It does help, of course, that we get to see multiple examples of Frodo's courage and heroism within the books, so that we get the full layered view of it. It's murkier in the Peter Jackson films. A lot of Frodo's best book moments are tied to events that got trimmed down or cut entirely for the sake of fitting the formulaic considerations of a feature-film, so Frodo ends up feeling a bit more like a passenger than a participant there. But I've noticed, in the modern fandom, that character portrayals in the films hold a lot of sway over the collective consciousness. Even in fanfiction, for example, authors who have clearly read the books and are drawing elements from them seem to treat film characterization as the default over the books. Frodo is not the only character who gets somewhat undersold in the fandom because of that.
Well put and very succinct. I'd only add that this assessment still is true no matter how deeply one delves into LOTR lore. And the book has wonderful sections such as Jess pointed to, which show very crucial and unusual ideas about how this all came out.
In my opinion, Frodo did fail because he succumbed to the lure of the ring. But it wasn’t random. Not too much earlier, Frodo, through the bring, or the ring, through Frodo, declared to Gollum “Begone! If you touch me again, you shall yourself be cast into the fires of doom” or something close to that. The last failure was that of Gollum, when he bit the ring off of Frodo’s hand. But that too was foreordained.
@@OneTrueNobody It's a pity they have to cut the Barrow-Downs. You miss Frodo shining brightest in the darkness there. “There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow. Frodo was neither very fat nor very timid; indeed, though he did not know it, Bilbo (and Gandalf) had thought him the best hobbit in the Shire. He thought he had come to the end of his adventure, and a terrible end, but the thought hardened him.”
@@MoviesWithDad This is very true - and ties in with the post author's evaluation I'd say. Tolkien even tackled Post Traumatic Stress Disorder with Frodo's inability to fit back home - such an important part of the experience of war. Vastly more mature than the curt "happily ever after" trope.
Frodo is actually one of my favorite characters in all of literature. He sacrificed his moral, mental, physical and spiritual well-being to save everyone. Thanks for not forgetting as so many do--the only reason Gollum was there to "save the day" was because Frodo had spared him at the beginning. Sam wanted to kill him. Great video as always, Jess! :-)
That great, unforgettable Moria conversation with Gandalf... a big part of it boils down to "it's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it". And you don't necessarily know it's you, but you think it might be. It's gotta be someone, someone's gotta bear that burden, so you choose to pick it up yourself. Tolkien would think God preordained it, and even as you're climbing Mount Doom Frodo and Sam would think it's them, but interestingly enough, it isn't. It was Gollum all along! ^_^
Exactly, dude went through the real world equivalent of being given hard drugs, getting addicted to said drugs while traveling through trials and tribulations on top of that, to destroy said drugs in the heart of the drug den as it consumes him....😅 With his sober friend and an addict whom the drug has already destroyed (Smeagol). But without Sam... Sam really is a true bro. I don't know if Frodo would have made it to mount doom without Sam.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw I think the drugs analogy is kind of weak and takes us far afield. The Ring represents Power and Power corrupts. It corrupted Frodo.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Back then, the main analgesic (pain killer) was morphene. By then it was very well understood it was highly addictive, and thus patients were monitored and pushed to withdraw use of the painkiller as soon as possible.
I really can't stand readers who underplay Frodo. He is a tortured soul. He succeeds where others would fail simply because of his selflessness and understated bravery. Not all heroes are machos swinging swords.
@Jess_of_the_Shire i think for some people a fragile hero is precisely the perfect hero to cheer for and identify with. The Lord of the Rings would be a much flatter and less interesting story with a more conventional, warrior-type protagonist at the forefront.
@@Jess_of_the_Shire I can't help but think of the tips that Hello Future Me made on writing Paragon Heroes (let me know if they don't hold up to scrutiny): 1. Paragons might be right, likable, and get things done, but these characters tend to work better when it’s difficult or costly to keep choosing good. It can create obstacles, damage relationships, and create dilemmas. 2. It’s important to explore how paragons feel even if they don’t struggle over what’s right or wrong. Alternatively, they might evolve and change in ways which don’t affect their core values and beliefs. 3. Being a paragon does not mean they can’t be reckless, stupid, or blind to how others view things. It might mean others sacrifice their lives for them or they miss more subtle evils. They may be wrong entirely. 4. Paragons change characters around them. They can often see through a ‘Lie’ others believe about themselves or the world, urge them in the right direction, or warn them of the path they’re going down. 5. The paragon’s death can be symbolically and narratively instrumental. It leaves the surrounding characters to either take up after them or find a new way forward. 6. Reactive scenes with paragons will often focus more on their reaction, while the dilemma and decision beats focus more on the characters around them. 7. It can be interesting to place the paragon in a position where there is either no obvious good option or where all options are bad.
Even though he failed to cast the ring into the fire himself, he nonetheless succeeded by cursing Gollum to the fire if he should ever try to take it again, thus accomplishing his goal in a roundabout way as Gollum then plunged into the Cracks of Doom after reclaiming it.
I was going to comment on that often overlooked scene: "If you touch me ever again you shall yourself be thrown in the crack of doom". The Ring trapped itself.
I agree 100% - Frodo (and the members of the Fellowship itself) served the purpose(s) set before them - If one believes Frodo was "personally" responsible for the actual, physical destruction of the ring "himself", then, Yes, he failed - though my thoughts align with yours - No, he did not fail in his purpose within the saga - one can't do everything oneself (as Sam said, in a rather different context, "Well, one can't be everywhere at once...") but, as a team, in a sense, one can, and Frodo was integral in getting the Ring to the Cracks of Doom (the main task laid on him by Elrond) and Gollum, fulfilling his desire, finished the destruction.
Technically he failed that too. Sam was the one who took the ring into Mordor. (Although you could argue that taking it to the boundary of Mordor counts as taking it to Mordor)
In the movie, yes. In the book he is charged explicitly with taking the Ring to the Cracks of Doom, never to lay it aside nor give it to anyone else, save in great need.
According to Tolkien: only Sam could get Frodo to Mount Doom, only Frodo could get the Ring to Mount Doom, and only Gollum could get the Ring away from Frodo. It was then that Eru reached down and gently nudged Gollum (and the Ring) off the ledge
I used to think that, but these days, I don’t see Eru “nudging” Gollum. What Eru did was subtly influence the events that led Frodo, Sam and Gollum to Mount Doom, after that it was their personalities that determined what happened. The only time I think he intervened in the Third Age was when he brought Gandalf back. Gandalf himself says that a higher power than the Valar brought him back at the darkest time.
@@Phantasia_Workshop I think I know which letter you mean, the one where he says “Another Power” took over. But again, it took over because all the pieces were in place. Last time Eru intervened directly he sank Numenor, destroyed Sauron and pulled Valinor out of the physical realm. Clearly, if he wanted to banish Sauron, he could do it effortlessly. So I think this time around, he manipulated events so that the fate of the Ring was not preordained, but that Frodo and Gollum would be there at the precipice and the “nudge” was simply guiding them to a place where they could exercise their free will, granted the Ring overpowered them, but it also self-destructed. If Eru wasn’t a thing, this “other power” would simply be called destiny. PS. My 2 cents, I totally understand your POV and accept it’s probably correct 😄
It's a huge misconception that I've seen people thing Eru shoved Gollum down. When Tolkien says Eru intervened he means that he set some paths that lead to that moment. The reason Gollum fell is actually quite simple. Frodo made Gollum swear on the ring that he doesn't hurt him. Later on mount doom when Gollum attacks him, Frodo threatens him that if you touch me again I'll make you throw yourself down. Which is what happens. Gollum bits his finger off, and the rings carries out Frodo's "curse" so to speak. Basically, ring destroys itself, because of the oath, and will of Frodo.
@@satana8157 Yeah, I've read and heard all that as well. Then...at the end of the day...I remember it's just a story. Either way (or many ways) it's an amazing story regardless of the author's answer
Frodo did fail, yes. As anybody else would have failed. The ring was more powerful than he was and it would not allow itself to be destroyed. The only thing more powerful than the ring was Eru and he succeeded in destroying the ring, seemingly by chance but ultimately by his will. However, Frodo was the perfect and ultimate ring-bearer, humble enough and strong willed enough to carry it. Frodo offered it willingly to both Gandalf and Galadriel - who both refused the offer and succeeded in overcoming their own tests by doing so. Frodo also refused to turn it over to Boromir, Faramir, Sam and Smeagol demonstrating the wisdom and strength required in his task. Ultimately Frodo is the hero, and worthy of our admiration and praise, but he definitely failed in this mission. Another great video, Jess. Thank you so much.
Correct me if I am wrong here: One of the powers of the Ring is that it is impossible for the bearer to intentionally destroy it, with the exceptions of the Valar and Bombadil. Therefore Frodo's task was flat out impossible. I assume the Council of Elrond did not know this because sending the Ring to Mordor was just handing it over to Sauron.
One theory a former girlfriend and I, both lifelong Tolkien fans, discussed was that Frodo's breaking point from the temptation of the Ring and the physical toll of the long, difficult and dangerous journey, actually happened slightly before the point that he stood at Sammath Naur and had only to open his hand and let the Ring drop to succeed in his quest; a seemingly very simple but actually impossible task. Instead, according to the theory, Frodo's breaking point came at the moment he first used the Ring for his own purposes and invoked its power and doom (not to be confused with merely putting the Ring on in desperate circumstances such as escaping from Boromir, for example). This happened when Gollum attacked Frodo and Sam on the path to Sammath Naur. Frodo, understandably infuriated and driven past endurance by the unexpected additional hardship and danger of Gollum's sudden attack, took up the power of the Ring to place a geis on Gollum: "If you ever touch me again, you shall yourself be cast into the fires of doom!" Sam witnessed the manifestation of power in Frodo when he made this pronouncement, and Frodo's words ultimately came true. Gollum attacked Frodo again shortly afterward and came under the curse Frodo had put on him.
Frodo carried the weight no one else could. He saw how it corrupted himself, he saw how it corrupted the ring wraiths and he saw how it started to corrupt members of the council. He knew the weight of it and because he did not wish it on anyone else, he chose to carry the ring. He chose to sacrifice himself for others, all the way back in Rivendell.
I think he did exactly what Eru decreed, “nor can any alter the music in my despite for he that attempteth shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful which he himself hath not imagined.” But this topic is great 👍
This quote is, for me, the core of the Legendarium that everything else revolves around. There are those who believe Eru and stay in harmony with the Music, acting as sub-creators of wonder, and then there are those who have been convinced by their own hubris that no one can improve on their art, and those who willfully misinterpret Eru's statement of fact as a challenge.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Look up Jess's video on Tolkien's Magical Music from 2 years ago. She talks about the music of creation and how Morgoth tried to ruin it (without ultimate success, however).
That's a thing that never sat right with me in the film, the Ring was Gollum's to destroy, it was like the whole point, the reason why Bilbo and Frodo spared him. And the poetic justice that the Ring should be destroyed, albeit unintentionally by its most tormented victim.
