Paired characters in LotR

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

I think that Bilbo is indeed an interesting character in this regard -- as he is in so many others.

I think the obvious pairing would be between Bilbo and Frodo, in the ways identified by SpM (welcome back!), but also think that there is a lot of value in Encaitare's suggestion that we can compare Bilbo to Gollum.

I'd like to combine these two, though, and compare the set pairs of Bilbo/Gollum to Bilbo/Frodo. It's not that there's a single set of character-character relations (that is Bilbo=Frodo) but that the relationship betwee Bilbo and Gollum is reflected in the relationship of Frodo and Gollum. Bilbo met and overcame Gollum in the relatively simple monster/adventure story of The Hobbit, and so their relationship is fairly straightforward: good guy defeats bad guy. This is how Frodo's relationship with Gollum begins, but as their relationship develops and grows they both begin to realise that its just not that simple: they are partners with and to one another through the Ring. Their relationship is like the Bilbo/Gollum one but it becomes more complex the more like Gollum Frodo becomes under the influence of the Ring, and the lmore like Frodo Gollum becomes under the influence of Frodo.

In a way, the difference between The Hobbit and LotR is defined by the the difference in these relationships. What's interesting about this comparison is the fact that in TH the relatively 'simple' adversarial relation of Bilbo and Gollum is appropriate to the story of the hero's triumph. In LotR, though, it's this same adversarial, either/or way of thinking that is the problem with and in the relationship of Frodo and Gollum. And what's interesting about this is that this either/or way of thinking the divides Frodo and Gollum is promulgated by the Ring (they both want it, they can't both have it; Frodo is out to destroy it, Gollum wants to preserve it) and by Sam, who perceives Gollum in a Bilbo way, right to the end (almost).

So, the Gollum/Frodo relationship is the more 'grown up' or thematically 'mature' version of the Bilbo/Gollum relationship. It's the culmination of an evolutionary movement from one kind or version of heroism (i.e. the monster is defeated) to an other (i.e. the monster is ot monstrous but a shadowy echo of the hero; the hero forbears victory over the monster who is 'defeated' in the end, by his own success -- Gollum, after all, gets the Ring back).

[Boromir88]

Fordhim the other think I believe about the Frodo/Gollum relationship is they both desire the same goal. They both desire to keep the ring away from Sauron, Gollum made a pledge he would never let Sauron have the ring again, and he kept that promise. Frodo and Gollum both wanted to keep the ring away from Sauron, but both had different ideas of how to do so. Frodo wanted to destroy it, Gollum wanted to keep it for himself.

I think you are right when you say Frodo/Gollum is a more "mature relationship" then Bilbo/Gollum. I think the reason for that would be because Frodo just spent a lot of time with Gollum. I mean Gollum was their "guide" for a big chunk of the journey, where Bilbo only knew Gollum for a short time, and plus the fact that Gollum and Bilbo wanted to kill eachother didn't really help the cause.

How about a comparison between Galadriel/Gimli. I know this has been discussed a number of times before, but I think it's worth bringing up here too. Galadriel was one of the Elves that showed hospitality to the dwarves (the other being Elrond). Galadriel being Noldor, and from Aule, there is this shared connection between Galadriel and Gimli. I don't know how you would describe it, but it seemed like Gimli had a touch of "unrequited love" and Galadriel was just sort of flattered by it. That's all we hear from Gimli for the rest of the book, gushing about Galadriel, ahh the pretty lady, lol.

Then there's something about Frodo I would like to mention. Frodo's parents had died when Frodo was still very young. So now who steps in as the "father" figure to Frodo, that he never, essentially had. I think first that father figure is Bilbo, but then Bilbo goes off to Rivendell, and Frodo still needs sort of that "father" to depend on. In steps Gandalf for a while, but Gandalf goes away and is trapped on Orthanc. So then, we get to Bree and Aragorn comes in, I don't know if you would say Aragorn was that "father figure" that Gandalf and Bilbo was to Frodo, but definately was a person Frodo looked up to. In the End, Frodo has grown, age wise, and mentally wise, doesn't need that "father" anymore. Now that we got the Father figure out of the way, I don't know if one would consider Galadriel as sort of a mother/grandmother to Frodo, but she did lend him advice, and did help him with his journey. Galadriel being arguably one of the more powerful people on Middle-Earth, she could even be like that "Grandmother" figure to the peoples of Middle-Earth. Eventhough, in the beginning we do see there are these "strange" tales of the Lady in the Wood, and as Eomer shows his strong hate towards it. But, in the end I would think Galadriel became one of the more respected people of Middle-Earth.

