What do you think happened to Frodo after Gray Havens..........

[Taure Leafsilver]

what whould life been like for frodo at wherever he ended up in after grey havens, and what about when sam followed 60 years later??????

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Taure Leafsilver ]

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

Eh?
Well, he probably would've felt lonely without his hobbit friends, but he had other friends there to be with him. I think that where he went kept his pain of the evil which he experienced down to a minimum. Supposidly, the Undying Lands and the regions surrounding are the most beautiful places in Middle Earth - so I guess there is comfort in that.
As for Sam... when he went I imagine he was over-joyed to see Frodo (ahhh, if only to read that reunion on paper). By that time Rosie and passed and I imagine that Sam was ready to go since he, too, beared the burden of the ring for a short while.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Taure --

I will admit that I have wondered about this question more than once.

First of all, the book clearly states that Frodo loved Bilbo more than any other in the world, and wanted to be with him. So I imagine that initially he spent much time with Bilbo.

My guess is that Bilbo had some modest gains in health and mental clarity because of the simple fact of being in Amon. But I also believe Bilbo needed a great deal of care to help him through the day. Strangely enough, that is what I see Frodo doing. If Frodo truly loved Bilbo with all his heart, he would have done these things with compassion, not minding that they were simple, menial tasks. In effect, he would be learning how to be a "Sam", to be the one who cares for another and provides for their needs.

There is also the question of whether Frodo was able to regain his health in Amon. Tolkien says in his Letters that we don't really know the answer to this. I find it very hard to think of Frodo in Tol Eressea without also believing that he did find a way to be healed, both physically and spiritually.

Again, the beginning of Frodo's healing probably stemmed from his relationship with Bilbo. Frodo strikes me as the kind of hobbit who does better when he gives of himself to others in some way. (The Ring quest incidentally would be an extreme example of this.) I think this is one reason why both Bilbo and Frodo preferred younger friends. They both found fulfillment in looking out for them, offering advise, teaching Sam how to read, etc. Bilbo did need Frodo, and in that need, I believe, lay the possible beginnings of healing.

Incidentally, I don't think it's coincidence that Frodo's health continued to deteriorate after Rosie married Sam. She undoubtedly spent many hours running around and waiting on her houseguest. She did this out of love, but it may not have been the best thing for Frodo. He needed to begin doing things on his own and, even more importantly, to reach out to someone he cared for and help them. This is the role he might play with Bilbo.

In a while, Bilbo must have felt it was time to go beyond the circles of the world. Remember that he could pick and chose his date of death. So I can see a poignant scene where Bilbo "falls asleep" in the arms of the grieving Frodo. Then Frodo would have had more time to get to know his Elven and Maiar neighbors. There would be those he already knew like Galadriel or Gandalf, or later Legolas and the dwarf Gimli. I can see Frodo learning more of Quenya and Sindarin, lstening to songs and poems, meeting some of the fabled Elves of the Silmarillion, perhaps even picking up some Osanwe skills.

No, the latter wasn't the usual province of a hobbit, but Frodo had shown an affinity for this with Gandalf when he carried the Ring. And Osanwe was said to be much easier to do in Amon than in Middle-earth. He'd probably take a trip to Valinor to see the sights there as well.

Finally, Sam would come. They would catch up on each other's news, and decide after a little while that it was time for the final journey. Then they'd have laid down with trust, and fallen asleep to go on to whatever lies beyond.

By the way, look in the fanfiction for Mithadan's Tales of Tol Eressea. These are lovely stories and at least one deals with the hobbits.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Taure Leafsilver]

aaaaaahhhhh! child you are gonna make me cry! Im shaking as we speak. I personaly can't let frodo and sam die but as you know legends never die so as long as people remember Sam and Frodo are alive

whoah! I'm acting as if they realy existed! Well I guess in a way, they do, and that's a good thing because this way they'll never die [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: Taure Leafsilver ]

[Birdland]

Child - I can see Frodo basically doing those things, but he seems to retain his basic "hobbit-ness" in your theories, and I can't really see that as being the case. He may have played this part for Bilbo, but after his passing, Frodo would have had to expand his horizons, so to speak, in order to truly fit in his new role as a halfling among Elves and Maiar.

I can see him absorbing as much of the lore and culture of the Elven-kind as he could, becoming a scholar in a way that was unavailable to him while living in the Shire.

In order for him to sustain any kind of friendships with the Elves around him, he would have to rise to their level, a feat I could see him being very capable of. Perhaps the secrets of his own people's past were revealed to him as well.