As I have been reading lotr over and over for 45 years. It has been good to see how I see Frodo differently over the years and how his sacrifice seems all the greater as a 55 year old than reading it as a 10 year old.
Also, Gollum swore by the ring, on pain of death to serve frodo in destruction of the Ring. I think this should be mentioned as it definitely plaid a part in his final plunge👌
@@philkugler2429 I don't think that was Frodo, or it wasn't ONLY Frodo who put that curse on Gollum: I believe that the One Ring spoke through Frodo to put that curse on Gollum, causing Evil's own selfishness and pride to undo itself in the end in spite of being able to dominate Frodo.
Beautifully dissected. You really made me realize that he did fail, that it was inevitable, I never thought about the ending so deeply. It makes me imagine the conversations frodo might have had with Gandalf as they go to the Gray Havens, imagine if he apologized to Gandalf that he failed at what he set out to do. The things Gandalf would say... My favorite moment that defines Frodo is at Rivendell during the formation of the fellowship we see everybody arguing over who should take the ring. Moments before Frodo is telling Sam it's time to go home, we did what we set out to do! But they're all arguing and he says "I will take the Ring".. and you see Gandalfs face sink into sadness as he turns to face Frodo, he knows he could never ask Frodo to do anymore than he's already done, but also that he's the only one capable of doing it. Its this epic yet sad moment where you feel almost ashamed that the heroes are incapable of the most important task in the world, we have to completely rely on the bravery of the weak. Such an unfair task to ask anyone to do, yet he volunteers himself. Gah makes me emotional everytime I see it
A hero who never wavers is less interesting than one who wavers. Red badge of courage is a great story because our protagonist flees in fear, but later faces his fear successfully.
This is my favorite of your videos. Yes to all of this. I've walked this same analysis, in mind and heart, as I've thought of Frodo's story. The exquisiteness of LotR hinges on the facts that you document here. Frodo is the best of us, in large part because it is not his indivudual heroism that saves the day. It is the fact that he said yes, the sum of his choices, and the richness of the tapestry of souls he is in community with, that brings us resolution. This, more than anything else, to me is what makes this story so important, so lasting, and so relevant to our time.
I like your explanation. I once spoke to a Second World War hero who, after the war, was head of a training department. He said it like this. When he trained the soldiers he tried to prepare them for the hell he had been through. This seemed to work well until he realized that the war had destroyed his own psyche, and now he was inflicting the same damage on the soldiers as he had himself. He realized that it was better, in fact, that the soldier only gets training in the technical skills, but that they can live their lives blissfully ignorant of the dark sides of war as long as there is peace, and then we can only hope they rise to the role if a new war starts in the future. And then he quit as a training officer.
It's funny as the stated quest of the ring-bearer seems pretty straightforward: take the ring to a specifically dangerous place and throw it into the fire where it will be unmade. But the better your understanding of the ring the more you realize what an utterly doomed quest it always was. Yes, per Tolkien, Frodo did fail to destroy the ring himself, but the nature of the ring was such that neither he nor anyone else could have ever succeeded in the first place. There might have been other people in Middle Earth who could have taken the ring as far as Frodo, but there are none who could have taken that one more step and deliberately thrown it away. The ring's will was always to return to Sauron, and nothing could intentionally override that as (nearly) all creatures of Middle Earth were fated to succumb to its vile whispers eventually. So we can't blame Frodo for failing in the end because he had effectively lost what little control he had. So in the end when Gollum breaks his oath that he made on the ring to Frodo it creates the opportunity for it be destroyed, because in a world like Middle Earth where words truly have power, broken promises demand recompense. So in the end perhaps the only greater will than that of the ring was of the very world itself.
I do love how simply the idea is presented at first. I think it's part of Tolkien's larger efforts to reinvigorate older myths--to show how it would realistically work to try and destroy evil
@@Jess_of_the_Shire It's practically presented like a side quest in a modern video game. At face value there's really nothing complex about the quest, but there's an enormous catch that no one truly understands until right up until the end.
Great video, as always. Can't wait to give it a thorough watch when I have the time! Ok, now... There's a reason Frodo is called the Ring Bearer, not the Ring Destroyer. It was never in his power to destroy the ring, and I strongly suspect that even Gandalf knew as much. All he could do was bring it to Mt Doom, and no more could be asked of him. And even that was almost too much. To say Frodo failed is to misunderstand his true role in the story, which is why I imagine Tolkien put the word in quotes. Frodo had no other option but to "fail." To Tolkien, Frodo is like us. We all undertake an arduous journey, confident that we can conquer the ills of the world, and avoid the temptations of evil along the way. But in the end, we all fall short, and only God's grace saves us, if we remain faithful to our cause. Gandalf had no other choice but to trust that Iluvatar would somehow deliver the world from Sauron's evil, as Tolkien trusted God to do the same for this world. For it is beyond the power of any creature to accomplish this.
I always thought that the Ring destroyed itself by keeping Gollum to his pledge to serve the master of the Ring. Frodo declared himself master, Gollum bit him, and the ring betrayed him to his doom. Evil oft mars evil. Crazy amounts of foreshadowing throughout that book.
What I love about LotR is how defeating Sauron is a group effort, not just with Frodo, Sam and Gollum, but all the others working together despite earlier conflicts, mistrust or sabotage attempts from Saron, Saruman and their goons. And the characters forge lifelong bonds.
One thing I've learned to appreciate only lately about the One Ring, often from analyses like these on TH-cam from great close-readers like yourself, is that it has one very interesting flaw, which turns out to be its undoing. It's subtle and there's an almost blink-and-you-miss-it moment where it's on full display, but I think it adds to the "character" of the One Ring as a villain. The flaw is that the Ring *must* enforce oaths sworn on it, either to the best of its ability or else by Eru or some other cosmic contract-enforcement power. When Smeagol swears not to betray Frodo, this takes effect, and Frodo mysteriously seems to understand the power of this oath, warning Smeagol that it's dangerous to make such an oath, and even more dangerous to break it. When Gollum does eventually break the oath and betray Frodo, there's almost a desperation in Frodo to prevent the consequences, as though his latent pathos for Smeagol kicks in and he seems determined to save him. But ultimately, the One Ring keeps its promise of retribution against Smeagol for the breaking of the oath, and Smeagol is killed - even though this means the Ring is destroyed itself. It seems that either the Ring itself, or else Eru / Ea / Tolkien is so insistent that oathbreakers must be punished, that even the Ring's self-preservation takes a back seat.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw No one can break an oath. That's why the Army of the Dead exists. In the book, they're called the Oathbreakers. There are other examples. It isn't that the Ring specifically has a thing with oaths, but that Gollum swore the oath by the Ring (what we understand as "in the name of"), so the Ring's power was what enforced the oath. Gollum swore to serve the master of the precious. As long as Frodo was the Ring-bearer, Gollum would have to obey Frodo's command, by a magical-kind of compelling. In disobedience, great tragedy (suffering or even death) would come upon the oathbreaker. Figure the namesake guys (Army of the Dead), doomed to remain impotent ghosts until their oath was fulfilled.
Frodo had succeeded as a friend and a hero when he stood up at the Council of Elrond and volunteered to carry the Ring to Mordor, knowing it's effects firsthand. After hearing from Elrond and Gandalf about the nature of the Ring, nobody was volunteering. The plan then was for all 9 to help Frodo get to Mordor, Boromir only broke when the Company had reached the crossroads where it was either Mordor or Gondor.
A hero is someone who does what needs to be done for the needs of others, for the sake of 'goodness', without any expectation of reward and in spite of the likeliness of harm or costs to themselves. By this definition, Frodo is most definitely a hero, as are Sam and the rest of the Fellowship. Further, whether or not Frodo himself succeeded (this video convinced me that technically he did not) his quest succeeded, and in the end this is all that mattered. Jess, thank you once again for a wonderful video. You often make me think deeply.
excellent video. On the failure thing. Its quite possible to give it everything you have and still fail. In fact IIRC in one of Tolkien's letters he comments that despite Sam, Frodo and the entire Fellowship, the entire effort to destroy the Ring failing, they had given not only their all but all that was human possible to give. And so because there was nothing humanly possible and because they have given all their efforts to do, that was why essentially a miracle, even if it is in its specificity undetailed occurred and Eru intervened to ensure the destruction of the Ring.
it is wonderful to see the clear passion you have for this material in your facial expressions when telling the story, you clearly love this story. Amazing work.
Who wants to hear Jess just read us the book already? The best parts of this upload were her direct quotes of the book, I could listen to you all day jess.
Frodo was a hero, whether Tolkien intended it or not. Free people of Middle Earth never doubt this and neither do I. Sure, his deeds were not flashy cavalry charge nor the last stand against the armies of Sauron, but his quest into Mordor with the One ring on his neck was no doubt the bravest thing anyone ever does in the story.
Frodo didn't fail in his task. He was meant to get the Ring to the Crack of Doom. Sam was meant to get Frodo to the Crack of Doom. And Gollum was meant to put the Ring into the Crack of Doom. All 3 did their part in destroying the Ring.
The Fellowship of the ring. Eru wanted fellowship to be the reason for the win. That’s why Gandolf offered help with fellowship over force. Fellowship is a team effort. His duty was to be a part of the fellowship that got the deed done, as which it did. Thus his duty was complete.
I'm 63. l love your insight and commentary. I grew up with the help of the great generation... Your insight describes these great people to a tee. I'm glad you shire folk get it. There is still hope for a good and happy future in this world. Blessed be you.
“Fail” can be used in two senses, either general/ overall, or specific. In the specific sense, Frodo could only fail at something he himself either said he would do, or was trying to do. We assume that he was trying to destroy the ring, as that was the overall mission, but what he said was that he would take the ring to Mordor. Did Frodo ever have the thought that he himself would throw the ring into the fire? Does it matter? Is failure dependent on the pov? Ultimately it’s the questions themselves that are the interesting thing.
Your final breakdown of what makes us human made me teary eyed while smiling very brightly, wich is both funny and beautiful to think about when the context is Tolkins works. Thank you for this ❤️
Mercy and Pity were not only shown by Frodo in saving Gollum from the archers under the command of Faramir but also in recruiting Sméagol to “team Frodo”. For the first time in centuries someone had treated Sméagol with compassion and pity - even to the extent of trusting him. Sméagol responded very positively to that - “nice master”. Ultimately Gollum could not be redeemed but I have often wondered how the story would have played out if Sam had been able to show Sméagol more compassion.
I'd like to add that Gollum could have been redeemed. He is at the brink of manifesting genuine love for a sleeping Frodo in the Stairs of Cirith Ungol when Sam wakes up and accuses him of sneaking, and calls him 'old villain'. Two pages earlier, Sam had wondered if Gollum considered himself a hero or a villain. Gollum obviously reacts negatively and his Stinker side gets to hold the reins until the end of the story. Some might have picked up on something: this is the scene in which Frodo tells Sam to "go away" in the movie. Sam pushing Gollum to villainy as the build-up of his climactic understanding for Gollum and display of Pity were made into Gollum successfully manipulating Frodo and pitting him against Sam. I love the movies but I don't really think that they're faithful. In the book, Sam is regretful of his harsh words immediately, of course. Yet he tries to kill Gollum in their face-off in Shelob's cave (and hey, I get him), while the demon-spider deals with Frodo. All of this is the beautiful build-up to him finally understanding and sparing the creature in Mount Doom.