[radagastly]

This is a topic I have thought about a great deal over the last several months, though I forget which thread here inspired it. It may well have been Fordim's Monsters thread. Since the book is called The Lord of the Rings, my focus in thinking about this centered around the Ring itself. The one thing that seemed to catch my attention the most on this topic of pairs (or foils as Boromir88 mentioned) lay in the list of ringbearers, more specifically in how they acquired or lost the ring. So, as a quick review, here are the ringbearers in order:

Sauron
Isildur
Deagol
Smeagol
Bilbo
Frodo
Sam
Frodo
Smeagol

While others may have handled the ring, they never declared possession of it either out loud or in their heart. They were therefore not actual Ringbearers. On this list, there are many pairings, as I said, especially in the acquisition and/or dispensation of the ring.

Two times the ring was acquired through a deliberate act of violence (Smeagol both times)
Two of them found it by some kind of chance (Deagol and Bilbo)
Twice it was given freely to the bearer (Frodo received it both times in this fashion)
and twice it was taken-on more or less 'from scratch' after the previous bearer was dead. (Isildur cut it from Sauron's dead body and Sam took it thinking Frodo was dead).

There are also some interesting pairings in how the bearers lost the ring.

Two of them lost a finger when it was taken from them. (Obviously Sauron and Frodo)
Two of them died (but were not really dead in either case) when it was taken from their body (again Sauron and Frodo)
Two of them were abandoned by the ring itself (Isildur and Smeagol)
Two of them gave the ring away freely (Bilbo and Sam)
Two of them were deliberately killed over of it (Sauron and Deagol)

I realize that some arguments could be made of these kinds of pairings. One might argue that Isildur's death came as an attempt to take the ring, but according to "The Disaster of the Gladden Fields" in Unfinished Tales, the marauding orcs did not attempt to pursue Ohtar when he escaped the battle with the shards of Narsil. If they were deliberately after anything of value, other than simply attacking men for it's own sake, they would certainly have sent a sortie to sieze Ohtar and his companion as they fled, thinking that they may be taking away something of great value.

Be that as it may, what does one learn when seeing this list and the obvious pairings laid out like this, knowing the history and personality of each character that bore the ring?

One of the first things I notice is that Frodo is the only character to receive the ring freely given, and he did so twice. And what's more, he received it from the two people in the world who loved him the most (and the only two people to give up this burden willingly). What similarity lies in the pairing of Bilbo and Sam that each of them would lay this unbearable burden onto someone they loved so dearly? This is to me one of the most obvious Christian references in the entire book.

Another obvious pairing lies in the fact that two of the bearers bore the ring twice; Smeagol and Frodo.

Frodo received the ring twice freely given to him. Smeagol acquired it twice through deliberate acts of violence. Frodo went to an ultimate reward in the West (or perhaps penultimate would be a better word) while Smeagol perished in flame. What does their respective means of acquiring the ring say about their ultimate fate as foils of one another? What do the other Ringbearer pairings on the list have to say about Tolkien's philosophy or theology? Can a similar list be drawn up centered around the demeanor in which each of the bearers kept the Ring? Can other similarities besides what I mentioned be found in the lists I've created above and what would that add to the mix of this discussion on pairings?

I feel as though I'm getting a little long-winded so I will post more on this later, after I see what some of you think.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Here's HerenIstarion's idea for a pair (well, not exactly a pair . . . ):

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...1271#post21271

If you scroll down, you'll see his FSG (Frodo-Sam-Gollum) idea, and then the Aragorn-Arwen pair. Quite a good read. For that matter, read the rest of the topic (though it has nothing to do with pairs!) Perhaps I've said too much . . .

[Evisse the Blue]

That was a really fascinating post, radagastly!

Two times the ring was acquired through a deliberate act of violence (Smeagol both times)
Two of them found it by some kind of chance (Deagol and Bilbo)
Twice it was given freely to the bearer (Frodo received it both times in this fashion)
and twice it was taken-on more or less 'from scratch' after the previous bearer was dead. (Isildur cut it from Sauron's dead body and Sam took it thinking Frodo was dead).

I would have included Isildur in the first category, therefore breaking the 'balance'. But I agree that Elrond's account of how the Ring came in Isildur's possesion is ambiguous and could very well prove your point:

Sauron himself was overthrown and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand(...)

