|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laerasëa
Dor-Lomin
Jan 15 2009, 5:05am
Post #1 of 9
(1666 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Scouring of the Shire 4: Pacifism and hesitation
|
Can't Post
|
|
Alright, I've been planning on doing pacifism tonight, but I apparently left all my notes at work, so I’m working a bit from memory here….when I get my notes back tomorrow (I know exactly where they are, annoyingly), I’ll go over them, and I might post a reply to this, for anything major (or minor) I forgot. Anyway, if I forget anything, sorry.
Ok, our first real look at Frodo. We’ll cover him a bit more with Saruman tomorrow (providing I remember to bring home my notes), but I wanted to look at the physically quieter aspects of this chapter, after covering a lot of the more violent stuff.
“Fight?” said Frodo. “Well, I suppose it may come to that. But, remember: there is to be no slaying of hobbits, not even if they have gone over to the other side. Really gone over, I mean; not just obeying ruffians’ orders because they are frightened. No hobbit has ever killed another on purpose in the Shire, and it is not to begin now.”
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent? Obviously, a lot has changed over the past year. Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders? (even if the hobbit had “really gone over” and it wasn’t just out of fear?)
Frodo had been in the battle, but he had not drawn sword, and his chief part had been to prevent the hobbits in their wrath at their losses, from slaying those of their enemies who threw down their weapons.
3. How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater? What about the Scouring of the Shire in general? (I’m not talking about the chapter itself, but the events covered during the chapter) Interestingly, Frodo is the first to suggest going to deal with the “chief.”
4. After the Red Book is written (in the paragraph above the section I quoted), and this battle becomes very famous all over the Shire, and all the hobbits remember the names of all the heroes, how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
Frodo also give a tactful compliment about Sam to the Gaffer, which also occurs just in front of Rosie.
5. Who was this compliment more intended for, the Gaffer or Rosie?
Moving onto Sam and Rosie a bit…
”Well, be off with you!” said Rosie. “If you’ve been looking after Mr. Frodo all this while, what d’you want to leave him for, as soon as things look dangerous?”
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed? What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead? What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
On pacifism in general…
8. Is Frodo a pacifist? Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through? How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s? (Cotton’s actions before the events of Scouring of the Shire)
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone? What do you think would have happened?
10. Any other thoughts in general?
********************************
Traveling Journal Official Site
"Who needs drugs when you spend all your money on books?"
-Menelwyn
"A friend helps you find your Silmaril. A true friend helps you slay kin, cross icy wastes, battle your rellies, lose your hand to a Dark Lord and cast yourself into a fissure in the earth."
-Ataahua
"...But life has thus far failed to adjust itself to my liking, so I soldier on."
-Magpie
"I just thought I would share this story, because today is a great day."
-Hobbiton
"True nerddom/geekdom/dorkdom does not kick in until you are in your 50s taking a nerd/geek/dork test on the discussion board of an internet fan site for a fantasy novel/film."
-Squire
|
|
|
Beren IV
Mithlond
Jan 15 2009, 6:09pm
Post #2 of 9
(1295 views)
Shortcut
|
I like to imagine that Rosie had some adventures herself while Sam was away. 
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
I think Frodo did expect there to be some fighting, but he wants as little of it as possible. He is, indeed, quite pacifist at this point. I can understand why he feels pacifist, but it's not, shall we say, conducive to survival, let alone freedom.
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent? Obviously, a lot has changed over the past year. Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders
I actually find this a little hard to believe. Hobbits are on average better than humans from a moral prospective, but there are some bad apples among them even so. I have a hard time imagining that Hobbit society is genuinely free from murder.
3. How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater? What about the Scouring of the Shire in general? and 4. ... how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
Frodo would be remembered as a hero if only because people would interview the other three and they would all claim Frodo to be a hero. Frodo would probably be remembered as the least of the four, however, since his adventures all took place in the legendary abroad that few other hobbits know about.