It’s clear that Sméagol/Gollum’s mindset, be it through Ring-mental-illness or it being his true (even pre-Ring) nature, is that “they’re mean to me, I’m mean to them; they’re nice to me, I’m nice to them.” However you treat Sméagol/Gollum, you’ll get the same treatment in return. That’s why he’s nasty to Sam and gentler with Frodo.
He failed, but the odds were against him against the corruption of the one ring. In the end Gollum and Frodo were tied to the ring. Gollum's triumph was also Middle Earth's. Frodo was damaged by the Ringwraith which he never fully recovered. And lost a finger out of it. But was broken. Not a hero in the traditional sense. But someone who sacrifices everything for the greater good is just as brave, and just as heroic even in failure.
I like how Frodo is aware of things because of his lucky adoption by Bilbo. It was Bilbo, after all (and as Gandalf points out) who had showed pity to Gollum, and that makes all interactions between Frodo and Gollum later on derivative. If Frodo and Gollum are powerless to resist their desire to possess (and be possessed by) the Ring then at least there are two of them at the end to neatly counterbalance.
9:07 it seems to be even when Tolkien was drafting his novel, he knew what the reaction to Frodo's failure would be like. Frodo himself showed little pity for Gollum at first only to be slowly dragged down into the same path of madness by the Ring. Likewise, some critics (and mfs in modern times) were quick to point out that Frodo wasn't a hero and didn't deserve to 'win'; like that's literally the point. On the one hand, his failure is relatable because how many of us feel confident that we can commit to doing the right thing even when it gets difficult? On the other hand, the backlash Frodo gets sometimes is exactly the kind of judgemental attitude people give to each other without ever being in the shoes of the other person. I'm happy how much this trilogy emphasizes mercy and effort over a rigid sense of good/bad or right/wrong (that nobody irl can 100% adhere to anyway).
Excellent discussion of such an amazing topic. Left on the surface, Frodo and Sam are heroes, but it is the combination of the efforts of all of the characters, that win the day because of the internal and external evil of the ring. I love your deep dive into Frodo’s complex personality and the root causes of his ultimate need to be whole.
“Evil doesn’t have to pick and choose.” Well said! Tolkien has taught me so much about morality. Evil doesn’t have the same constraints as good. It doesn’t have the same obligations. But, thank Eru, evil is myopic. Unconstrained but myopic-a lidless eye.
Heroism is when someone sacrifice themselves to save others. Frodo knew he will fail the moment he saw Gollum -- he's looking at what he would become. His failure was not a surprise since it was foreshadowed. He failed the moment Shelob got him -- without Sam, it's game over.
I'm thinking that Tolkien would have said something not unlike this. The quote seems to say regular living beings always can be defeated by consummate evil (all are sinners?). He does not say the fight against evil is futile, instead his great trilogy appears to be all about a great fight against evil. It's such a rich tale that we also get view of how ring bearers become enslaved to the thing. We also see the great nobility of the several (Gandalf, Galadriel, Aragorn, Faramir) who choose to avoid contact with the ring.
Deus Ex Machina was what the awkward quick solution of an intervention by a higher power was called (common in Greek plays). Here the plot and underlying philosophy are so rich, that this is more like an integral part of "getting it" when you read about Middle Earth, it's nature and characters per the author's philosophy. Frodo wound up being able to be corrupted even though he could resist as well as any, but there is still the same larger world and its workings that were mentioned off and on through the many thousands of pages. "You were meant to have the ring". Sam being caught spying and sent with Frodo, etc. Hitting Gollum with one of those Hobbit "well placed hit with a rock" would likely be a go to approach for modern folk, but entirely repugnant to Tolkien. In fact the entire work would have been written drastically differently by someone who enjoyed that sort of solution.
I think your take on this is pretty spot on. When I first read the Lord Of The Rings, back in the mid 80’s, my take was similar and I had a more favorable view of Gollum’s redemption than most, I think. I felt like at least some small part of him knew he was doing right by taking the ring into the Crack of Doom, almost purposefully as he tumbled in. I’m the sort of writer that believes much of the written word is up for interpretation by the reader. In fact, I always enjoyed hearing what other people thought of my stuff, especially when their thoughts made me want to laugh (not disrespectfully). Perhaps I’m influenced by my upbringing but I do believe the universe ultimately bends toward that which supports life.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who views Smeagol's demise as the end of a redemption arc of sorts. Less explicit than Lobelia's, but no less there. We must remember that he was a being of two natures, and there was a longstanding war between the two that had only recently been rekindled. I believe his good side desired the peace of the grave, while his dark side desired only the Ring, and that as he entered the fire his good side was happier than his dark side had been at the recovery of the Ring.
This was very good stuff Jess. of course Frodo as he was destined too failed. One could just as well say that Gollum is the hero since he completes his journey to a happy fate, this of course happens through the mercy and goodnes of Bilbo, Frodo, Gandalf, aragorn, the wood elves and others, and of course mostly through the grace of Eru. here lies the heart of the catholic world view in the book.But as you say it is a human book it allows us to soldier on despite our human frailty and to find success even in our failures. Thanks for this upload.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Indeed the contention thast he is the hero is stretching things a little. But he does succeed in completing a heroes journey even if not by or for himself.
Thanks Jess. Great analysis of this character, and of the "foil" Gollum. Those of us who want to live an exemplary life can learn much from his weakness and strength that came from outside his humble life to see it through to the end, although imperfectly. I appreciate your videos, and your discussions remind me of someone I once knew back in my college days as we both were taking English literature classes together. She took the higher road and majored in that , me I was too practical and settled for something that I thought could get me a job better 😀. Thanks again!
I love the way you read the dialogues from those passages in the books. It contrasts your normal tone sharply, but it's very entertaining, and communicates well the emotion and emphasis of the characters words. Thank you for making such great videos. I enjoy these greatly. Have a lovely day!
Jess, this was another great video. I especially enjoyed your readings, which seemed more “acted out” (rather than merely read) than usual. Well done and thank you! I’ve been a fan of Tolkien since grammar school is the 70s and you continue to help deepen my appreciation for this beautiful world. So, thanks!!
There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow. Frodo was neither very fat nor very timid; indeed, though he did not know it, Bilbo (and Gandalf) had thought him the best hobbit in the Shire.
Wonderful analysis. I think also it's suggested that he lasted as long as he did partly because in having mercy, in acting mercifully, he made it harder for the ring to gain a foothold. I seem to remember Gandalf saying something about how Bilbo wasn't hurt much by the ring for a long time partly because his gaining of it was accompanied by an act of mercy. Whereas Smeagol fell quickly after acquiring the ring by an act of violence, jealousy and malice.
It is such a treat to listen to a Tolkien commentator who goes as deep as you do into the meaning behind JRRT's works rather than simply recite lore or hypothesize. I have come to wait for your videos eagerly. Do please keep them coming :)
I love how Frodo embodies the idea found in St Paul in the Bible that God chooses the weak in the world to shame the strong and that when we are weak then we are strong because God is able to work through us more powerfully. 5:03
Very good evaluation and presentation. My emotions concerning Frodo have been conflicted, and that speaks very well of Tolkien's talent and depth. The movies are frustrating, but the books describe the emotion and internal struggles of Frodo that I don't believe can be truly reflected within the constraints of movie production. So often, I hoped for Frodo not to make certain choices that inevitably hurt him, and yet, it was in those choices that ultimate victory was obtained. It's an amazing testament to the true value of seemingly insignificant and often unnoticed and unrewarded choices to adhere to even small gestures of righteousness. We may not be able to be perfect or consistently good, but we can always make a choice to do good and to do well. Who knows what large victories those small internal successes might eventually yield. It's certainly worth attempting.
I LOVE that even though “Gollum is too far gone to be redeemed” ( 11:01 ), it was still “pity & mercy [that] reign[ed] supreme.” Frodo moved from fear to empathy both while possessing the Ring. He didn’t gain empathy after obtaining the Ring, Rather, he gained empathy when he humbled himself enough to see that it could just as easily be him in Gollum’s place. Even though Gollum was still too far gone (by the power of the Ring and his own choices) by the time Frodo encountered him, it was STILL Bilbo’s mercy & Frodo’s humility allowing the “de-hobbitized” “villain” to remain that ended up saving all of Middle Earth. Humility-driven mercy wins out, and it’s not by earthly power or by human morality, which would’ve dictated that Gollum should die “for the greater good.”
Awesome work as always Jess! I'd like to contribute by sharing some things on Gollum's fall. It is not Eru actively pushing Gollum, INTERVENING the story; it's Frodo's (and Sam's) actions that create the conditions for Fate, or Eru's design -the Music of Creation, to unfold. In Mount Doom, Sam (before facing and sparing Gollum himself) has a vision that describes Frodo as "a figure robed in white, but at its breast it held a wheel of fire. Out of the fire there spoke a commanding voice. ‘Begone, and trouble me no more! If you touch me ever again, you shall be cast yourself into the Fire of Doom.’ When Gollum asked to have the Ring for a while to "protect it from Sauron while Master goes into Mordor" (paraphrase), as they hide in sight of the Black Gate, Frodo reprimends and warns him of not overstepping his boundaries: "In the last need, Sméagol, I should put on the Precious; and the Precious mastered you long ago. If I, wearing it, were to command you, you would obey, even if it were to leap from a precipice or to cast yourself into the fire. And such would be my command. So have a care, Sméagol!’ He also reminds Gollum of the oath to convince him to get out of the Forbidden Pool -to save him from death by Faramir's men. Oaths have binding power in Middle-earth (see Fëanor and his sons, or the, ahem- Oathbreakers). Gollum swore an oath by the Ring -which means that the Rings holds the oath. Frodo keenly percieved that the Ring "is more treacherous than you are, and it may twist your words". Gollum swore to serve the master of the precious. Frodo understands Gollum's mind and the power of the oath. Gollum serves his Master by (unwillingly, magically compelled by the oath to "fall into the Fire if he touched Frodo again") completing the quest, which not only redresses Frodo's failure, but also saves his life (for the short while that it's worth, and it IS worth).
To put Frodo's and Gollum's actions at the Cracks of Doom into the context of Tolkien's greater legendarium, I see an analogy with the discord of Melkor within the music of the Ainur being overcome by Ilúvatar. Or in a Christian context: all works - good or bad - are futile; only by God's grace can one be saved.