This does indicate that Isildur cut the Ring after Sauron fell, but it is not clarified if Sauron was overthrown by Isildur, or by someone else, in order to be removed of the Ring.
If you're right, and Isildur falls in the same category as Sam, then this offers and interesting possibility of redemption for Isildur, if only he had released the Ring from his keeping. At one point he is ready to do that:

"It needs one greater than I know now myself to be. My pride has fallen. It should go to the Keepers of the Three."

. But it was too late, because the Ring apparently had other plans. Redemption was thus denied to him, maybe because it was not yet the time for it.

What similarity lies in the pairing of Bilbo and Sam that each of them would lay this unbearable burden onto someone they loved so dearly? This is to me one of the most obvious Christian references in the entire book.

I agree.
My thoughts on this: They seem to place the fate of many above the fate of a single individual, whom they happen to love very much. And they do it on account of their faith that everything will turn out alright, this faith which seems to many no more than 'a fool's hope'. They do it because they sense there is no other way. It appears to me that they would rather let themselves governed by the flow of events, by fate, if you will, then will things into happening. All the other Ringbearers (except Frodo) willed things into happening, and only harm came of it.

[Boromir88]

Evisse wrote:

This does indicate that Isildur cut the Ring after Sauron fell, but it is not clarified if Sauron was overthrown by Isildur, or by someone else, in order to be removed of the Ring.

Here is a quote from The Shadow of the Past, this is what Gandalf said:

"But for the moment, since most of all you need to know how this thing came to you, and that will be tale enough, this is all that I will say. It was Gil-Galad, Elven king and Elendil of Westernesse who overthrew Sauron...

So if Gandalf is correct in this (because sometimes the account/stories of people are inaccurate) I think this is what happened...

This does indicate that Isildur cut the Ring after Sauron fell

So, if Gandalf's story is accurate, I think Gil-Galad and Elendil overthrew Sauron, then Isildur cut the ring after Gil-Gald, Elendil, and Sauron were all "overthrown." I think I can trust Gandalf's words, especially if it has the backing of Elrond.

Sauron himself was overthrown and Isildur cut the Ring from his hand

[radagastly]

Boromir88--Thanks for those quotes about the overthrow of Sauron. From "The Silmarillion" I would add this:

and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own.

This seems to emphasize more clearly that Sauron was already dead.

Evisse the Blue:

But it was too late, because the Ring apparently had other plans. Redemption was thus denied to him, maybe because it was not yet the time for it.

I tend to think that his redemption came when he recognized that the Ring was more powerful than he was, and set out to seek council from Elrond in Imladris. He simply didn't get that far. If he had, he might have become the third character to give the Ring away freely (though I doubt he would have succeeded in actually giving it away.) Compare this to Sam, on the edge of Mordor outside the Tower of Cirith Ungol:

As Sam stood there, even though the Ring was not on him but hanging by its chain about his neck, he felt himself enlarged, as if he were robed in a huge distorted shadow of himself, a vast and ominous threat halted upon the walls of Mordor. He felt that he had from now on only two choices: to forbear the Ring, though it would torment him; or to claim it, and challenge the Power that sat in its dark hold beyond the valley of shadows. Already the Ring tempted him, gnawing at his will and reason. Wild fantasies arose in his mind; and he saw Samwise the Strong, Hero of the Age, striding with a flaming sword across the darkened land, and armies flocking to his call as he marched to the overthrow of Barad-dur. And then all the clouds rolled away, and the white sun shone, and at his command the vale of Gorgoroth became a garden of flowers and trees and brought forth fruit. He had only to put on the Ring and claim it for his own, and all this could be.

In that hour of trial it was the love of his master that helped most to hold him firm; but also deep down in him lived still unconquered his plain hobbit-sense: he knew in the core of his heart that he was not large enough to bear such a burden, even if such visions were not a mere cheat to betray him. The one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due, not a garden swollen to a realm; his own hands to use, not the hands of others to command.

Sam's realization of his own weakness compared to the Ring certainly comes about more quickly and is spelled out more plainly than it is with Isildur, but the sentiment is the same. It is just too big and powerful for either of them. I realize this does not quite count as redemption in and of itself, but in both cases, it is a step in the right direction.

The difference, I guess between Sam and Isildur in this case, is that Sam actually succeeds in giving the Ring away:

In that hour of trial it was the love of his master that helped most to hold him firm;

I think there lies the faith of which you spoke, Evisse.