If he hadn't done this, I could see his life Tol Eressëa becoming more of a burden then a pleasure, and Frodo becoming a figure of pity, rather than admiration. And I would sincerely hope that he would gain the privilege of being allowed into Valinor, as well. By the time Sam arrived on the Lonely Isle, I wonder if the Frodo he met there would even bear any resemblance to the Frodo that left 60 years before.

As to Rosie's small role; I don't think she contributed to Frodo's illness. She and Sam seem to be the only connection he still had to the people of the Shire. And Tolkien did indicate that he enjoyed their company, (as well as enjoying the benefits of having the Gamgees there to run the household, while he worked on his writing.)

I would not like to read that Frodo had to suffer through all his "flashbacks" alone. That would be far too sad. Sam and Rosie did the best they could for Frodo, it was just, unfortunately, not enough.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Child - I can see Frodo basically doing those things, but he seems to retain his basic "hobbit-ness" in your theories, and I can't really see that as being the case.

Bird,

You raise some very interesting points. I think my answer is that I'm just not sure in some areas.

I do think that, after Bilbo's passing, Frodo would have changed in some of the ways you indicate. Yes, he would have become more knowledgable about lore and song and history. Perhaps, he would have become a bit more scholarly, although Bilbo actually had more natural leanings in that direction than Frodo. It was Bilbo, for example, who was the translator of the Silm, and who wrote poetry with Aragorn.

I actually see Frodo as less of a scholar and more as a mystic or seer. It was he, rather than Bilbo, who had dreams and visions. He is the one with the light in his eyes and his face. And when Gandalf wonders in Rivendell what is to become of Frodo, he seems to compare him implicitly to something very akin to the phial of Galadriel (which itself contains a sliver of a silmaril):

He may become like a glass filled with a clear light for eyes to see that can.

But the real question I have is when you suggest that Frodo may lose his hobbit-ness, and indeed would need to "rise to the level" of the Elves. This I do not agree with. All through Tolkien's writings we are given a strong indication that the worst thing any creature can do is to belittle the gifts that come to their own people and try to emulate those of another.

I am thinking of the Men of Numenor who became so jealous of immortality and Valinor and the Elves that they destroyed the beautiful culture which they had. I am thinking of Morgoth who could not accept his limitations as a Vala but strove to become like Eru. I am thinking of those Elves who resisted the Valar's call to come to Amon, and instead chose to remain in Middle-earth at a time when Men were becoming the dominent group. All of those examples have some sadness attached, although of differing degrees and levels.

In all those cases, beings were trying to be or become something that Eru or the Valar did not intend for them. To put it succinctly, I think Eru made Frodo a hobbit, and a hobbit he would have to stay. He admittedly would evolve into a different hobbit than the one who lived in Middle-earth. There is a fine line between a hobbit chasing after Elves, and a hobbit becoming an Elf. The former is elevating; the latter would be a disaster.

By the time Sam arrived on the Lonely Isle, I wonder if the Frodo he met there would even bear any resemblance to the Frodo that left 60 years before.

Again, I wouldn't go this far. That hobbit-ness which is at the core of Frodo has to remain there. Otherwise, he becomes something else, and this something else goes against his very nature and fea.

If he hadn't done this (i.e. lost his hobbit-ness), I could see his life Tol Eressëa becoming more of a burden then a pleasure, and Frodo becoming a figure of pity, rather than admiration.

No, I don't think so.I think the Elves and Maia could relate to such a Frodo. They were able to do so on the Ring quest, and I do not think that would change. Yes, Frodo would learn more intellectually and spiritually than he ever had before, but he would still be Frodo the Hobbit.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[Birdland]

Child - Have you ever read "Childhood's End" by Robert Heinlein? It has been many years since I read it last, (hmmmmm, must go to Amazon after this), but the one thing I remember from the novel is the character who chose not to evolve with the rest of Mankind. He wound up on this planet, living with a race of people who he could not really communicate with, never able to shed his basic humanity. He could not even fit in on the physical plane of this planet, since everyone else on the planet had wings, (how would you cope, living in a city where there was no need for stairs?)

I can see Frodo being in a similar situation on Tol Eressëa if he, too, chose not to evolve. You are right though. "Scholar" was a bad choice of a word. He would be more of a "seeker". And he would change, not so much in mind and body, but in his very fea.