For a while, that is. The Mortal races (Men, Hobbits, Dwarves) seem potentially more connected after the War of the Ring than beforehand. I can envision commerce between the lands, which would lead to Hobbits inevitably becoming more aware of the outside world. Bilbo was the first, Frodo's party the second, but there were be more who ply the vast lands of Middle-Earth... only without the same level of adventure.
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed? What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead? What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
See comment above. This is a destiny thing, of course. I'm sure Rosie can figure out everything pretty quickly. This is her husband-to-be, remember.
8. Is Frodo a pacifist? Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through? How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s? (Cotton’s actions before the events of Scouring of the Shire)
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone? What do you think would have happened?
If Frodo came back to the Shire alone, then only an Author could help him. I suspect that an Author would, however! 
I suspect that Frodo's pacifism is intended to be a direct contrast to the other three hobbits. Frodo has become saintly, is no longer heroic. The other three are still heroes.
Once a paleontologist, now a botanist, will be a paleobotanist
|
|
|
batik
Dor-Lomin
Jan 15 2009, 6:41pm
Post #3 of 9
(1295 views)
Shortcut
|
|
all's fair in love and battle...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Frodo...on fighting and killing
I would think he half-*hoped* rather than half-*expected* that there would be no fighting;
Wishful thinking might lead him to believe that no Hobbit killed another;
and, yes, it would *count* as killing, at least to the dead Hobbit and his family
Frodo's roles...
What impressed me about Frodo in this chapter is that he sounded so sure of himself in many instances (no book on hand, so no quotes available)--rather like a high lord. For me, Frodo was a steady hand, a calm mind here-- when the others (esp. Merry) could have let hot-headedness rule their actions.
Frodo...on  ( )
EIther way--no harm done, aye?
On Rosie...
Well, if nothing else, I was impressed for her while reading this part. Sam goes off--just a *simple man*, returns a *wise warrior/gardener*--I think she conducted herself very properly here!
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Doriath
Jan 15 2009, 7:08pm
Post #4 of 9
(1298 views)
Shortcut
|
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
Maybe a forlorn hope. Without knowing that Saruman was at the root of it, he perhaps thought that if he could rescue his cousin, the ruffians wouldn't have any "chief" to hide behind and so they'd move on.
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent? Obviously, a lot has changed over the past year. Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders? (even if the hobbit had “really gone over” and it wasn’t just out of fear?) It would take a long time for a Shire hobbit to get that bad. Even Ted Sandyman was rude, not murderous. And yes, I do believe that no hobbit in the Shire ever killed another on purpose. Notice the many qualifiers on the statement. First of all, it only includes hobbits in the Shire--hobbits act very suspicious of their fellows who live outside the Shire. I'm thinking they exile troublemakers quickly before they have a chance to become too dangerous. [space] Second, that "on purpose" is a telling phrase. Obviously, then, hobbits do occasionally kill each other by accident. Some of the accidents seem a mite suspect, like Pippin's sister Pearl accidentally slipping while propelling the wheelchair of the detested family matriarch (what's her name, Something-or-other the Great or the Gross, depending on whether it was said to her face or back) causing her to tumble down a slope in all her morbidly obese glory and so die. The eldest son (brother to Pippin's father) who never married due to his domineering mother breathing down his neck, then became the head of household. He sternly withheld birthday presents from Pearl as a formal rebuke, but later bought her a pearl necklace. This is in one of the letters, in explaining birthday customs.
[space]
Then there's the unofficial matter of rumors. Frodo's parents officially drowned, but rumor painted them as having murdered each other. The book says that "other, darker rumors" abounded in the Shire. However, since Frodo's own parents were thus maligned (apparently quite unfairly) it would be easier for him to toe the official line of murder never actually taking place in the Shire. Whatever the case, the existence of rumors indicates that hobbits had some knowledge of hobbits murdering hobbits somewhere. I don't think any hobbits murdered anyone under Sharkey, however.
3. How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater? What about the Scouring of the Shire in general? (I’m not talking about the chapter itself, but the events covered during the chapter) Interestingly, Frodo is the first to suggest going to deal with the “chief.”
