The importance of Tolkien's minor characters

[Essex]

Dininziliel, I will definately have to but a copy of Letters !

The quote you state pretty much sums up what I love most about LOTR and it's great to see that if affected Tolkien in the same way.

The things that make me cry and feel joy are when we see the hobbits praised by the 'greats' , or Nobles as Tolkien puts it.

You know, when Gandalf says that Merry should have been carried into Minas Tirith in great honour, or when Eoywn says to Eomer that Merry should be made a knight of the riddermark, or when Aragorn kneels to Sam and Frodo.

'The ennoblement of the ignoble' sums it all up.

[The Saucepan Man]

Dininziliel, I will definately have to but a copy of Letters !

Oh, but you definately must, Essex. I am reading the Letters at the moment, and finding them to be an absolute revelation. For one thing, they provide the answers to so many of the questions that come up routinely in this forum. And for another, they give great insights into Tolkien's works (particularly LotR). And I also find myself agreeing with so much of what he says about life in general (see my sig, for example ).

Anyway, back on topic. For me, it is not so much Tolkien's use of minor characters as "plot devices", to move the story on or impart useful information, that indicates his skill as a story-teller. After all, any story which spans great distances and encompasses great events must include characters other than those at the forefront of the story. What I do find delightful, however, is the way in which he imbues so many of his minor characters with real character. He really brings them to life by giving them individual identities and character traits which make them seem real, and only some of which are necessary to help in developing the plot. While their characters are not really (and do not need to be) developed beyond what we see of them when we meet them, what we do see of them makes them entirely believable and completely individual.

The two prime examples of this which spring to mind are Barliman Butterbur (whose very name gives a good indication of his character) and Ioreth. They have individual characters which really mark them out as more than just cardboard cut-outs carrying out their plot-developing duties. Butterbur is the slightly bumbling and absent-minded, but nevertheless kind-hearted, barman. He maybe fearful of the Ringwraiths (who wouldn't be), but one suspects that he would be as tough as nails if a fight were to develop in the Prancing Pony (which it probably does quite frequently). But it is only his role as barman of the Prancing Pony and his forgetfulness (in sending Gandalf's letter to Frodo) which is necessary for plot purposes. As for Ioreth, she probably occupies even less space in the book than Butterbur, but we get a good sense of her character as someone who is kind-hearted, learned in her art, and also a bit of chatterbox (evident in Aragron's gentle teasing of her quick tongue). But it is only her knowledge of old lore which is necessary to the plot, since it is this which is central to Aragorn becoming recognised as the true heir to the throne. Importantly, though, her role in the development of the plot flows not just from what she says, but also from what she is.

We even get a good sense of the character of some of the bad guys in Ugluk, Shagrat and Gorbag. They are just Orcs, and all we really need to know about them for plot purposes is what they do. Ugluk commands the assorted Orcs who capture Merry and Pippin and attempt to take them to Isengard. We need to see his role in the argument which develops, and is central to Merry and Pippin escaping, but we do not really need to see that he also has a character. Except that we do, because this makes him a more interesting and believable character. And much the same goes for Shagrat and Gorbag. They could just be those two Orc leaders who capture Frodo and then fight in the Tower of Cirith Ungol. But they are much more than that. They are also the two Orc leaders who talk nostalgically about the old times and would rather make off and have an easy time of it. It's not necessary to the plot for us to know this about them, but it does add so much more colour to them.

Of course, not every minor character is so well developed as these, but there are many that are. Does anyone else have any good examples?

[doug*platypus]

What about those often overlooked miner characters, the Dwarves? Just because the account we receive of the events at the end of the Third Age is so elfophilic, doesn't mean that the stunted children of Aulë were any less important!!

A very good point has been made that minor characters may be there often out of convenience. Still, that's far better than using major characters all the time. Modern stories (movies, etc.) tend to overvalue the major players, and give them all the credit. Nothing riles me more than a non-speaking extra who should have been allowed to say a few words.

Tolkien takes the time to show the rich tapestry that is humanity and our everday lives. Certain individuals (the hobbits, Gandalf, Aragorn) were the focus of the Lord of the Rings, but Tolkien seldom makes minor characters fade into the obscurity of the background. They are present more often than not, even unnecessary characters such as:

• the rider of Rohan who doubts Gandalf will return
• Mablung and Damrod
• the Healer
• Lindir
• Rúmil, brother of Haldir

These characters aren't solely there to accomplish plot devices. They fill out the story and make the world much more believable. And yeah, as pointed out, most of them saved the universe as well.

[Osse]

Originally Posted by doug*platypus

What about those often overlooked miner characters, the Dwarves?

MINER characters... dwarves HARF HARF HARF