Frodo didn't fail, he played his part in the Music of the Ainur perfectly. Remember, when Eru tasked the Valar with making their symphony, Melkor introduced Discord and everyone thought that it was hideous, until Eru pulled back the veil and showed them the music in its entirety. All of the Valar were amazed that even the Discord introduced by Melkor ultimately played a role in Eru's plan, and that nothing occurred unless it originated within his innermost thoughts. Frodo may have seemed to us to have failed, but when we zoom out and see things from Eru's perspective we realize that all of this was planned from before the beginning of time and Frodo's claiming the Ring for himself had to have happened. If I remember correctly, Tolkien wrote in letter that Eru himself stretched his hand and helped Frodo to his feet when all of his strength was utterly spent. Eru knew Frodo would claim the Ring for himself, but this didn't matter. Frodo's discord was all a part of Eru's beautiful plan to wipe Sauron from Middle Earth.
It's interesting to consider that perhaps to Gandalf, and maybe Galadriel and Elrond and a few others with foresight, it was expected that Frodo would fail to resist the Ring's power in the end. Their hope was that he would get far enough, close enough, that when he finally failed, their goal could still be achieved in spite of it. If so, then there's an added level of tragedy to Frodo's appointment as the Ring Bearer, because, unbeknownst to him, his task isn't just to bear the Ring and endure its temptations as long as he can, his task is to endure the failure of his last scraps of strength, and to be "split in two" in a way that none of the wise ones can ever heal. His living with his failure could arguably be a much higher cost than his time actually bearing the Ring.
As far as Gandalf is concerned, I don't think there's any "perhaps" about it: Gandalf had already seen that Frodo couldn't throw the Ring into his hearth fire at Bag End. Your analysis of Gandalf's and Elrond's hope is spot on, I would say. Of course it could have worked out a bit better for Frodo: Gollum might have grabbed the Ring *before* Frodo decided to claim it for himself, thus saving him from that failure. But that wouldn't have been as good a story.
Thank you, Jess! This is one of your best videos, I really enjoyed it and appreciate the passion you put into making these videos. I think that looking into Tolkien's Christian belief is the key to answering this question. The Bible is clear: humans are doomed to fail in their fight against evil/sin. The only way to beat it is to accept our weakness, our inability to solve the problem of sin, and our need for a Savior. And that's when Jesus who died for all our sins comes and changes us and makes us look more like Him every day. So, yeah, Frodo was doomed to fail, but as you and others have said - it is about him acknowledging his weakness that in the end made him the ideal hero. 2 Corinthians 12: 9-10: "9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong."
Excellent video - I think you perfectly summed up Frodo's character and why he is so compelling. I think a lot of the blame for Frodo's underratedness rests on the films, as good as they are. They remove many of Frodo's most heroic moments, and his interactions with the ring and Sam wildly cheapen his character.
I have only just discovered your channel. Thanks for such an interesting take on "fire side" conversations about Tolkien's works (and some other stuff). You have convinced me to pull out LotR and re-read the tome. Which as the years roll on is becoming more bitter-sweet to read as it reminds me of being on set for FotR (as a Hobbit & Frodo stand-in), and I miss those summer days with my fellow hobbits in the Shire...
Thank you so much! I've always loved Frodo and have had endless arguments regarding him with my family (which, I must admit, some of them continued on the sole purpose of messing with me...). I've used similar arguments but you articulate everything so much better, and bring up more points than I ever had. BTW, if you haven't seen it, I recommend watching the psychology of a hero video about Frodo. While it focuses on the movies instead of the books it's an interesting watch.
Very well said. I hope that everyone who has ever doubted Frodo's strength of character, commitment, loyalty, or efforts to destroy the Ring watches this video to learn Tolkien's intent and clarification of happened at the Crack of Doom. I would just add that everyone should be strongly encouraged to read the books. As excellent as the films are, they are still an incomplete interpretation of the original work and only provide a small fraction of the detail and context that Tolkien wrote about. Hey, that's an idea for another video! Specific instances where the films, because of obvious time constraints or the need to sustain dramatic tension, fell short of conveying the importance and gravity of situations in the books. I'll give my favorite example: When Frodo finally gives in to the Ring and puts it on, film viewers are shown that Sauron is suddenly aware of Frodo by a shift in the "flashlight" direction of the Eye from the Battle of the Morannon to the door of the Crack of Doom. This scene takes less than five seconds and is almost forgettable in the frantic rush of events. In the book, however, Tolkien pauses the action for just a moment to describe the significance of Sauron's epiphany in satisfying detail: "The Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him, and his Eye piercing all shadows looked across the plain to the door that he had made; and the magnitude of his own folly was revealed to him in a blinding flash, and all the devices of his enemies were at last laid bare. Then his wrath blazed in consuming flame, but his fear rose like a vast black smoke to choke him. For he knew his deadly peril and the thread upon which his doom now hung. From all his policies and webs of fear and treachery, from all his stratagems and wars his mind shook free; and throughout his realm a tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were forgotten. The whole mind and purpose of the Power that wielded them was now bent with overwhelming force upon the Mountain." That passage is POWERFUL, and there was simply no way for Peter Jackson to translate it to film despite all his directorial prowess. What are some other good examples of the books providing more detail/context than the films for pivotal plot points, character developments, or themes? These shouldn't be meant as criticisms of the films, just demonstrations that the books are definitely worth reading to gain a fuller understanding of Tolkien's works.
Frodo “failed” in that moment, but the point of the story is always that small acts of courage, pity, and good are what build up and defeat evil. Frodo himself was never going to be able to overcome the ring, but by his acts of good along the way, and the actions of his friends, an insurmountable evil was overcome.
I love thinking about Tolkien and LOTR and talking about it. However, right now in life, I don't have any friends who like talking about it as much as I do. lol! So I really appreciate your videos!
Very well done and thoroughly thoughtful presentation. Many of your videos bring me to tears and this one did so unexpectedly. It touched emotional cords. I really wanted to share this on Face Book because it seems especially timely after the last presidential debate debacle. I was thinking very catastrophically after the election before last, but we're still here with our democracy more or less intact (or not much worse than usual), but this next time will be more different for other reasons I won't get into here. Darkness encroaches subtly and incrementally, in human history and in the history of Middle Earth, and I believe is addressed similarly. My thinking toward this has changed since then and has been informed a lot by Tolkien and commentators on him like you. And this piece helps immensely in ways I won't get into in a Comment that is already too long. Thanks and bless you. Contributing to your Patreon has been long overdue.
Frodo is my favorite!! Always has been since I first encountered him in the cartoons. I never understood the frustrations, almost hate, some people had for Frodo, but then I met more people, and came to understand not everyone sees the world the same, looks for the same things, much less offer grace and mercy where needed. That being said, I still think they're stupid for not even bothering to give him a chance, to know him better, and just base their decisions on whether or not he actually can hold his own in a fight or that he's a damsel in distress. He doesn't have to be your favorite character, but don't tear him down because he doesn't fit your notion of a hero. Frodo is an amazing character, what the Ring did to him is heartbreaking. If we can recognize the heroics of a single, working mom, we should be able to recognize his heroics. #ForFrodo
This makes sense from the christian persuasion of Tolkien. Man, alone, is helpless against evil. Nobody, as in no one, stands a chance. Only by allowing the higher power working thru them can evil be undone. Only thru Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam's pity and Gollum himself (and everybody else tbh) was the one ring destroyed. Only thru Grace is the common saying they have.
I always felt that frodo's mission was to go as far as his will takes him, like Elrond says in Rivendell (at least in the books, i dont rmr what exactky he says in the movies). Yea, he failed to destroy the ring, but that wasn't his mission. He was meant to go as far as he humanely (hobbitly?) possible and he did just that.
Have always grokked Frodo's journey in much the way you discuss here, Jess. However, hadn't understood the dual powers of the ring in quite this way... Your analysis of the ring explains a lot to me! Thanx
He is the essence of the good in us that consciously rejects the evil opportunities we have. (Did Tolkien explicitly say that he didn't think of Frodo as a "hero"?) Because I think that Frodo failing in the end was _absolutely necessary_ from a position of Christian theology: like if Jesus could have a moment of doubt on the cross, then Frodo can't possibly do better than that, right? Every person, no matter how *_heroic,_* necessarily has that failing in him, absolutely integral to his person. (I feel like there's an assumption in this video that "heroes are perfect".) That Frodo is a hero who failed in the end seems undeniable in my mind, is what I'm saying. The whole Fellowship, they were all heroes.
(Because I would imagine that to Tolkien, however important it is to recognize we all have that failing inside us... we all have that capacity for heroism in us.)
Great video!💕 I've finished reading the Return of the King for the first time in my life recently. Frodo is definitely my favourite character from LotR, because of how human, vulnerable, yet extremely selfless and determined he is. He chose to carry the heavy burden and sacrifice himself, so that others, braver and stronger than him, could not worry about this danger and could take care of all the important things that needed to be protected from the evil. I think we should appreciate those people who simply put things out of our concern. The problem is, we tend to overlook someone's job if it doesn't have some visible or noticeable impact on our lives. Characters like Frodo make us care more, and I find it great✨️ There is this trendy song "Daylight" by David Kushner, and for some reason it makes me think of Frodo and Gollum, and their struggle with the influence of the ring in particular. I would say it captures the feeling of despair and some inevitable power over you. LotR is one of the best things that happened to me this year, and your video essays have helped me so much while analysing the characters❤
Excellent discussion of this powerful, ingenious element in Tolkien's storytelling. An analogy I've thought of to empathize w/Frodo is alcoholism. (Or drug addiction, but whatever). A severe alcoholic is given a Magic Bottle. Full of his favorite drink, it is bottomless, and will never run dry. But, to save the world, he must destroy it by casting it into Mount Doom. And he is told that AFTER doing so, there will NEVER be ANY alcohol to be found in all the world ever again. Might be an approximation of the "addictive" power of the One Ring.
I think Frodo's "failure" is meant to prove Tolkien's perspective of evil and heroism. Frodo is, traditionally, the "ideal" hero but he still fails because nobody can ever truly overcome evil because we've all got evil in ourselves. Gollum knocking the ring into Mount Doom proves his greater point though, that evil is, inherently, self defeating and will ultimately bring about its own destruction by its own corruptive nature.
Yes, Frodo did fail. You said at 14:26 , "evil had become irresistible". Was it evil that was irresistible? or was it the power of the ring? Was the ring powerful because it was evil, or because a Maia put his own strength in it? I mean, if Olórin had poured his mercy, his benevolence, and his will to heal all life into a ring, would any ring-bearer be able to resit?
The "failure" of Frodo was success for Tolkien. It makes the story realistic and relatable, unexpected, and complex.
It does help, of course, that we get to see multiple examples of Frodo's courage and heroism within the books, so that we get the full layered view of it. It's murkier in the Peter Jackson films. A lot of Frodo's best book moments are tied to events that got trimmed down or cut entirely for the sake of fitting the formulaic considerations of a feature-film, so Frodo ends up feeling a bit more like a passenger than a participant there.
But I've noticed, in the modern fandom, that character portrayals in the films hold a lot of sway over the collective consciousness. Even in fanfiction, for example, authors who have clearly read the books and are drawing elements from them seem to treat film characterization as the default over the books. Frodo is not the only character who gets somewhat undersold in the fandom because of that.
Well put and very succinct. I'd only add that this assessment still is true no matter how deeply one delves into LOTR lore. And the book has wonderful sections such as Jess pointed to, which show very crucial and unusual ideas about how this all came out.
In my opinion, Frodo did fail because he succumbed to the lure of the ring. But it wasn’t random. Not too much earlier, Frodo, through the bring, or the ring, through Frodo, declared to Gollum “Begone! If you touch me again, you shall yourself be cast into the fires of doom” or something close to that. The last failure was that of Gollum, when he bit the ring off of Frodo’s hand. But that too was foreordained.
@@OneTrueNobody It's a pity they have to cut the Barrow-Downs. You miss Frodo shining brightest in the darkness there.
“There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow. Frodo was neither very fat nor very timid; indeed, though he did not know it, Bilbo (and Gandalf) had thought him the best hobbit in the Shire. He thought he had come to the end of his adventure, and a terrible end, but the thought hardened him.”
@@MoviesWithDad This is very true - and ties in with the post author's evaluation I'd say. Tolkien even tackled Post Traumatic Stress Disorder with Frodo's inability to fit back home - such an important part of the experience of war. Vastly more mature than the curt "happily ever after" trope.
Frodo is actually one of my favorite characters in all of literature. He sacrificed his moral, mental, physical and spiritual well-being to save everyone. Thanks for not forgetting as so many do--the only reason Gollum was there to "save the day" was because Frodo had spared him at the beginning. Sam wanted to kill him. Great video as always, Jess! :-)
That great, unforgettable Moria conversation with Gandalf... a big part of it boils down to "it's a dirty job, but somebody's gotta do it". And you don't necessarily know it's you, but you think it might be. It's gotta be someone, someone's gotta bear that burden, so you choose to pick it up yourself. Tolkien would think God preordained it, and even as you're climbing Mount Doom Frodo and Sam would think it's them, but interestingly enough, it isn't. It was Gollum all along! ^_^
Exactly, dude went through the real world equivalent of being given hard drugs, getting addicted to said drugs while traveling through trials and tribulations on top of that, to destroy said drugs in the heart of the drug den as it consumes him....😅 With his sober friend and an addict whom the drug has already destroyed (Smeagol). But without Sam... Sam really is a true bro. I don't know if Frodo would have made it to mount doom without Sam.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw I think the drugs analogy is kind of weak and takes us far afield. The Ring represents Power and Power corrupts. It corrupted Frodo.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Back then, the main analgesic (pain killer) was morphene. By then it was very well understood it was highly addictive, and thus patients were monitored and pushed to withdraw use of the painkiller as soon as possible.
No doubt - Frodo had no chance without Sam. Without Sam and Gollum.
I really can't stand readers who underplay Frodo. He is a tortured soul. He succeeds where others would fail simply because of his selflessness and understated bravery. Not all heroes are machos swinging swords.
I get it. He's a complicated hero to handle, but I think he grows on a lot of people over time.
@Jess_of_the_Shire i think for some people a fragile hero is precisely the perfect hero to cheer for and identify with. The Lord of the Rings would be a much flatter and less interesting story with a more conventional, warrior-type protagonist at the forefront.
@@Jess_of_the_Shire I can't help but think of the tips that Hello Future Me made on writing Paragon Heroes (let me know if they don't hold up to scrutiny):
1. Paragons might be right, likable, and get things done, but these characters tend to work better when it’s difficult or costly to keep choosing good. It can create obstacles, damage relationships, and create dilemmas.
2. It’s important to explore how paragons feel even if they don’t struggle over what’s right or wrong. Alternatively, they might evolve and change in ways which don’t affect their core values and beliefs.
3. Being a paragon does not mean they can’t be reckless, stupid, or blind to how others view things. It might mean others sacrifice their lives for them or they miss more subtle evils. They may be wrong entirely.
4. Paragons change characters around them. They can often see through a ‘Lie’ others believe about themselves or the world, urge them in the right direction, or warn them of the path they’re going down.
5. The paragon’s death can be symbolically and narratively instrumental. It leaves the surrounding characters to either take up after them or find a new way forward.
6. Reactive scenes with paragons will often focus more on their reaction, while the dilemma and decision beats focus more on the characters around them.
7. It can be interesting to place the paragon in a position where there is either no obvious good option or where all options are bad.
Like a child growing up without Spongebob.
Even though he failed to cast the ring into the fire himself, he nonetheless succeeded by cursing Gollum to the fire if he should ever try to take it again, thus accomplishing his goal in a roundabout way as Gollum then plunged into the Cracks of Doom after reclaiming it.
Whoa I never noticed that parallel before!
That's an excellent catch
I was going to comment on that often overlooked scene: "If you touch me ever again you shall yourself be thrown in the crack of doom". The Ring trapped itself.
I agree 100% - Frodo (and the members of the Fellowship itself) served the purpose(s) set before them - If one believes Frodo was "personally" responsible for the actual, physical destruction of the ring "himself", then, Yes, he failed - though my thoughts align with yours - No, he did not fail in his purpose within the saga - one can't do everything oneself (as Sam said, in a rather different context, "Well, one can't be everywhere at once...") but, as a team, in a sense, one can, and Frodo was integral in getting the Ring to the Cracks of Doom (the main task laid on him by Elrond) and Gollum, fulfilling his desire, finished the destruction.
@@stephicath”the ring is treacherous, it will hold you to your word”
Getting in early. Technically, all he agreed to do at the Council of Elrond was to "take the Ring to Mordor". Now that job he did flawlessly 😂
Technically he failed that too. Sam was the one who took the ring into Mordor.
(Although you could argue that taking it to the boundary of Mordor counts as taking it to Mordor)
That's a good point!
He obeyed the letter of the agreement, if not the spirit. XD
@@BananaWasTaken Sam was in his crew. So it counts.
In the movie, yes.
In the book he is charged explicitly with taking the Ring to the Cracks of Doom, never to lay it aside nor give it to anyone else, save in great need.
According to Tolkien: only Sam could get Frodo to Mount Doom, only Frodo could get the Ring to Mount Doom, and only Gollum could get the Ring away from Frodo. It was then that Eru reached down and gently nudged Gollum (and the Ring) off the ledge
I used to think that, but these days, I don’t see Eru “nudging” Gollum. What Eru did was subtly influence the events that led Frodo, Sam and Gollum to Mount Doom, after that it was their personalities that determined what happened. The only time I think he intervened in the Third Age was when he brought Gandalf back. Gandalf himself says that a higher power than the Valar brought him back at the darkest time.
@@peterk2735 True, but Tolkien himself stated in one of his letters that it was Eru
@@Phantasia_Workshop I think I know which letter you mean, the one where he says “Another Power” took over. But again, it took over because all the pieces were in place. Last time Eru intervened directly he sank Numenor, destroyed Sauron and pulled Valinor out of the physical realm. Clearly, if he wanted to banish Sauron, he could do it effortlessly. So I think this time around, he manipulated events so that the fate of the Ring was not preordained, but that Frodo and Gollum would be there at the precipice and the “nudge” was simply guiding them to a place where they could exercise their free will, granted the Ring overpowered them, but it also self-destructed. If Eru wasn’t a thing, this “other power” would simply be called destiny. PS. My 2 cents, I totally understand your POV and accept it’s probably correct 😄
It's a huge misconception that I've seen people thing Eru shoved Gollum down. When Tolkien says Eru intervened he means that he set some paths that lead to that moment.
The reason Gollum fell is actually quite simple. Frodo made Gollum swear on the ring that he doesn't hurt him. Later on mount doom when Gollum attacks him, Frodo threatens him that if you touch me again I'll make you throw yourself down. Which is what happens. Gollum bits his finger off, and the rings carries out Frodo's "curse" so to speak. Basically, ring destroys itself, because of the oath, and will of Frodo.
@@satana8157 Yeah, I've read and heard all that as well. Then...at the end of the day...I remember it's just a story. Either way (or many ways) it's an amazing story regardless of the author's answer
Frodo did fail, yes. As anybody else would have failed. The ring was more powerful than he was and it would not allow itself to be destroyed. The only thing more powerful than the ring was Eru and he succeeded in destroying the ring, seemingly by chance but ultimately by his will. However, Frodo was the perfect and ultimate ring-bearer, humble enough and strong willed enough to carry it. Frodo offered it willingly to both Gandalf and Galadriel - who both refused the offer and succeeded in overcoming their own tests by doing so. Frodo also refused to turn it over to Boromir, Faramir, Sam and Smeagol demonstrating the wisdom and strength required in his task. Ultimately Frodo is the hero, and worthy of our admiration and praise, but he definitely failed in this mission.
Another great video, Jess. Thank you so much.
The ring was also destroyed by its own evil. The harm it did to Gollum created the situation that Eru used to destroy it.
The ring is addictive as crack to a drug addict
Correct me if I am wrong here: One of the powers of the Ring is that it is impossible for the bearer to intentionally destroy it, with the exceptions of the Valar and Bombadil. Therefore Frodo's task was flat out impossible. I assume the Council of Elrond did not know this because sending the Ring to Mordor was just handing it over to Sauron.
@@kryptonianguest1903 As far as I know the only intervention if Eru in LotR is the resurrection of Gandalf.
@@earlofdoncaster5018 In one of his letters, Tolkien mentioned that Eru nudged Gollum off the ledge to punish him for breaking his oath.
One theory a former girlfriend and I, both lifelong Tolkien fans, discussed was that Frodo's breaking point from the temptation of the Ring and the physical toll of the long, difficult and dangerous journey, actually happened slightly before the point that he stood at Sammath Naur and had only to open his hand and let the Ring drop to succeed in his quest; a seemingly very simple but actually impossible task. Instead, according to the theory, Frodo's breaking point came at the moment he first used the Ring for his own purposes and invoked its power and doom (not to be confused with merely putting the Ring on in desperate circumstances such as escaping from Boromir, for example). This happened when Gollum attacked Frodo and Sam on the path to Sammath Naur. Frodo, understandably infuriated and driven past endurance by the unexpected additional hardship and danger of Gollum's sudden attack, took up the power of the Ring to place a geis on Gollum: "If you ever touch me again, you shall yourself be cast into the fires of doom!" Sam witnessed the manifestation of power in Frodo when he made this pronouncement, and Frodo's words ultimately came true. Gollum attacked Frodo again shortly afterward and came under the curse Frodo had put on him.
Frodo carried the weight no one else could. He saw how it corrupted himself, he saw how it corrupted the ring wraiths and he saw how it started to corrupt members of the council. He knew the weight of it and because he did not wish it on anyone else, he chose to carry the ring. He chose to sacrifice himself for others, all the way back in Rivendell.
I think he did exactly what Eru decreed, “nor can any alter the music in my despite for he that attempteth shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful which he himself hath not imagined.”
But this topic is great 👍
Perfect quote for this conversation!
