The History of LotR - Chapter-by-Chapter Companion

[Aiwendil]

I haven't posted much because I'm still sorting out who the characters are in and of themseves, which is hard because they keep changing!

I feel exactly the same way. When I read HoMe VI I thought I was paying very close attention to every intricacy, but the Hobbit names are now a complete jumble in my mind.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

I'm now reading Chapter IX in RotS; the first half corresponds with the 'Strider' chapter of FotR. In the light of the CbC discussion of Strider as Aragorn, noble, kingly and inspiring love in story characters as well as in us readers, it's interesting to compare Trotter, the Ranger hobbit with him. I must say, I find the latter very much lacking!

There is little implied mystery and depth to Trotter; he is described in Gandalf's letter as a "wild hobbit: dark, long-haired, has wooden shoes!" It seems to me that the word "ranger" is used in the generic sense of "wanderer", not having a specific purpose nor a set definition. As a matter of fact, he tells the hobbits that "not all rangers are to be trusted"! So who are the rangers? Are they various races? Is there a coordinated purpose to their wandering? And how on earth do wooden shoes contribute positively to walking in the wild?! (Can you imagine traversing the bogs of the Midgewater Marshes with wooden shoes?!)

The most important Bree characters - Butterbur, Bill Ferny - are hobbits as well! That makes Bree seem less foreign, less interesting too.

Gandalf was there a few days earlier, which is less disturbing than the final version of the story.

I guess the word "less" sums up my impression of the early drafts of this chapter. It gains so much by the time it becomes what we are now familiar with: The book's most fascinating character (in my opinion), the "All that is gold" poem, and Gandalf's amusing characterization of Butterbur...

[mark12_30]

Interesting, Esty; I know that Trotter has less depth than Strider, of course, but (perhaps due to Child's influence) I found him fascinating. By LOTR it seems that Hobbits can only be found in two places-- The Shire and Bree. In a similar vein, Rohirrim are found in Rohan, etc; everyone is localized. Why would the Dunedain be the ONLY travellers? Aside from Gildor and Strider and Black Riders, what other travellers in the wild do we meet? The place is pretty empty.

I guess I (very much) liked the idea of turning a corner and meeting a wandering Hobbit.

[Child of the 7th Age]

....perhaps due to Child's influence

Now I know why my ears were burning this afternoon! I do like Trotter: I have used him or similar hobbit Rangers in many a Shire RPG. But I will certainly admit that Aragorn lends a depth to LotR that is simply missing with Trotter.

It is only with the character of Aragorn that we see the vital link forged to the Legendarium as a whole. LotR ceases to be simply a sequel to the Hobbit and becomes a tale linked to Silm and the whole history of Middle-earth.

Even more than Gandalf, the Dunedain have a history, a sad and tragic past, that gives depth and meaning to everything that will come about in Lord of the Rings. So many themes present in the earlier history find their fullest expression in Aragorn: the creative gifts of the Elves passing to Men, the hoped for moment when Aragorn finally 'corrects' the terrible mistake his ancestor made, the restoration of Numenor's promise in a different guise and form, even the reaffirmation of Man's potential that we first glimpsed in the character of Beren.

I like Trotter just where he is: in the middle of the pages of HoMe. Aragorn belongs in LotR. He and Frodo are in many respects mirror images of each other, reflective of a very old theme. Frodo is the sacrificial figure who must give up his life to restore the vitality of the land. Aragorn is the new king ruling over a land that is cleansed and enriched because of Frodo's sacrifice. Trotter is fun but, without Aragorn, the story lacks that rich nuance and sense of history that I find so compelling.

[mark12_30]

Child, you put it so eloquently... Yes, Bingo and Trotter's story is different than Frodo and Strider. It's a different book. And I like it that way. It's almost like they are ancestors, or something. (Parallel Universe, anyone? )

[davem]

Its different near the Shire

And so it is, because with the appearance of Strider we are suddenly in a bigger, older world. If Tolkien had continued with his original idea we would have remained in the world of the Hobbit, Bombadil & Farmer Maggot.

Aragorn changes the whole story. As Child says, he is the link to the Sil. This is fascinating for me. The appearance of a single character changes the whole story. It is no longer to be a children's book, it is no longer to be a fairy story, it even changes its purpose - no longer a sequel to the Hobbit, its now the culmination of the Silmarillion.

Having said that, I like Trotter, & I can't help wondering what kind of adventures he'd have lead the hobbits on. Of course, one could speculate that as time passed. at least for hobbits in their rural isolation, the whole history of the end of the Third Age became a fairy story - Bilbo became 'Mad Baggins' who disappeared with a bang & returned with wagon loads of treasure, Sam chased black men up mountains & Aragorn became a mysterious hobbit who wore wooden shoes. Its almost like Tolkien first 'discovered' this version, & then slowly worked backwards to discover 'what really happened'.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

What an interesting thought, davem! Strider/Aragorn as the key to the story, not just the Ring! He is the connection to the depth of history, as Child has mentioned on the CbC discussion. That could be the reason why I can’t get used to Trotter, as Aragorn is just too important to me to replace him with someone else. I haven’t yet gotten to the point of being able to like Trotter as a different character. However, the idea of “wild hobbits” fascinates me! (I’ve finished reading Chapter IX, ‘Trotter and the Journey to Weathertop’.) What potential for a fan fiction there!