why Frodo? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

doug*platypus · 01-22-2003, 03:19 AM

I agree that Sam was far more suited to the role of secondary hero. I also think that in some kind of Bombadil way, he wouldn't really care about the Ring at all. He never experiences any desire for It, and even when he tries to keep It after rescuing Frodo, this is only (at least on the surface) out of concern for his master. While history tells against such things, I think that Sam would have been strongly tempted to either cast away the burden, or just lay it aside and get on with mowing the lawn.

01-22-2003, 03:19 AM	#4
doug*platypus Delver in the Deep Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Aotearoa Posts: 960	I agree that Sam was far more suited to the role of secondary hero. I also think that in some kind of Bombadil way, he wouldn't really care about the Ring at all. He never experiences any desire for It, and even when he tries to keep It after rescuing Frodo, this is only (at least on the surface) out of concern for his master. While history tells against such things, I think that Sam would have been strongly tempted to either cast away the burden, or just lay it aside and get on with mowing the lawn. __________________ But Gwindor answered: 'The doom lies in yourself, not in your name'.