Quote:
|
What I'm saying is that Tolkien likes Sam, admires him without reservation. This makes him an "orthodox" hero....
|
Anguirel,
No, no. There are times when Tolkien was quite irked with Sam. Indeed, he was quite irked with hobbits in general. Just look at this quote from a letter written by the Professor in 1963:
Quote:
|
Sam is meant to be lovable and laughable. Some readers he irritates and even infuriates. I can well understand it. All hobbits at times affect me in the same way, though I remain very fond of them. But Sam can be very "trying". He is a more representative hobbitthan any others that we have to see much of; and he has consequently a stronger ingredient of that quality which even some hobbits found at times hard to bear: a vulgarity--by which I do not mean a mere "down-to-earthness"--a mental myopia which is proud of itself, a smugness (in varying degrees) and cocksureness, and a readiness to measure and sum up all things from a limited experience, largely enshrined in sententious traditional "wisdom"....Imagine Sam without his education by Bilbo and his fascination with things Elvish! Not difficult. The Cotton family and the Gaffer, when the "Travellers" return are a sufficient glimpse....
|
Tolkien goes on to chastise Sam for his inability to understand what was going on between Frodo and Gollum: how Sam was unable to see the "damaged" good in Gollum that Frodo so clearly perceived.
All this is a farily harsh commentary on Tolkien's part. If Sam was indeed vulgar and cocksure with all the other "little" faults that Tolkien lists, and yet was still a hero, then surely he merits the title of "unorthodox hero" as well or better than any other in the Legendarium.