This quote is, for me, the core of the Legendarium that everything else revolves around. There are those who believe Eru and stay in harmony with the Music, acting as sub-creators of wonder, and then there are those who have been convinced by their own hubris that no one can improve on their art, and those who willfully misinterpret Eru's statement of fact as a challenge.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Look up Jess's video on Tolkien's Magical Music from 2 years ago. She talks about the music of creation and how Morgoth tried to ruin it (without ultimate success, however).
That's a thing that never sat right with me in the film, the Ring was Gollum's to destroy, it was like the whole point, the reason why Bilbo and Frodo spared him. And the poetic justice that the Ring should be destroyed, albeit unintentionally by its most tormented victim.
As I have been reading lotr over and over for 45 years. It has been good to see how I see Frodo differently over the years and how his sacrifice seems all the greater as a 55 year old than reading it as a 10 year old.
Also, Gollum swore by the ring, on pain of death to serve frodo in destruction of the Ring. I think this should be mentioned as it definitely plaid a part in his final plunge👌
yeah and that put a power in play that might not have been there otherwise!
Also, Frodo basically cursed Gollum on Mount Doom. "If you touch me again, you yourself shall be cast into the fires" or something like that.
@@philkugler2429 I don't think that was Frodo, or it wasn't ONLY Frodo who put that curse on Gollum: I believe that the One Ring spoke through Frodo to put that curse on Gollum, causing Evil's own selfishness and pride to undo itself in the end in spite of being able to dominate Frodo.
Hiya, Jess. I love what you do, so thank you for all the unseen/unsung work that goes into just getting one of these videos out. Peace!
Thank you so much!
Beautifully dissected. You really made me realize that he did fail, that it was inevitable, I never thought about the ending so deeply. It makes me imagine the conversations frodo might have had with Gandalf as they go to the Gray Havens, imagine if he apologized to Gandalf that he failed at what he set out to do. The things Gandalf would say...
My favorite moment that defines Frodo is at Rivendell during the formation of the fellowship we see everybody arguing over who should take the ring. Moments before Frodo is telling Sam it's time to go home, we did what we set out to do!
But they're all arguing and he says "I will take the Ring".. and you see Gandalfs face sink into sadness as he turns to face Frodo, he knows he could never ask Frodo to do anymore than he's already done, but also that he's the only one capable of doing it.
Its this epic yet sad moment where you feel almost ashamed that the heroes are incapable of the most important task in the world, we have to completely rely on the bravery of the weak. Such an unfair task to ask anyone to do, yet he volunteers himself.
Gah makes me emotional everytime I see it
A hero who never wavers is less interesting than one who wavers. Red badge of courage is a great story because our protagonist flees in fear, but later faces his fear successfully.
This is my favorite of your videos. Yes to all of this. I've walked this same analysis, in mind and heart, as I've thought of Frodo's story. The exquisiteness of LotR hinges on the facts that you document here. Frodo is the best of us, in large part because it is not his indivudual heroism that saves the day. It is the fact that he said yes, the sum of his choices, and the richness of the tapestry of souls he is in community with, that brings us resolution. This, more than anything else, to me is what makes this story so important, so lasting, and so relevant to our time.
I like your explanation. I once spoke to a Second World War hero who, after the war, was head of a training department. He said it like this. When he trained the soldiers he tried to prepare them for the hell he had been through. This seemed to work well until he realized that the war had destroyed his own psyche, and now he was inflicting the same damage on the soldiers as he had himself. He realized that it was better, in fact, that the soldier only gets training in the technical skills, but that they can live their lives blissfully ignorant of the dark sides of war as long as there is peace, and then we can only hope they rise to the role if a new war starts in the future. And then he quit as a training officer.
It's funny as the stated quest of the ring-bearer seems pretty straightforward: take the ring to a specifically dangerous place and throw it into the fire where it will be unmade. But the better your understanding of the ring the more you realize what an utterly doomed quest it always was. Yes, per Tolkien, Frodo did fail to destroy the ring himself, but the nature of the ring was such that neither he nor anyone else could have ever succeeded in the first place. There might have been other people in Middle Earth who could have taken the ring as far as Frodo, but there are none who could have taken that one more step and deliberately thrown it away. The ring's will was always to return to Sauron, and nothing could intentionally override that as (nearly) all creatures of Middle Earth were fated to succumb to its vile whispers eventually. So we can't blame Frodo for failing in the end because he had effectively lost what little control he had.
So in the end when Gollum breaks his oath that he made on the ring to Frodo it creates the opportunity for it be destroyed, because in a world like Middle Earth where words truly have power, broken promises demand recompense. So in the end perhaps the only greater will than that of the ring was of the very world itself.
I do love how simply the idea is presented at first. I think it's part of Tolkien's larger efforts to reinvigorate older myths--to show how it would realistically work to try and destroy evil
@@Jess_of_the_Shire It's practically presented like a side quest in a modern video game. At face value there's really nothing complex about the quest, but there's an enormous catch that no one truly understands until right up until the end.
Great video, as always. Can't wait to give it a thorough watch when I have the time! Ok, now... There's a reason Frodo is called the Ring Bearer, not the Ring Destroyer. It was never in his power to destroy the ring, and I strongly suspect that even Gandalf knew as much. All he could do was bring it to Mt Doom, and no more could be asked of him. And even that was almost too much. To say Frodo failed is to misunderstand his true role in the story, which is why I imagine Tolkien put the word in quotes. Frodo had no other option but to "fail." To Tolkien, Frodo is like us. We all undertake an arduous journey, confident that we can conquer the ills of the world, and avoid the temptations of evil along the way. But in the end, we all fall short, and only God's grace saves us, if we remain faithful to our cause. Gandalf had no other choice but to trust that Iluvatar would somehow deliver the world from Sauron's evil, as Tolkien trusted God to do the same for this world. For it is beyond the power of any creature to accomplish this.
I always thought that the Ring destroyed itself by keeping Gollum to his pledge to serve the master of the Ring. Frodo declared himself master, Gollum bit him, and the ring betrayed him to his doom. Evil oft mars evil. Crazy amounts of foreshadowing throughout that book.
I love that book, but the foreboding is laid on a little thickly.
The Ring unaliving itself to hold Gollum to a high moral standard is quite out of character not gonna lie
What I love about LotR is how defeating Sauron is a group effort, not just with Frodo, Sam and Gollum, but all the others working together despite earlier conflicts, mistrust or sabotage attempts from Saron, Saruman and their goons. And the characters forge lifelong bonds.
One thing I've learned to appreciate only lately about the One Ring, often from analyses like these on TH-cam from great close-readers like yourself, is that it has one very interesting flaw, which turns out to be its undoing. It's subtle and there's an almost blink-and-you-miss-it moment where it's on full display, but I think it adds to the "character" of the One Ring as a villain.
The flaw is that the Ring *must* enforce oaths sworn on it, either to the best of its ability or else by Eru or some other cosmic contract-enforcement power. When Smeagol swears not to betray Frodo, this takes effect, and Frodo mysteriously seems to understand the power of this oath, warning Smeagol that it's dangerous to make such an oath, and even more dangerous to break it. When Gollum does eventually break the oath and betray Frodo, there's almost a desperation in Frodo to prevent the consequences, as though his latent pathos for Smeagol kicks in and he seems determined to save him. But ultimately, the One Ring keeps its promise of retribution against Smeagol for the breaking of the oath, and Smeagol is killed - even though this means the Ring is destroyed itself. It seems that either the Ring itself, or else Eru / Ea / Tolkien is so insistent that oathbreakers must be punished, that even the Ring's self-preservation takes a back seat.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw No one can break an oath. That's why the Army of the Dead exists. In the book, they're called the Oathbreakers. There are other examples. It isn't that the Ring specifically has a thing with oaths, but that Gollum swore the oath by the Ring (what we understand as "in the name of"), so the Ring's power was what enforced the oath.
Gollum swore to serve the master of the precious. As long as Frodo was the Ring-bearer, Gollum would have to obey Frodo's command, by a magical-kind of compelling. In disobedience, great tragedy (suffering or even death) would come upon the oathbreaker. Figure the namesake guys (Army of the Dead), doomed to remain impotent ghosts until their oath was fulfilled.
Frodo had succeeded as a friend and a hero when he stood up at the Council of Elrond and volunteered to carry the Ring to Mordor, knowing it's effects firsthand. After hearing from Elrond and Gandalf about the nature of the Ring, nobody was volunteering.
The plan then was for all 9 to help Frodo get to Mordor, Boromir only broke when the Company had reached the crossroads where it was either Mordor or Gondor.
Boromir always intended to return to Minas Tirith, the only question was would he go alone.
A hero is someone who does what needs to be done for the needs of others, for the sake of 'goodness', without any expectation of reward and in spite of the likeliness of harm or costs to themselves. By this definition, Frodo is most definitely a hero, as are Sam and the rest of the Fellowship.
Further, whether or not Frodo himself succeeded (this video convinced me that technically he did not) his quest succeeded, and in the end this is all that mattered.
Jess, thank you once again for a wonderful video. You often make me think deeply.
excellent video. On the failure thing. Its quite possible to give it everything you have and still fail. In fact IIRC in one of Tolkien's letters he comments that despite Sam, Frodo and the entire Fellowship, the entire effort to destroy the Ring failing, they had given not only their all but all that was human possible to give. And so because there was nothing humanly possible and because they have given all their efforts to do, that was why essentially a miracle, even if it is in its specificity undetailed occurred and Eru intervened to ensure the destruction of the Ring.
it is wonderful to see the clear passion you have for this material in your facial expressions when telling the story, you clearly love this story. Amazing work.
Who wants to hear Jess just read us the book already? The best parts of this upload were her direct quotes of the book, I could listen to you all day jess.
Frodo was a hero, whether Tolkien intended it or not. Free people of Middle Earth never doubt this and neither do I.
Sure, his deeds were not flashy cavalry charge nor the last stand against the armies of Sauron, but his quest into Mordor with the One ring on his neck was no doubt the bravest thing anyone ever does in the story.
Frodo didn't fail in his task. He was meant to get the Ring to the Crack of Doom. Sam was meant to get Frodo to the Crack of Doom. And Gollum was meant to put the Ring into the Crack of Doom. All 3 did their part in destroying the Ring.
Exactly. Well.said.
Great analysis of Frodo’s complex story. So many layers in such a great figure. Great video as always, Miss Jess.
The Fellowship of the ring. Eru wanted fellowship to be the reason for the win.
That’s why Gandolf offered help with fellowship over force.
Fellowship is a team effort.
His duty was to be a part of the fellowship that got the deed done, as which it did. Thus his duty was complete.
I'm 63. l love your insight and commentary. I grew up with the help of the great generation... Your insight describes these great people to a tee. I'm glad you shire folk get it. There is still hope for a good and happy future in this world. Blessed be you.
“Fail” can be used in two senses, either general/ overall, or specific. In the specific sense, Frodo could only fail at something he himself either said he would do, or was trying to do. We assume that he was trying to destroy the ring, as that was the overall mission, but what he said was that he would take the ring to Mordor. Did Frodo ever have the thought that he himself would throw the ring into the fire? Does it matter? Is failure dependent on the pov? Ultimately it’s the questions themselves that are the interesting thing.
