Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HMS Surprise
Frodo, a reluctant but lion-hearted and trustworthy warrior-poet who was capable of denying himself the corrupting influence of the ring of power.

Hardly. Frodo WAS corrupted by the One Ring. It nearly destroyed him, and led him to attack Sam, forsake his quest, and ultimately even fight Gollum at Mount Doom. He was desperate to keep the Ring.

The only Ringbearer to escape the corruption of Sauron was lowly Samwise Gamgee, whose heart was so simple and pure that he actually held the Ring for a while, then, in an act even Gandalf could not match, willingly gave it up.

The hero of "Lord of the Rings" is not Frodo Baggins. It's Sam.

15 posted on 09/12/2011 5:02:00 PM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: IronJack

Regardless, the real hero is understood to be the one who resists power. I seem to recall a few such in the movie. I am going to go out on a limb and say that Frodo was the ringbearer for a reason. Call me crazy.


18 posted on 09/12/2011 5:07:52 PM PDT by HMS Surprise (Chris Christie can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: IronJack
The only Ringbearer to escape the corruption of Sauron was lowly Samwise Gamgee, whose heart was so simple and pure that he actually held the Ring for a while, then, in an act even Gandalf could not match, willingly gave it up.

The hero of "Lord of the Rings" is not Frodo Baggins. It's Sam.

Sam was a hero. But he was only one of them. Sam's strength came from serving Frodo. Sam couldn't do it on his own, and he couldn't be the ringbearer. The only reason that Sam could give the ring up was because he was giving it back to Frodo - otherwise it would have destroyed him, too. That's why he had to give it back - he couldn't handle it.

Frodo collapsed, yes - but Frodo was the only one to allow himself to be slowly destroyed in order to get the ring to Mt. Doom. No one else would make that sacrifice. We say that everyone else was consumed by the ring's power, but what does it mean? It means that everyone else felt unable to allow the ring to destroy them, rather than comply with it's demands. Frodo alone was able to look at the ring and refuse it while simultaneously paying the price of allowing himself to be slowly destroyed by it. That is a sacrifice no one else was willing to do - not even Sam.

19 posted on 09/12/2011 5:08:07 PM PDT by Talisker (History will show the Illuminati won the ultimate Darwin Award.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: IronJack
The only Ringbearer to escape the corruption of Sauron was lowly Samwise Gamgee, whose heart was so simple and pure that he actually held the Ring for a while, then, in an act even Gandalf could not match, willingly gave it up.

Sam held the Ring out before Frodo in Cirith Ungol and said he would be willing to share the burden with Frodo, if he'd let him. Instead, in a fit, Frodo snatched it from him. He took it before Sam could quite give it to him. Sam would have resisted the Ring for a long time. But even he, after wearing it, was not immune from the desire of possessing it. Frodo did give up the Ring willingly to Tom Bombadil. Who, after examining it and toying with it, returned it.

34 posted on 09/14/2011 9:25:46 PM PDT by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson