Davem,
I don't feel that diagnosis is relevent, and I have rather strong views, I fear.
I have little or no medical background in terms of the syndrome we are discussing. But I have an innate distrust of anyone who explains the behavior of a person in terms of an imagined neurosis.
My professional background and training is as an historian. I can not tell you how many times I have seen other historians take an individual who made a singular contribution in terms of new political or religious ideas and virtually explain those ideas (or behavior) away by making reference to some supposed psychological disorder that the person may have had. What is unique and amazing about that person simply gets erased and he or she is reduced to a clinical term. That is not right.
Yes, it is possible to look at some figures in literature or in history and see that it is likely they may have suffered from a particular ailment. But, without independent medical verification, we can never be sure. You can not get the person and lay them down on a couch and apply the kinds of criteria that a professional psychiatrist would insist on.
Even when we positively know that a person had a particular disorder, or some hint of it, there is no way to be certain just how that influenced his/her behavior and thinking. I do not see Bilbo and Frodo's supposed lack of social graces as stemming from some disease, or the Ring influencing their behavior in this regard.
Bilbo was acting in "strange ways" long before he had the Ring. Just look at the description of Bilbo as a child and young man in Unfinished Tales. Gandalf describes his "bright eyes, and his love of tales." The neighbors looked at him askance because he had the audacity to speak with dwarves! He would pester the wizard to tell him tales of his Tookish uncles who'd gone off on great adventures. Gandalf was appalled when he visited Bilbo and found out that his dreams had all "dwindled down"; he was becoming more and more like his neighbors, the so-called sensible hobbits. He was becoming a conformist.
If Bilbo had continued on this road, he would indeed have become a "normal" sensible hobbit and would probably have extended his social network further. And how terribly boring and sad that would have been.....
Are Bilbo and Frodo "normal" hobbits? Absolutely not. Tolkien says they were "extraordinarily gifted and talented. " Because of that and their own choices in life, they were very different than their neighbors from day one. But what's wrong with that? Maybe it's the neighbors we should look at for falling short rather than the "gifted' hobbits who weren't afraid to follow their hearts. It especially couldn't have been easy for Bilbo living in such a closed community. In a certain sense, he broke the ground for Frodo who was then a bit freer to be himself. According to Gandalf, hobbits had been different in the past They'd even gone on adventures. But now all the dangers had receded and they had settled down to being "sensible" and expecting everyone in the community to do the same. By the end of the 3rd Age, the "sensible" hobbits looked askance at someone like Bilbo or Frodo.
Yes, Frodo was probably a little shy, and he and Bilbo tended to have friends younger than they themselves were. But they did have a warm circle of friends and functioned well in the Shire, even if other folk didn't always approve. If Frodo was such an awful misfit and loner, why is he described by the Bree Innkeeper as a perky lad with red cheeks? Would a totally introverted person get up on the tables and dance and sing?
It is true that a Ringbearer walks alone. This affected Frodo more than Bilbo since the former was far more aware of what being a Ringbearer meant. But that is an aspect of legend, not a medical syndrome. And I would not agree that Frodo's behavior or the view of the neighbors changed dramatically after he got the Ring at Bag-end. Even before then, Frodo and Bilbo would go on walks to look at Elves.
What bothers me most about these kinds of psychological analyses is that there is an unspoken assumption behind all of them. Society is set up as the norm against which we should be judged; it is the particular individual -- Frodo or Bilbo -- who are 'sick'. They have been measured against society's sacred ruler and been found wanting--- perhaps because they are too shy, hold strange opinions, or their neighbors look at them askance.
I honestly think Tolkien would have recoiled at the idea of explaining his hobbits' behavior in terms of a psychological syndrome. He had notoriously little sympathy for modern writers who specialise in such things. This is what I think Tolkien would have said. It is society that is found wanting -- not Frodo or Bilbo.
When I first read LotR, I was immediately attracted by Bilbo and Frodo. Here, in this gentle but staid and conformist hobbit community, were two individuals willing to stick their necks out and act how they thought best, ignoring nasty looks from some of their neighbors. They weren't afraid to be different in terms of personality or behavior and sometimes being different carries a price. So who was more psychologically healthy: the non-conformist adventurers or the stay-at-home conformists? To me, that question has an obvious answer.
Oh, yeah, except with close friends and family, I would probably be called an "introvert".
