Hero - A Part to Play

[butterfly]

It always bothers me a bit when people call Sam the real hero of LotR.

Is there now a one-hero limit per story?

I would say that Sam is a real hero of LotR. I would say the same of Gandalf and of Aragorn and of Eowyn and Merry and Pippin and Faramir.

There are three applicable definitions of 'hero'.

a) A man distinguished by exceptional courage and nobility and strength
Which is shown by so many in this trilogy.

b) The principal character in a play or movie or novel or poem
And I would say by this definition that Frodo is the hero of LotR (this definition is commonly linked more to the word 'protagonist').

c) Someone who fights for a cause
Which, again, covers a wide range of characters and motivations.

The other two definitions that I found are the classical definition, which is just about ability, heritage, and great deeds (Aragorn as hero), and the sandwich definition.

Now, my definition of hero tends to be more a and c, whereas I do think of b as a protagonist. Under my definition - yes, Sam is most definitely a hero, but he is not the only one and there's no way that he could have ever undertaken the quest without Frodo. Frodo is his reason for going. Frodo is the cause that he fights for, with the Shire in there, too, yes, but it's mostly All About Frodo and getting him there and back again.

Is Frodo a hero? In the final, most vital moment, he breaks and claims the ring. In the end, he can't cast it into the fire and he doesn't stop longing for it after it is destroyed. But he got the ring to the mountain - to the very fires of Mount Doom. Because he does break in the moment of decision, I would say that he wasn't a hero in the end. But that doesn't mean that he wasn't the right choice to carry the ring.

Pippin and Merry are definitely heroes. Merry makes it possible for Eowyn to slay the Witch King and Pippin saves Faramir's life and lights the first beacon - thus saving all of Gondor. And Billy Boyd is gorgeous, which has nothing to do with being heroic, but it doesn't hurt. Yowza.

Gandalf brings the turn of the tide many times. Aragorn also saves Gondor's ass when he brings the Army of the Dead. Eowyn, as previously noted, slays the Witch King. Faramir, who we are shown time and again as so longing for his father's approval, goes against that in TT to do the right thing and give Frodo and Sam their chance.

What every hero needs, though, is a reason to fight. A reason to go on. They need to know that there are things in the world worth fighting for. That's what Frodo lost at the end. One of the times that I was closest to actually crying was when Frodo said he couldn't remember what things in the Shire had been like or what food tasted like. Frodo got lost because he couldn't remember why he should fight, because the ring and the want for the ring were blocking out all the reasons that he'd taken the burden onto himself in the first place.

Sam always had his reason for fighting right in front of him, in the form of Frodo. The times that he seemed to despair were because he didn't have that reason with him anymore.

Merry and Pippin (and Gandalf, in many ways) all fight to save the Shire - which is, of course, a symbol of all that is green and good in the world. Aragorn fights for what he has claimed as his people (in the end of Fellowship) and also to save the woman that he loves (which I didn't mind as an addition - in Fellowship, Arwen gives her grace to Frodo, so it makes sense that she would be bound to him and thus the ring). Eowyn fights for her people and for her right to defend that which she loves.

I think that they're all heroes and that there isn't a need to narrow it down to one - because they all needed each other to save Middle-Earth. Not one of them could have done it alone.

And that's as it should be.

Comments

ITA, but...

[sizequeen.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I agree with this, although I understand why people say that Sam is the "real" hero of LOtR. Sam is a humble, simple soul who never thirsted for adventure (Bilbo) or hijinks (like Pippin and Merry)or any kind of life outside of the Shire, but he unhesitatingly takes on the burden of caring for Frodo. Unlike Merry and Pippin who have each other, Sam is not only alone in carrying Frodo, but he has to deal with the added burden of the treacherous Gollum and the shifting loyalities and depression plaguing Frodo. Sam never loses himself and never seems to be reluctant (unlike Aragorn) to shoulder his responsibilities. Not that Aragorn is a slacker, but I sense a reticence in him even at the end, up until Arwen shows up. In the end, Sam inherits the best of the world that the various races fought to protect from Sauron. Somehow, it feels like he is the biggest winner. Does that make sense? It feels like Sam is the person, we as the audience, are supposed to admire most and aspire to be. Aragorn and the elves are too high, Frodo too damaged, and Merry and Pippin weren't as challenged as Sam. Sam faces terrible challenges with few physical/emotional/experiential resources and yet has the most ideal ending. That's why he feels like the "real" hero in this group.

Re: ITA, but...

[butterfly.livejournal.com]

I think that part of it is that I'm with Frodo so much - I mean, the first time that we see him, he's reading. Sam is one of the most admirable characters, but Frodo is who I identify with the most. Sam never does lose himself and I can't quite grasp what that's like. To be so steady. Pippin is also easier for me to identify with, because his story is one of growing up - trading a bit of innocence for wisdom and courage.

But it's really more of a pet peeve thing - being bothered by just an article. And yet, I can't stop it from bothering me that little bit.