[Lush]

I adore this thread.

Per Frodo - I think Tolkien does a good job of highlighting, within the character, some common symptoms of PTSD, found in survivors of great catastrophes, retired soliders, etc. It strikes me that everything that happens to Frodo is a kind of "reality check" that comes when one envisions a great epic - people can still get damaged and traumatised in great epics. It's not all waving banners and grandiose speeches.

As for whether or not Frodo is being punished - well, the very nature of these ordeals is punishing; perhaps this is the point that Tolkien is making. No one can go through something like that with perfect composure and zero mistakes. I think that perhaps the reason why one might think that Frodo is at fault is because the story is so heavily Hobbit-centered. The Hobbits are very fleshed out, very real, and they are shown to us close-up in almost all their dealings. Hence the cracks are more apparent.

It may be wise to explore the character of Sam further. Does he endure less "damage" because he is ultimately more resilient? Or is it because he bears less responsibility (i.e., he's not carrying the Ring all this time)? It fascinates me - how alike and yet different Sam and Frodo are, and what that may mean.

What's also interesting to me is whether or not Frodo's negative experiences ultimately outweigh his positive ones... He really does seem to hit a wall when he comes back to the Shire. In a weird way, his departure almost reminds me of Celebrian, even though it is seen as a gift, what happens to him at the end.