Absolutely necessary. He kept the battle from spinning out of control. Collaborators might have been lynched. After WWII, what people did to those even suspected of collaboration was savage. Not even children were exempt. Frodo kept the hobbits level-headed, remembering who they are--not an easy thing to do with a traumatized mob! It's hard to stand fast against letting tormentors drag one down morally. And that, no doubt, was Sharkey's plan B. If anyone should interrupt him in spoiling the Shire (which he realistically knew might well occur sooner or later) he could still drive them to do horrible things in the name of fighting him, destroying their innocense forever. For the last cry of the defeated wicked is, "You're no better than me!" And they will gladly die to prove it. The most horrible defeat that Frodo could deal to Saruman was to grant him mercy.
4. After the Red Book is written (in the paragraph above the section I quoted), and this battle becomes very famous all over the Shire, and all the hobbits remember the names of all the heroes, how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
Probably about the same way that people regard a PTSD-stricken veteran today, who cannot get quite get his life together after the war. They would duly note that his fellow-veterans treat him with high regard, they would see that he'd lost a finger, bore other scars, and had aged quite a lot in a short period of time. They would find the whole story of what had happened to him confusing and long and hard to follow, but would likely pick up that Sam had rescued him from captivity somewhere along the line. Maybe the Travelers respected Frodo so much because he had resisted giving them away under torture? Whatever the case, he seemed to be a broken hobbit now, pitiful rather than glorious--and perhaps a cautionary example of what can happen to a hobbit who leaves the Shire, lest the young-folk get too many notions from the other Travelers. But they would treat Frodo tenderly for obviously having suffered so much. And they must have still had some degree of respect for him, if not in as great measure as they afforded the others, because they did make him temporary mayor until Wil Whitfoot could recover. They would not blame Frodo when it soon became apparent that Sam had more energy to actually accomplish things in the rebuilding of the Shire; they would just shake their heads and say, "Poor fellow!" At the same time, they would note that the other veterans did not seem to suffer the same difficulties, which would mean (to their limited view) that the others were stronger and more admirable.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
(This post was edited by Dreamdeer on Jan 15 2009, 7:10pm)
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Doriath
Jan 15 2009, 7:23pm
Post #5 of 9
(1323 views)
Shortcut
|
Frodo also give a tactful compliment about Sam to the Gaffer, which also occurs just in front of Rosie.
5. Who was this compliment more intended for, the Gaffer or Rosie?
Rosie, although he also wanted very much to set the Gaffer straight.
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed? What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
Well, she does say, "I think you look fine, Sam."
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead? What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
That subtle telepathic link between people who love each other deeply. It rarely conveys details, except in extreme need, but it does pass on generalities.
On pacifism in general…
8. Is Frodo a pacifist? Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through? How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s? (Cotton’s actions before the events of Scouring of the Shire)
It depends on your definition of pacifism. If you mean the conviction that he himself cannot bring himself to fight, then yes. If you mean that he considers it preferable to avoid violence where possible, then yes. If you mean that he categorically stands against all warfare of any kind, then no. As to how his actions differ from Farmer Cotton's before the scouring, Frodo may be pacifistic, but he his not passive. He's more of a civil disobedience sort, and will not hesitate to march right up to Bag End to confront his cousin.
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone? What do you think would have happened?
He might have become a sort of hobbit Gandhi. It would have taken longer to expel Saruman, and the damage would be worse, but Frodo would have inspired resistence nonetheless, and eventually word would have reached the King, who would then have expelled Saruman and the ruffians the hard way. Most importantly for Frodo, he would still have saved the soul of the Shire, and defeated Saruman's most insidious purpose. The prolongation of Saruman's reign of terror would not have satisfied the wizard at all, failing as he did to corrupt the Shire.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
|
|
|
sador
Gondolin
Jan 15 2009, 9:45pm
Post #6 of 9
(1326 views)
Shortcut
|
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
At this stage he was still trying the forlorn hope that the ruffians will be scared away, like Ferny was. He forgets that Ferny was a well-to-do landowner, and has got were to run to.
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent?
He's been anxiously reading Hobbit Life every week.
