Gamgees at The Party? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Estelyn Telcontar · 08-20-2009, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tolkien

Practically everybody living near was invited. A very few were overlooked by accident, but as they turned up all the same, that did not matter.

This supports the idea that the Gamgees were definitely present at the party. I would agree with those who think that they were not among the 144 honoured guests. Perhaps, seeing that they helped out in various functions at Bag End, they may have had some sort of task assigned to them - I can imagine Sam serving beer from the barrel to which he later says farewell!

Morthoron · 08-20-2009, 06:41 PM

The Gamgees parked cars and worked the coat check. They made very little money, as Hobbits are notoriously bad tippers.

Inziladun · 08-20-2009, 06:49 PM

I'd be more apt to think along the lines of Esty. Sam works the crowd..."One for me 'n one for you Mr. Burrows. That's another for me 'n one for you Mrs. Chubb..."

radagastly · 08-20-2009, 08:24 PM

Gotta agree with Esty and Inziladun, the Gamgees were at the party. Except it was probably "One for you, Mr. Proudfoot, two for my Gaffer, and one more for me!"

Seriously, I have no doubt the Gamgees were both at the party, as well as their cousins, nephews, nieces, aunts, uncles, grandfathers, grandmothers, grandaunts and -uncles etc. as well as many and any other relatives they had including assorted siblings (we don't know for a fact that Sam was an only child, only that he was the only one who "made good!")

After all, it is clear that Bilbo planned and executed a community festival, not a private party. The real question is, was this party the clincher in why it was (apparently) so difficult for him to give up the Ring when it came down to it? After all, it was the first time he used the Ring to trick, and not merely to hide. Surely, that stress would have worked on him, at least a little, to make Gandalf's job more difficult in persuading him to give it up?

Just a random thought . . .!

TheGreatElvenWarrior · 08-21-2009, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radagastly

Seriously, I have no doubt the Gamgees were both at the party, as well as their cousins, nephews, nieces, aunts, uncles, grandfathers, grandmothers, grandaunts and -uncles etc. as well as many and any other relatives they had including assorted siblings (we don't know for a fact that Sam was an only child, only that he was the only one who "made good!")

Sam wasn't an only child! He has siblings on his family tree.

radagastly · 08-22-2009, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by TheGreatElvenWarrior:

Quote:

Sam wasn't an only child! He has siblings on his family tree.

I guess I should have checked that before I said anything.

TheGreatElvenWarrior · 08-22-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radagastly

I guess I should have checked that before I said anything.

Probably. Sam had five siblings if I counted right.

08-20-2009, 06:41 PM	#2
Morthoron Curmudgeonly Wordwraith Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits Posts: 2,515	The Gamgees parked cars and worked the coat check. They made very little money, as Hobbits are notoriously bad tippers. __________________ And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision.

08-20-2009, 06:49 PM	#3
Inziladun Gruesome Spectre Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Heaven's doorstep Posts: 8,039	I'd be more apt to think along the lines of Esty. Sam works the crowd..."One for me 'n one for you Mr. Burrows. That's another for me 'n one for you Mrs. Chubb..." __________________ Music alone proves the existence of God.

08-20-2009, 08:24 PM	#4
radagastly Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Washington, D. C., USA Posts: 299	Gotta agree with Esty and Inziladun, the Gamgees were at the party. Except it was probably "One for you, Mr. Proudfoot, two for my Gaffer, and one more for me!" Seriously, I have no doubt the Gamgees were both at the party, as well as their cousins, nephews, nieces, aunts, uncles, grandfathers, grandmothers, grandaunts and -uncles etc. as well as many and any other relatives they had including assorted siblings (we don't know for a fact that Sam was an only child, only that he was the only one who "made good!") After all, it is clear that Bilbo planned and executed a community festival, not a private party. The real question is, was this party the clincher in why it was (apparently) so difficult for him to give up the Ring when it came down to it? After all, it was the first time he used the Ring to trick, and not merely to hide. Surely, that stress would have worked on him, at least a little, to make Gandalf's job more difficult in persuading him to give it up? Just a random thought . . .! __________________ But all the while I sit and think of times there were before, I listen for returning feet and voices at the door.