I don't see this as a bad thing at all. Frodo has left the things of Middle-Earth behind. He had certainly left the Shire behind. (Remember his comment about "falling asleep again"?) The only way I could accept the exile of this character from his homeland, is if I believed he not only gained healing in a new land, but an "awakening" as well.

And I would sincerely hope, that after 60 years, Sam would have stepped on that ship not because he wanted to just rehash old times, but because he was ready for a "change" as well.

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bird,

This is interesting. Part of what is getting between us is language, how we express ourselves, rather than a drastic difference of opinion. Yet a difference in view still exists, I believe.

I do agree that Aman had to be an "awakening" for Frodo beyond anything that he'd experienced in Middle-earth. But I will probably also stubbornly insist that his awakening was as a hobbit. And that seems to be different from what you are saying. In my opinion, the only way Frodo could lose his "hobbit-ness" is if he lost his fea itself, and that could not be, at least if he wished to walk in the path of goodness.

The clearest proof of this is Tolkien's insistence in his Letters that Frodo is a mortal, and would remain a mortal, even in the Blessed Land. Tolkien clearly states that the lands themselves change nothing. The important thing is the nature of the person who goes there. Frodo's hobbit-ness is the core of who he is. This can not and will not change.

Look carefully at the words Tolkien uses to explain what will happen to Frodo in the Blessed Lands:

Frodo was sent or allowed to pass over Sea to heal him--if that could be done, before he died. He would have eventually to 'pass away'; no mortal could, or can, abide forever on earth, or within Time. So he went both to a purgatory, and to a reward, for a little while: a period of reflection and peace and a gaining of a truer understanding of his position in littleness and in greatness, spent still in Time amind the natural beauty of 'Arda Unmarred', the Earth unspoiled by evil.

To me the key words are "a truer understanding of his position in littleness and in greatness." For Tolkien, the goal was a deeper understanding of self, rather than a changing of that self.

Yes, I've read much of Heinlein. He was enormously popular when I was in college and graduate school. And I recall Childhood's End, though not in every detail. But again I would differentiate. Frodo had the choice to evolve or not to evolve as a hobbit. He did not, however, have the choice to change into something totally different than what he was.

Would there be a space of some kind between Frodo and his neighbors because he was mortal and they were immortal, because he was a hobbit and they were other? I would say absolutely yes. That space is necessary according to the plans of Eru. There would be some loneliness and sadness in that difference, but I do not see it as the enormous gulf which Heinlein postulates in his tale.

In fact the opposite seems true to me. It is the small, petty people in life who demand that we become like them and 'rise to their level' in order to be accepted. If someone is truly on a higher level, they occupy a position which enables them to see and understand much of the intricate web of life. They are able to appreciate and communicate with each different being on whatever level they are on (assuming that there is basic goodness of character). There is no insistence on change, but rather an appreciation of the diversity of creation.

The one character in LotR who exemplifies this attitude is Gandalf, trained in the house of the Lady Nienna who is the bringer of hope and compassion to Arda. He loved and accepted Bilbo and Frodo, and even the community in general with all its smallness and limitations. He would have wanted Frodo to grow as a hobbit, but I do not believe he would have wanted him to be anything other than what he was.

In Tolkien's eyes, there is a hierarchy in the universe, both in terms of Middle-earth and in our own world. For Tolkien, that hierarchy had religious overtones. He felt we each have our part, and can fill our destiny best by growing in that role which we have been placed in by the Creator. For all we may wish it differently, a man is not an angel, neither in the 21st century or in Tol Eressea. For someone to step outside that role, and strive to become something else, was not his view of things. And I think he would have felt very uncomfortable with his humble Hobbit evolving into anything other than a Hobbit. He might have said there was enough potential for goodness and light within Hobbits for Frodo to gain healing and insight in ample measure without needing to become something different.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[mark12_30]

Sharon, I agree; although I do believe that Frodo will be completely transformed, it will happen not when he arrives at Aman, but when he passes beyond the circles of the world. He will approach that transformation differently, I think, as a result of his time in Aman; he will definitely have a better sense of both his littleness and his greatness; but he will not approach that transformation, through the gateway of the circles of the world, as an elf. He will approach it as a mortal, as a hobbit. Enlightened, educated, with vision and understanding and wisdom-- but a hobbit nonetheless.

Incidentally, I think that sense of "both his littleness and his greatness" is key to Tolkien. Remember Gandalf's closing words to Bilbo at the end of The Hobbit? "You are a fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world, after all!"

And Bilbo's reply? "Thank Goodness."

