Why save them?

[Child of the 7th Age]

Davem,

You've said this so very well. I do agree with what both you and Esty have said.
It makes me wonder what harsh dreams and distortions of reality Tolkien himself suffered after his return from the war. There must have been a lot that was never publicly expressed: both his own personal response and the suffering that he could see other veterans going through.

Do his diary contains any entries for the immediate post-war period, or was that writing done at a later date? I don't have Garth handy right now, but I suspect that even he could only dig out so much. Certainly the letters exchanged after the deaths of Tolkien's friends were suggestive. Still, there is so much in any individual's life that we don't know: things that are kept private and only hinted at in rare personal conversations. I have a feeling we are seeing only the tip of an iceberg here.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Folwren

Not happy endings, Lommy, the LotR doesn't have a happy ending.

That was actually partly sarcastic comment. But LotR does have a happy ending - in a way - for Frodo and Sam. And I'd still call LotR's ending more happy than sad, though that does not mean it ha a happy one. (Hey, we could start a new poll: "Does LotR have a happy or a sad ending?" )

Originally Posted by Kath

Bittersweet moments were mentioned, here is the opportunity for a perfect one. Gandalf goes in to rescue them, but only finds one alive. There is joy in that one is saved, but sadness that one could not be. If you want a truly noble sacrifice, how about one life to save the world.

I see your point, but I disagree.

Who of them you'd condemn to death, Frodo or Sam, and not break the story?

Frodo's fate of losing the Shire after saving it is one of the most sorrowful events in the LotR and very important for the plot. It adds the famous bittersweetness and takes the ending further away from a clear happy ending. Frodo's going to west emphasises and adds to the fading of the Elves. Thereby, in my opinion, he couldn't die on Mount Doom.

In fairytales and in Christian faith's main doctrines, which were both important to Tolkien, good is rewarded (and evil punished). Such a good and loyal person who never failed as Sam couldn't be rewarded with death in a hope-forsaken place, though he craves to see his home, sweetheart and old father again. Also, Sam is very important for the healing of the Shire. No other character could easily take his place in it. So, in my opinion, he couldn't die on Orodruin either.

So, in my opinion, there would have been no point in killing neither Frodo nor Sam only to make a more sorrowful and bitter ending, (because they're both essential for the later story).

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Kath

This makes some sense morm, but I think that people could have coped with Frodo dying. Not Sam perhaps, but Frodo yes.

It is funny, I feal the other way. I think there is a good reason to let Frodo live, we need to see the change that has happend and wich cannot be revoked.

Personaly I don't think that Sam is that important after Orodruin. . . atleast I think that what ever changes there was in his esteem in the Shire, could have been shown in Merry and Pippin. I might be influenced by the fact, that I at times find Sam annoying.

I actually think it could work out quite nicely with Sam dying. . . If you don't care about the christian doctrines that Lommy speaks of, that is.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Personaly I don't think that Sam is that important after Orodruin. . . atleast I think that what ever changes there was in his esteem in the Shire, could have been shown in Merry and Pippin. I might be influenced by the fact, that I at times find Sam annoying.

I actually think it could work out quite nicely with Sam dying. . . If you don't care about the christian doctrines that Lommy speaks of, that is.

Well, at least if he had died Tolkien should have written Galadreil to give the earth to someone else, or Frodo to take Sam's gift with him and spread it around in his memory...

But I still think he couldn't have died. That, I think, wouldn't have made the story more bittersweet, only over-tragic. I like the plot the way it is.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Hey, we could start a new poll: "Does LotR have a happy or a sad ending?"

Thinlómien

This is a great question, although I haven't checked to see if there's already a similar thread. I actually think a general thread would work better than a poll. Otherwise people might just "punch the button" and not explain why they felt that way.

If forced to choose, I would vote "yes, but...."

[Folwren]

Originally Posted by Child of the 7th Age

Thinlómien

This is a great question, although I haven't checked to see if there's already a similar thread. I actually think a general thread would work better than a poll. Otherwise people might just "punch the button" and not explain why they felt that way.

There is a similar thread. . .in fact, there is a thread talking explicitly about that. It's called 'Happy ending. . .or is it?' I could figure out how to make a link, but as I don't know if I have time nor wants, I won't do that now. It's a good thread, actually. I forget who started it.

-- Folwren

EDIT: I'm adding this having read more than just Child's last post. Once again, Boromir, I apologize - I have not read all of the entire thread since my last post. I have read most of it, but the posts that I have not read, I haven't even glanced over. However, my flitting eye would just happen to catch on this concerning Sam, wouldn't it? *sigh* Ever to his rescue.

Originally Posted by Rune

Personaly I don't think that Sam is that important after Orodruin. . . atleast I think that what ever changes there was in his esteem in the Shire, could have been shown in Merry and Pippin. I might be influenced by the fact, that I at times find Sam annoying.

I actually think it could work out quite nicely with Sam dying. . . If you don't care about the christian doctrines that Lommy speaks of, that is.

Sam is absolutely important! Even after Orodruin! He is one of the main charactesr, and he is the main character that makes the ending so good. If it were not for Sam, the end wouldn't have been what it is. Sam Gamgee was one of the only reasons that Frodo ever stayed so long, and he was also one of the only reasons that his departure is so heartbreaking. Sam's homecoming at the very end, and his famous line that will always be quoted in my home ('Well, I'm back,' he said) is what finally tells the reader, "Yes, everything is alright, even if Frodo did have to leave."

By the way, in my sometimes overberaing opinion, Sam is never annoying. Amusing, thick headed (atimes, not often, but sometimes), childish, but not annoying.

The edit is longer than the original post, but ah me.

And for any of you think this is straying from the point of thread. . .I wouldn't say so. This is a further explenation of why Sam shouldn't have died.

-- Folwren

[Mithalwen]

I rediscovered this thread looking for something else and thought I would bump it up partly because IMO it is worth a read and partly because since A Game of Thrones has come to prominence I have read comments implying that Martin is superior because he isn't afraid to kill off major characters. Now I can't judge that as I haven't got around to readin ASOIAF yet but this old thread does illustrate that Tolkien's choices are far more complex than mere squeamishness.