Yep!
Your final breakdown of what makes us human made me teary eyed while smiling very brightly, wich is both funny and beautiful to think about when the context is Tolkins works. Thank you for this ❤️
Mercy and Pity were not only shown by Frodo in saving Gollum from the archers under the command of Faramir but also in recruiting Sméagol to “team Frodo”. For the first time in centuries someone had treated Sméagol with compassion and pity - even to the extent of trusting him. Sméagol responded very positively to that - “nice master”.
Ultimately Gollum could not be redeemed but I have often wondered how the story would have played out if Sam had been able to show Sméagol more compassion.
I'd like to add that Gollum could have been redeemed.
He is at the brink of manifesting genuine love for a sleeping Frodo in the Stairs of Cirith Ungol when Sam wakes up and accuses him of sneaking, and calls him 'old villain'. Two pages earlier, Sam had wondered if Gollum considered himself a hero or a villain. Gollum obviously reacts negatively and his Stinker side gets to hold the reins until the end of the story.
Some might have picked up on something: this is the scene in which Frodo tells Sam to "go away" in the movie. Sam pushing Gollum to villainy as the build-up of his climactic understanding for Gollum and display of Pity were made into Gollum successfully manipulating Frodo and pitting him against Sam.
I love the movies but I don't really think that they're faithful.
In the book, Sam is regretful of his harsh words immediately, of course. Yet he tries to kill Gollum in their face-off in Shelob's cave (and hey, I get him), while the demon-spider deals with Frodo. All of this is the beautiful build-up to him finally understanding and sparing the creature in Mount Doom.
It’s clear that Sméagol/Gollum’s mindset, be it through Ring-mental-illness or it being his true (even pre-Ring) nature, is that “they’re mean to me, I’m mean to them; they’re nice to me, I’m nice to them.” However you treat Sméagol/Gollum, you’ll get the same treatment in return. That’s why he’s nasty to Sam and gentler with Frodo.
He failed, but the odds were against him against the corruption of the one ring. In the end Gollum and Frodo were tied to the ring. Gollum's triumph was also Middle Earth's. Frodo was damaged by the Ringwraith which he never fully recovered. And lost a finger out of it. But was broken. Not a hero in the traditional sense. But someone who sacrifices everything for the greater good is just as brave, and just as heroic even in failure.
I like how Frodo is aware of things because of his lucky adoption by Bilbo. It was Bilbo, after all (and as Gandalf points out) who had showed pity to Gollum, and that makes all interactions between Frodo and Gollum later on derivative. If Frodo and Gollum are powerless to resist their desire to possess (and be possessed by) the Ring then at least there are two of them at the end to neatly counterbalance.
9:07 it seems to be even when Tolkien was drafting his novel, he knew what the reaction to Frodo's failure would be like. Frodo himself showed little pity for Gollum at first only to be slowly dragged down into the same path of madness by the Ring. Likewise, some critics (and mfs in modern times) were quick to point out that Frodo wasn't a hero and didn't deserve to 'win'; like that's literally the point. On the one hand, his failure is relatable because how many of us feel confident that we can commit to doing the right thing even when it gets difficult? On the other hand, the backlash Frodo gets sometimes is exactly the kind of judgemental attitude people give to each other without ever being in the shoes of the other person. I'm happy how much this trilogy emphasizes mercy and effort over a rigid sense of good/bad or right/wrong (that nobody irl can 100% adhere to anyway).
Excellent discussion of such an amazing topic. Left on the surface, Frodo and Sam are heroes, but it is the combination of the efforts of all of the characters, that win the day because of the internal and external evil of the ring. I love your deep dive into Frodo’s complex personality and the root causes of his ultimate need to be whole.
“Evil doesn’t have to pick and choose.” Well said! Tolkien has taught me so much about morality. Evil doesn’t have the same constraints as good. It doesn’t have the same obligations. But, thank Eru, evil is myopic. Unconstrained but myopic-a lidless eye.
Your new camera/lighting setup is producing a gorgeous image 😊
A finely formulated and delivered analysis, Melon ni'
Heroism is when someone sacrifice themselves to save others. Frodo knew he will fail the moment he saw Gollum -- he's looking at what he would become. His failure was not a surprise since it was foreshadowed. He failed the moment Shelob got him -- without Sam, it's game over.
Frodo got the ring to where it needed to be when Eru stepped in and gave a tiny shove.
I still think it would have been more satisfactory and less Deus et Machina, to have Sam bean Gollum with a 🪨, knocking him off the ledge.
Frodo did also spare Gollum. Mercy was rewarded.
I'm thinking that Tolkien would have said something not unlike this. The quote seems to say regular living beings always can be defeated by consummate evil (all are sinners?). He does not say the fight against evil is futile, instead his great trilogy appears to be all about a great fight against evil. It's such a rich tale that we also get view of how ring bearers become enslaved to the thing. We also see the great nobility of the several (Gandalf, Galadriel, Aragorn, Faramir) who choose to avoid contact with the ring.
Deus Ex Machina was what the awkward quick solution of an intervention by a higher power was called (common in Greek plays). Here the plot and underlying philosophy are so rich, that this is more like an integral part of "getting it" when you read about Middle Earth, it's nature and characters per the author's philosophy. Frodo wound up being able to be corrupted even though he could resist as well as any, but there is still the same larger world and its workings that were mentioned off and on through the many thousands of pages. "You were meant to have the ring". Sam being caught spying and sent with Frodo, etc.
Hitting Gollum with one of those Hobbit "well placed hit with a rock" would likely be a go to approach for modern folk, but entirely repugnant to Tolkien. In fact the entire work would have been written drastically differently by someone who enjoyed that sort of solution.
Shove? No, no, no - just a wee nudge.
Thank you, Jess. As always much food for thought, even for one who has been reading Tolkein for 55 years.
I think your take on this is pretty spot on. When I first read the Lord Of The Rings, back in the mid 80’s, my take was similar and I had a more favorable view of Gollum’s redemption than most, I think. I felt like at least some small part of him knew he was doing right by taking the ring into the Crack of Doom, almost purposefully as he tumbled in. I’m the sort of writer that believes much of the written word is up for interpretation by the reader. In fact, I always enjoyed hearing what other people thought of my stuff, especially when their thoughts made me want to laugh (not disrespectfully). Perhaps I’m influenced by my upbringing but I do believe the universe ultimately bends toward that which supports life.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who views Smeagol's demise as the end of a redemption arc of sorts. Less explicit than Lobelia's, but no less there. We must remember that he was a being of two natures, and there was a longstanding war between the two that had only recently been rekindled. I believe his good side desired the peace of the grave, while his dark side desired only the Ring, and that as he entered the fire his good side was happier than his dark side had been at the recovery of the Ring.
This was very good stuff Jess. of course Frodo as he was destined too failed. One could just as well say that Gollum is the hero since he completes his journey to a happy fate, this of course happens through the mercy and goodnes of Bilbo, Frodo, Gandalf, aragorn, the wood elves and others, and of course mostly through the grace of Eru. here lies the heart of the catholic world view in the book.But as you say it is a human book it allows us to soldier on despite our human frailty and to find success even in our failures. Thanks for this upload.
@EricRobertson-pm1fw Indeed the contention thast he is the hero is stretching things a little. But he does succeed in completing a heroes journey even if not by or for himself.
Your videos are always thought provoking -- As a casual fan of Tolkien, ive never considered these ideas, and they are enriching. Thank you Jess!
Thanks Jess. Great analysis of this character, and of the "foil" Gollum. Those of us who want to live an exemplary life can learn much from his weakness and strength that came from outside his humble life to see it through to the end, although imperfectly. I appreciate your videos, and your discussions remind me of someone I once knew back in my college days as we both were taking English literature classes together. She took the higher road and majored in that , me I was too practical and settled for something that I thought could get me a job better 😀. Thanks again!
I love the way you read the dialogues from those passages in the books. It contrasts your normal tone sharply, but it's very entertaining, and communicates well the emotion and emphasis of the characters words.
Thank you for making such great videos. I enjoy these greatly. Have a lovely day!
Jess, this was another great video. I especially enjoyed your readings, which seemed more “acted out” (rather than merely read) than usual. Well done and thank you! I’ve been a fan of Tolkien since grammar school is the 70s and you continue to help deepen my appreciation for this beautiful world. So, thanks!!
I think this is your very best video! Utterly brilliant and so thoughtful provoking.
For Frodo.
There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, waiting for some final and desperate danger to make it grow. Frodo was neither very fat nor very timid; indeed, though he did not know it, Bilbo (and Gandalf) had thought him the best hobbit in the Shire.
Thanks, Jess. I could listen to you all day !
Wonderful analysis. I think also it's suggested that he lasted as long as he did partly because in having mercy, in acting mercifully, he made it harder for the ring to gain a foothold. I seem to remember Gandalf saying something about how Bilbo wasn't hurt much by the ring for a long time partly because his gaining of it was accompanied by an act of mercy. Whereas Smeagol fell quickly after acquiring the ring by an act of violence, jealousy and malice.
It is such a treat to listen to a Tolkien commentator who goes as deep as you do into the meaning behind JRRT's works rather than simply recite lore or hypothesize. I have come to wait for your videos eagerly. Do please keep them coming :)
Your theater background makes your book fragment readings a total delight. How amazing! Have you considered being the voice of a Tolkien's audiobook?
I love how Frodo embodies the idea found in St Paul in the Bible that God chooses the weak in the world to shame the strong and that when we are weak then we are strong because God is able to work through us more powerfully. 5:03
Very good evaluation and presentation. My emotions concerning Frodo have been conflicted, and that speaks very well of Tolkien's talent and depth. The movies are frustrating, but the books describe the emotion and internal struggles of Frodo that I don't believe can be truly reflected within the constraints of movie production.
So often, I hoped for Frodo not to make certain choices that inevitably hurt him, and yet, it was in those choices that ultimate victory was obtained. It's an amazing testament to the true value of seemingly insignificant and often unnoticed and unrewarded choices to adhere to even small gestures of righteousness. We may not be able to be perfect or consistently good, but we can always make a choice to do good and to do well. Who knows what large victories those small internal successes might eventually yield. It's certainly worth attempting.
I LOVE that even though “Gollum is too far gone to be redeemed” ( 11:01 ), it was still “pity & mercy [that] reign[ed] supreme.”
Frodo moved from fear to empathy both while possessing the Ring. He didn’t gain empathy after obtaining the Ring, Rather, he gained empathy when he humbled himself enough to see that it could just as easily be him in Gollum’s place.
Even though Gollum was still too far gone (by the power of the Ring and his own choices) by the time Frodo encountered him, it was STILL Bilbo’s mercy & Frodo’s humility allowing the “de-hobbitized” “villain” to remain that ended up saving all of Middle Earth. Humility-driven mercy wins out, and it’s not by earthly power or by human morality, which would’ve dictated that Gollum should die “for the greater good.”