[Birdland]

To me the key words are "a truer understanding of his position in littleness and in greatness." For Tolkien, the goal was a deeper understanding of self, rather than a changing of that self.

Hmmmmm, we do seem to be at a bit of an impasse, here. But the very quote that you use to defend your case seems to bolster mine, as well.

How can you achieve a "deeper understanding of self" and not experience change? And Frodo had already started this transformation long before he left the shores of Middle-Earth. "You've grown, Halfling", "...an Elvish air"; many of those around Frodo commented on the fact that he had grown beyond his basic "Hobbitness". Now maybe this reflects the lack of understanding that most cultures shared concerning Hobbits. Only Gandalf seemed to appreciate the inate goodness of the people, and their place in Middle Earth.

But another aspect of being a Hobbit is showing a complete lack of curiosity about their origins and their "position in littleness and in greatness". It is this attitude that possibly led to Frodo's ostracism within the Shire, (though this was partly self-imposed.) Frodo had decided that "you can't go home again". The change had already taken place.

But it was incomplete. His journeys had left his with more questions than answers. It's as if he is only half-born, and is struggling like a butterfly half trapped in its cocoon. The transformation could only be completed if he left behind his origins and "moved on".

Now I'm not saying that he would not be a Hobbit. Of course he would. Just a different type of Hobbit. And as he learned and grew in wisdom and understanding, perhaps he could bring a different perspective to the ideas and conceits of the "wise Elves" as well. Perhaps the destruction of the Ring was only the first part of Frodo's mission.

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bird --

First of all, this is very mysterious. We seem to have found a secluded thread on the boards where we can talk. No one else apparently reads this question or responds! Indeed, I wonder if they can even see it on their computers.

I don't think I've ever gone on and on like this writing lengthy exchanges without having someone else join in at some point. Very strange. The only reason Helen found her way here is that I mentioned it in a pm. (Plays spooky music.....)

Ahem, back to our discussion.

Now I'm not saying that he would not be a Hobbit. Of course he would. Just a different type of Hobbit.

I see Bird and Child on two ends of a long plank. Both begin curiously inching their way towards the middle! If you will stand by the above sentence which I took from your post, we can probably meet somewhere near the middle and at least be in waving distance of each other.

I will certainly not deny the reality of change in Frodo. But I see that change happening within the context of being a hobbit. In fact, I would argue that by going forward, Frodo becomes more of a hobbit (not less). He would definitely not lose his hobbit-ness which stands at his very core. He would become (for lack of a better term) 'purifed'. He would become the true hobbit he was really supposed to be instead of the watered down version they have in the Shire.

C.S. Lewis deals with this question in his writings in terms of nations. There is the everyday Britain which is full of pettiness and strife and not living up to potential. Then there is the 'true' Britain which Lewis calls Logres. This is what Britain could and would become if she lived up to the best in her soul. Lewis postulates that this is true of every nation, and, by implication, of every created being. To me, Frodo is not changing away from what he was, but merely becoming more like he was meant to be. The one does not preclude the other.

But another aspect of being a Hobbit is showing a complete lack of curiosity about their origins and their "position in littleness and in greatness". It is this attitude that possibly led to Frodo's ostracism within the Shire, (though this was partly self-imposed.) Frodo had decided that "you can't go home again". The change had already taken place.

Definitely! Hobbits in the Shire can be exceedingly closed minded. (But to be truthful, the same thing could be said of Elven insularity!) That's why it's so interesting when some hobbits come around who are different. Tolkien clearly stated that the LotR is about "extraordinary" Hobbits, ones who are gifted. We would all fall asleep if we read too long about the "normal" ones. Too predictable!

But I think I could make a similar comparison within the human race itself. If an alien were to come to earth and visit a typical suburban community, he/she would come away with a very limited and not too optomistic picture of Man. But what if that same alien had spent a few days with Mother Theresa or Moses or Siddhartha? They would probably develop a totally different opinion of Man, and his/her capabilities.

I know more about figures from my own tradition than others. And I'd definitely say Moses was still a Man at the core, even though he grew and changed and became more aware of a divine presence in his own life and that of his people. I would say the same for Frodo. That hobbit base is still there. Everything else that comes later builds on top of that.

It's as if he is only half-born, and is struggling like a butterfly half trapped in its cocoon. The transformation could only be completed if he left behind his origins and "moved on".