Seriously, I think it's possible - if we assume that Sauron had overlooked hobbits altogether, and they might have been spared the Fall of Man. On the other hand, note how quickly one Stoor killed another after his first contact with Evil.
Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders?
Did the ruffians kill anyone? Even Fatty was taken to the Lockholes, nothing more; only miserable Grima murdered someone - and that was because Sharkey made him (or not? I guess you're about to discuss that soon).
3. How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater? What about the Scouring of the Shire in general?
Considering the role Frodo actually played in the Battle - well, it seems it was necessary, which made it critical; in a way, by preventing the hobbits from taking just revenge on the ruffians - he had saved the sould of the Shire.
4. how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
Not at all. Remember, even Bilbo is remembered only as 'Mad Baggins' ( , not  ); Frodo won't be 'the famousest of hobbits' until an Oxford professor discovers the Red Book.
5. Who was this compliment more intended for, the Gaffer or Rosie?
Rosie, of course. As an elf-friend, Frodo knows all about gallantry.
And anyway, the Gaffer will forget it in a few moments - it's not as important as the years' turnip crop, is it?
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed?
Yes. Girls can be perceptive, you know.
What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
What's happened to his weskit? And I'm sure she's afraid that blade might tear something.
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead?
Maybe because it was Ted who brought the news...
What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
What else would he be doing? And I guess he told her he is going with Mr. Frodo on a dangerous mission, on which he might however see elves!
8. Is Frodo a pacifist? Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through?
Remember Curious' answer of yestreday. Frodo isn't pure anymore.
How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s?
Cotton was afraid, because he felt he had no power; Frodo is afraid because he feels he does.
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone? What do you think would have happened?
He would have sat aside being shocked and sad, and the Shire wouldn't have been saved. As a matter of fact, he probably wouldn't have gotten as far as Bywater - but would have retired to Crickhollow, to grieve about the Shire's lost innocense.
10. Any other thoughts in general?
Remembering Darkstone's previous comparing of Frodo to a political comissar - I wish all comissars were like that, reigning rather than stoking the troops' ferocity.
"A sign of affection, possibly" - Saruman
|
|
|
FarFromHome
Doriath
Jan 16 2009, 8:44pm
Post #7 of 9
(1281 views)
Shortcut
|
Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead?
From the unpublished Epilogue to LotR: Master Samwise stood at the door and looked away eastward. He drew Mistress Rose to him and set his arm about her. “March the twenty-fifth!” he said. “This day seventeen years ago, Rose wife, I did not think I should ever see thee again. But I kept on hoping.” “I never hoped at all Sam,” she said. “Not until that very day; and then suddenly I did. About noon it was, and I felt so glad that I began singing and mother said 'Quiet lass! There's ruffians about.' and I said 'Let them come. Their time will soon be over. Sam's coming back.' And you came.” “I did,” said Sam; “To the most belovedest place in all the world. To my Rose and my garden.” They went in, and Sam shut the door. But even as he did so, he heard suddenly, deep and unstilled, the sigh and murmur of the Sea upon the shores of Middle-earth.
Farewell, friends! I hear the call.
The ship’s beside the stony wall.
Foam is white and waves are grey;
beyond the sunset leads my way.
Bilbo's Last Song
|
|
|
Darkstone
Elvenhome
Jan 16 2009, 10:58pm
Post #8 of 9
(1315 views)
Shortcut
|
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
I think he was surprised and chagrined to suddenly realize that there would continue to be fighting. Of course he would have hoped that destroying the ring would have put a stop to it all. You know, like when Tolkien himself came home after he fought “The War To End All Wars,” only it didn’t. It’s really sad, actually.
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent?
It’s unthinkable to him. He’s yet to realize that the Shire has changed, and that yes, a hobbit could indeed now kill another.
Of course there were rumors that contradicted Frodo’s assertion:
'I've heard they went on the water after dinner in the moonlight,' said Old Noakes; 'and it was Drogo's weight as sunk the boat.'
'And I heard she pushed him in, and he pulled her in after him,' said Sandyman, the Hobbiton miller.