Bird, what a beautiful statement this is! Your words are wondrous. Only this stubborn hobbit doesn't believe the last sentence is possible for Frodo or anyone else. And I think this is where we come to the heart of our difference. Leaving aside the specific examples of Tolkien or Frodo, I do not believe it is possible for anyone to leave behind their origins and move on. Your origins are with you every day and every moment, whether you like it or not.

Since I am trained as an historian, I probably have stronger feelings about this than most people do. I might even push it one step further and say that I became an historian because in my heart of hearts I believe this: you carry your past with you, no matter how you evolve. And, whether in Aman or the Shire, Frodo would have done the same. For a similar reason, I do not believe that true "revolution" is possible. Take a look at history, and you'll see what I mean. It's possible, Bird, that you are more optomistic at heart than I am, and this is why you see Frodo able to leave behind his origins. I do not.

Since Tolkien isn't here to answer, we can't be certain what he would say. But I think he'd be closer to my end of the plank than yours. He definitely saw limitations in humanity which, according to his beliefs, could only be transformed beyond the circles of the world, or at the far edge of time. In fact I'd say that Tolkien was even more of a pessimist than I am. JRRT even suggested in he Letters that Frodo might not be able to be healed in Aman. I do not have the heart to entertain that possibility!

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Not as secluded as you think, Sharon! I have been reading this thread with the greatest interest and can't think of anything to say that would improve on what you and Birdie, as well as the others, have already said. (I'm afraid this is one of those posts I normally abhor - "I have nothing to say, but I'm saying it anyway!" [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] But I wanted to say thank you for sharing those wonderful thoughts!)

[Child of the 7th Age]

I wonder if there is anyone out there who'd like to make the argument that it was likely Frodo could not be healed? I'd be very curious to hear this.

sharon

[Birdland]

Leaving aside the specific examples of Tolkien or Frodo, I do not believe it is possible for anyone to leave behind their origins and move on. Your origins are with you every day and every moment, whether you like it or not.

Very true, Child. (Birdie inches closer to the center of the seesaw.) You and I seem to have a similar background from what you have told me in other posts. We have both made choices concerning our origins and whether we would continue down certain paths or take new roads.

But yes, we all carry the "baggage" of our origins. But when we prepare for our life's journey, what do we carry in that baggage? The very best of our origins, I would hope, the things that we loved and would fit with our own values.

But can you really separate these things, the bitter and the sweet? By choosing only parts, some might feel you are rejecting all. (I speak from experience.)

And the parts left behind? Well, they must be replaced by other things, in order that you can be whole. And thus you create a new reality. A new "you". Voila! Change. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

As to whether there was a chance that Frodo would not find healing in the West, Tolkien supposedly addressed this very idea. His poem The Sea-Bell has also been called "Frodo's Dreme". (I'm sorry, I don't know if Tolkien did this, or others). It tells of a "seeker" who arrives in a place where he strives for a connection, only to find himself rejected and lost, seeing "through a glass darkly." In the end, he returns to his origins, only to again find himself an outsider, a ghost who wanders unseen by all he had left behind.

To be lost between two worlds; if this really was "written" by The Ringbearer, it should have been titled "Frodo's Nightmare." IMHO, choices must be made. In order for the subject of the poem to find a connection in this new land, the boat must be sunk and the bridges burned.

Remember Frodo's words to Sam: "You cannot be always torn in two".

(OK, I may have crawled back to the end of the seesaw, there.)

Hmmmmm, you're right. We seem to have the field to ourselves, here. Can it be the Downs is in silent awe of our erudite debating skills?...Nah!

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bird -- I did receive a nice pm from Belin saying that he'd stumbled on to our thread, and was enjoying the polite polemics.

Since I'm very sleepy, I will wait to respond tomorrow to your post.

sharon

[mark12_30]

Bird,

Since Frodo's Dreme was included in a margin in one of teh copies of the Red Book of Westmarch, it couldn't have been written by Frodo AFTER he got to Tol Eressea. It would have been one of his traumatic dreams before he left. Maybe, thinking about leaving, he was worried about "what if I don't fit in."

Sharon, in terms of Frodo not getting healed-- I don't think anybody is completely healed this side of eternity. (The power of sin can be defeated here; the presence of sin is eliminated there.) But I certainly hope that he didn't end up in the same nightmarish state on Tol Eressea that he was in when he left the Shire! (wails at the thought)

[Birdland]

M12-20 - Didn't mean to suggest that this was Frodo's actual experience. It is after all, labeled a dream and the images are not to be taken literally. And my own images were not meant in the literal sense, as well.

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]