But consider the source. Still, apparently hobbits could conceive of killing each other. It's just apparently Frodo has always had a higher opinion of them. Which is well considering all he sacrificed to save them.
Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders? (even if the hobbit had “really gone over” and it wasn’t just out of fear?)
The Nuremberg Trials say yes, though in his autobiography Chuck Yeager expresses bemused relief that it’s only a war crime if you lose.
Quote
Frodo had been in the battle, but he had not drawn sword, and his chief part had been to prevent the hobbits in their wrath at their losses, from slaying those of their enemies who threw down their weapons.
3. How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater?
Like I said in my last post, he’s the political commissar. A political commissar has the ability to countermand the orders of a military commander to ensure that a military unit acts politically correct. Like by not killing other hobbits. Though used as early as the French Revolution, political commissars are most popularly known due to their use in the Russian Army 1917 through 1942.
What about the Scouring of the Shire in general? (I’m not talking about the chapter itself, but the events covered during the chapter) Interestingly, Frodo is the first to suggest going to deal with the “chief.”
He is the conscience of the Shire. Merry is the brain. Pippin is the nerves. Sam is the brawn.
4. After the Red Book is written (in the paragraph above the section I quoted), and this battle becomes very famous all over the Shire, and all the hobbits remember the names of all the heroes, how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
An obstruction. Like General Colin Powell was known derisively by some as “the reluctant warrior” because he was slow to start a fight, and quick to end it. I think that's an admirable trait myself.
Frodo also give a tactful compliment about Sam to the Gaffer, which also occurs just in front of Rosie.
5. Who was this compliment more intended for, the Gaffer or Rosie?
The rest of the hobbits. Sam is one of his three commanders. Merry and Pippin already have standing among the hobbits due to their social rank and their new height. Frodo is taking the opportunity to make sure all the hobbits have reason to respect Sam as much as Merry and Pippin. Another instance of Frodo displaying impressive political instincts.
Moving onto Sam and Rosie a bit…
Quote
”Well, be off with you!” said Rosie. “If you’ve been looking after Mr. Frodo all this while, what d’you want to leave him for, as soon as things look dangerous?”
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed?
No more so than Frodo can see that the Shire has changed. Sure, superficially it’s different, like just the same old person in a new set of clothes. But it has also fundamentally changed. So has Sam. Rosie will find out soon enough. But most people find out after they’re married that their partner is a lot different than they seemed. Sometimes to the good, sometimes to the bad. Of course the other question is, can Sam see that Rosie has changed?
What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
Possibly The Cinderella Complex, but I’m betting The Penelope Complex. I’m sure Rosie is very glad her Sam looks capable of standing up the horde of suitors that have been pestering her these past months.
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead?
Like with Frodo believing in the constancy of the Shire, to Rose the alternative was unthinkable.
What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
She knows that if it’s this bad in “civilized” places like the Shire it must be ten times worse elsewhere. Bigger brigands, worse desolation, deeper betrayal. And she’d be right.
On pacifism in general…
8. Is Frodo a pacifist?
He's an idealist who truly believed that destroying Sauron and the ring would make the world a better place. But there are always more Saurons and rings.
Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through?
He was able to get through what he’s gone through by holding onto an ideal about the Shire. He’s not going to let that go without a fight.
How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s? (Cotton’s actions before the events of Scouring of the Shire)
Frodo is a leader.
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone?
Then he would have become Merry.
What do you think would have happened?
Everything Merry did and said, Frodo would have done and said.
10. Any other thoughts in general?
It’s interesting that the final test that assures Penelope that it is indeed Odysseus who has returned involves a tree.
******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Jan 17 2009, 10:06pm
Post #9 of 9
(1337 views)
Shortcut
|
1. Did Frodo actually half-expect to not see any fighting? What did he think was going to happen?
Perhaps that the ruffians would flee in the face of armed resistance, as they had up to this moment.
2. What makes him think that no hobbit ever killed another while he was absent?
Frodo seems perceptive, and still has a good opinion of the hobbits. He doesn't think even Sandyman or Lotho are capable of murder. It's the outsiders who have caused trouble.
Would the killing of a hobbit (by another) not “count” if it was under a ruffian’s orders?
It would count.
How necessary was Frodo in the Battle of Bywater?
Apparently very necessary -- to preserving the innocence of the hobbits, and the lives of the prisoners.
What about the Scouring of the Shire in general?
Merry is the general; Frodo is the moral authority. Merry recognizes Frodo's moral authority, too, and defers to him, while Frodo delegates the battle to Merry:
"‘All the same,’ said Frodo to all those who stood near, ‘I wish for no killing; not even of the ruffians, unless it must be done, to prevent them from hurting hobbits.’
"‘All right!’ said Merry. ‘But we shall be having a visit from the Hobbiton gang any time now, I think. They won’t come just to talk things over. We’ll try to deal with them neatly, but we must be prepared for the worst. Now I’ve got a plan.’
"‘Very good,’ said Frodo. ‘You make the arrangements.’"
As for dealing with the Chief, I suppose if Frodo weren't there they still would have done that next; but once they get there Frodo again is the moral authority, pronouncing judgment on Saruman and showing him mercy. It's really rather presumptive of Frodo to set Saruman free, but since Merry and Pippin and Sam defer to Frodo's moral authority, so do the rest of the hobbits.
... how do you think Frodo would be remembered?
The Brandybucks, Tooks, and Fairbairns will read Frodo's memoirs and remember him quite well. The ordinary hobbits may not remember him at all.
5. Who was this compliment more intended for, the Gaffer or Rosie?
Frodo does know about Rosie -- well, he does if he was in any shape to remember what Sam said when they thought they were going to die on Mount Doom. The compliment is certainly intended for the Gaffer, but it's possible that Frodo intends for Rosie to overhear.
6. Can Rosie see that Sam’s changed? What does she think of him, riding home on a pony wearing chain mail and boasting a sword?
7. Why didn’t Rosie believe that Sam was dead? What does she know of where Sam’s been; how does she know that Sam’s been protecting Frodo?
Rosie has a remarkably good idea of what Sam has been through, as we learn if we read the unpublished Epilogue. Apparently she has some sort of telepathic link with him. There's just a hint of it here, when she notes that "'They said you were dead; but I’ve been expecting you since the Spring. You haven’t hurried have you?’" So she is, I think, teasing when she chides Sam for leaving Frodo "'as soon as things look dangerous," and perhaps getting back at him for dilly-dallying, but she quickly makes up for it by running after him and saying:
"‘I think you look fine, Sam,’ she said. ‘Go on now! But take care of yourself, and come straight back as soon as you have settled the ruffians!’"
8. Is Frodo a pacifist? Or is just just a lot more hesitant to kill than the other hobbits, because of what he’s gone through? How do his actions differ from someone like Farmer Cotton’s? (Cotton’s actions before the events of Scouring of the Shire)
Frodo reluctantly accepts that fighting may be necessary, so he is not an absolute pacifist. But he does not want the hobbits to fight evil with evil, and thereby metaphorically claim the Ring. Indeed, Tolkien is showing us what LotR is all about. We all face the temptation to metaphorically claim the Ring, i.e. to toss morals out the window when we think the end justifies the means. Frodo knows the terrible consequences of that choice, and knows that if the hobbits fought evil with evil, Saruman would have won.
It's an interesting lesson in an era when we find ourselves fighting terrorists who believe the means do justify the ends, and find ourselves tempted to adopt the same policy. But don't forget the era in which Tolkien lived, the era of two world wars and a Great Depression. The temptation to abandon moral principles always exists, but perhaps never more so than in Tolkien's lifetime.
Cotton was reluctant to fight because he did not want harm to come to his family. Frodo is reluctant to fight because he does not want the hobbits to harm their souls.
9. What if Frodo had returned to the Shire alone? What do you think would have happened?
It would have been harder if Frodo was on his own. But I like to think the hobbits still would have rallied around him.
|
|
|
|
|