Awesome work as always Jess! I'd like to contribute by sharing some things on Gollum's fall. It is not Eru actively pushing Gollum, INTERVENING the story; it's Frodo's (and Sam's) actions that create the conditions for Fate, or Eru's design -the Music of Creation, to unfold.
In Mount Doom, Sam (before facing and sparing Gollum himself) has a vision that describes Frodo as "a figure robed in white, but at its breast it held a wheel of fire. Out of the fire there spoke a commanding voice. ‘Begone, and trouble me no more! If you touch me ever again, you shall be cast yourself into the Fire of Doom.’
When Gollum asked to have the Ring for a while to "protect it from Sauron while Master goes into Mordor" (paraphrase), as they hide in sight of the Black Gate, Frodo reprimends and warns him of not overstepping his boundaries:
"In the last need, Sméagol, I should put on the Precious; and the Precious mastered you long ago. If I, wearing it, were to command you, you would obey, even if it were to leap from a precipice or to cast yourself into the fire. And such would be my command. So have a care, Sméagol!’
He also reminds Gollum of the oath to convince him to get out of the Forbidden Pool -to save him from death by Faramir's men.
Oaths have binding power in Middle-earth (see Fëanor and his sons, or the, ahem- Oathbreakers). Gollum swore an oath by the Ring -which means that the Rings holds the oath. Frodo keenly percieved that the Ring "is more treacherous than you are, and it may twist your words".
Gollum swore to serve the master of the precious. Frodo understands Gollum's mind and the power of the oath. Gollum serves his Master by (unwillingly, magically compelled by the oath to "fall into the Fire if he touched Frodo again") completing the quest, which not only redresses Frodo's failure, but also saves his life (for the short while that it's worth, and it IS worth).
I love your channel. You are beautiful and your passion for your craft is evident!
To put Frodo's and Gollum's actions at the Cracks of Doom into the context of Tolkien's greater legendarium, I see an analogy with the discord of Melkor within the music of the Ainur being overcome by Ilúvatar. Or in a Christian context: all works - good or bad - are futile; only by God's grace can one be saved.
Frodo didn't fail, he played his part in the Music of the Ainur perfectly. Remember, when Eru tasked the Valar with making their symphony, Melkor introduced Discord and everyone thought that it was hideous, until Eru pulled back the veil and showed them the music in its entirety. All of the Valar were amazed that even the Discord introduced by Melkor ultimately played a role in Eru's plan, and that nothing occurred unless it originated within his innermost thoughts.
Frodo may have seemed to us to have failed, but when we zoom out and see things from Eru's perspective we realize that all of this was planned from before the beginning of time and Frodo's claiming the Ring for himself had to have happened. If I remember correctly, Tolkien wrote in letter that Eru himself stretched his hand and helped Frodo to his feet when all of his strength was utterly spent.
Eru knew Frodo would claim the Ring for himself, but this didn't matter. Frodo's discord was all a part of Eru's beautiful plan to wipe Sauron from Middle Earth.
It's interesting to consider that perhaps to Gandalf, and maybe Galadriel and Elrond and a few others with foresight, it was expected that Frodo would fail to resist the Ring's power in the end. Their hope was that he would get far enough, close enough, that when he finally failed, their goal could still be achieved in spite of it. If so, then there's an added level of tragedy to Frodo's appointment as the Ring Bearer, because, unbeknownst to him, his task isn't just to bear the Ring and endure its temptations as long as he can, his task is to endure the failure of his last scraps of strength, and to be "split in two" in a way that none of the wise ones can ever heal. His living with his failure could arguably be a much higher cost than his time actually bearing the Ring.
As far as Gandalf is concerned, I don't think there's any "perhaps" about it: Gandalf had already seen that Frodo couldn't throw the Ring into his hearth fire at Bag End. Your analysis of Gandalf's and Elrond's hope is spot on, I would say.
Of course it could have worked out a bit better for Frodo: Gollum might have grabbed the Ring *before* Frodo decided to claim it for himself, thus saving him from that failure. But that wouldn't have been as good a story.
This was such a lovely video, thank you for making it. I think you really grock tolkiens stories in a way most dont.
Thank you, Jess! This is one of your best videos, I really enjoyed it and appreciate the passion you put into making these videos. I think that looking into Tolkien's Christian belief is the key to answering this question. The Bible is clear: humans are doomed to fail in their fight against evil/sin. The only way to beat it is to accept our weakness, our inability to solve the problem of sin, and our need for a Savior. And that's when Jesus who died for all our sins comes and changes us and makes us look more like Him every day. So, yeah, Frodo was doomed to fail, but as you and others have said - it is about him acknowledging his weakness that in the end made him the ideal hero.
2 Corinthians 12: 9-10: "9 But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong."
Very insightful. Great video as always, Jess. Thank you.
Excellent video - I think you perfectly summed up Frodo's character and why he is so compelling.
I think a lot of the blame for Frodo's underratedness rests on the films, as good as they are. They remove many of Frodo's most heroic moments, and his interactions with the ring and Sam wildly cheapen his character.
You've got a good voice for reading and presentation! I like your deep dives and analysis as well.
Your video was beautifully written. Thank you for sharing.
I have only just discovered your channel. Thanks for such an interesting take on "fire side" conversations about Tolkien's works (and some other stuff). You have convinced me to pull out LotR and re-read the tome. Which as the years roll on is becoming more bitter-sweet to read as it reminds me of being on set for FotR (as a Hobbit & Frodo stand-in), and I miss those summer days with my fellow hobbits in the Shire...
Thank you so much! I've always loved Frodo and have had endless arguments regarding him with my family (which, I must admit, some of them continued on the sole purpose of messing with me...). I've used similar arguments but you articulate everything so much better, and bring up more points than I ever had.
BTW, if you haven't seen it, I recommend watching the psychology of a hero video about Frodo. While it focuses on the movies instead of the books it's an interesting watch.
This is such a wonderful and compassionate reading and I agree completely. Genuinely brought a tear to my eye ❤
Wonderful commentary. Thank you again, Jess of the Shire! You're a class act.
Another great topic to debate.Good work👍🏿👍🏿
Very well said. I hope that everyone who has ever doubted Frodo's strength of character, commitment, loyalty, or efforts to destroy the Ring watches this video to learn Tolkien's intent and clarification of happened at the Crack of Doom.
I would just add that everyone should be strongly encouraged to read the books. As excellent as the films are, they are still an incomplete interpretation of the original work and only provide a small fraction of the detail and context that Tolkien wrote about.
Hey, that's an idea for another video! Specific instances where the films, because of obvious time constraints or the need to sustain dramatic tension, fell short of conveying the importance and gravity of situations in the books. I'll give my favorite example: When Frodo finally gives in to the Ring and puts it on, film viewers are shown that Sauron is suddenly aware of Frodo by a shift in the "flashlight" direction of the Eye from the Battle of the Morannon to the door of the Crack of Doom. This scene takes less than five seconds and is almost forgettable in the frantic rush of events. In the book, however, Tolkien pauses the action for just a moment to describe the significance of Sauron's epiphany in satisfying detail:
"The Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him, and his Eye piercing all shadows looked across the plain to the door that he had made; and the magnitude of his own folly was revealed to him in a blinding flash, and all the devices of his enemies were at last laid bare. Then his wrath blazed in consuming flame, but his fear rose like a vast black smoke to choke him. For he knew his deadly peril and the thread upon which his doom now hung.
From all his policies and webs of fear and treachery, from all his stratagems and wars his mind shook free; and throughout his realm a tremor ran, his slaves quailed, and his armies halted, and his captains suddenly steerless, bereft of will, wavered and despaired. For they were forgotten. The whole mind and purpose of the Power that wielded them was now bent with overwhelming force upon the Mountain."
That passage is POWERFUL, and there was simply no way for Peter Jackson to translate it to film despite all his directorial prowess.
What are some other good examples of the books providing more detail/context than the films for pivotal plot points, character developments, or themes? These shouldn't be meant as criticisms of the films, just demonstrations that the books are definitely worth reading to gain a fuller understanding of Tolkien's works.
Powerful! Well done! I am going to watch it again because I have so many thoughts.
Yes, I believe that you did a fantastic job of fleshing out this back story!
Frodo “failed” in that moment, but the point of the story is always that small acts of courage, pity, and good are what build up and defeat evil. Frodo himself was never going to be able to overcome the ring, but by his acts of good along the way, and the actions of his friends, an insurmountable evil was overcome.
Extremely well thought out, and brilliantly explained!
Sauron made it impossible to destroy the Ring. Frodo takes it farther than anyone else could have expected. But in the end, he failed.
I appreciate you… Very excellent storytelling… Very insightful… Easily listened to and appreciate it
I love thinking about Tolkien and LOTR and talking about it. However, right now in life, I don't have any friends who like talking about it as much as I do. lol! So I really appreciate your videos!
Simply excellent ... As always !! The pinnacle of analysis relayed in the most engaging of ways. 🙂
Thanks!
Very well done and thoroughly thoughtful presentation. Many of your videos bring me to tears and this one did so unexpectedly. It touched emotional cords.
I really wanted to share this on Face Book because it seems especially timely after the last presidential debate debacle. I was thinking very catastrophically after the election before last, but we're still here with our democracy more or less intact (or not much worse than usual), but this next time will be more different for other reasons I won't get into here. Darkness encroaches subtly and incrementally, in human history and in the history of Middle Earth, and I believe is addressed similarly.
My thinking toward this has changed since then and has been informed a lot by Tolkien and commentators on him like you. And this piece helps immensely in ways I won't get into in a Comment that is already too long. Thanks and bless you. Contributing to your Patreon has been long overdue.
Frodo is my favorite!! Always has been since I first encountered him in the cartoons. I never understood the frustrations, almost hate, some people had for Frodo, but then I met more people, and came to understand not everyone sees the world the same, looks for the same things, much less offer grace and mercy where needed. That being said, I still think they're stupid for not even bothering to give him a chance, to know him better, and just base their decisions on whether or not he actually can hold his own in a fight or that he's a damsel in distress. He doesn't have to be your favorite character, but don't tear him down because he doesn't fit your notion of a hero. Frodo is an amazing character, what the Ring did to him is heartbreaking. If we can recognize the heroics of a single, working mom, we should be able to recognize his heroics.
#ForFrodo
This makes sense from the christian persuasion of Tolkien. Man, alone, is helpless against evil. Nobody, as in no one, stands a chance. Only by allowing the higher power working thru them can evil be undone. Only thru Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam's pity and Gollum himself (and everybody else tbh) was the one ring destroyed. Only thru Grace is the common saying they have.
I always felt that frodo's mission was to go as far as his will takes him, like Elrond says in Rivendell (at least in the books, i dont rmr what exactky he says in the movies). Yea, he failed to destroy the ring, but that wasn't his mission. He was meant to go as far as he humanely (hobbitly?) possible and he did just that.
Have always grokked Frodo's journey in much the way you discuss here, Jess.
However, hadn't understood the dual powers of the ring in quite this way... Your analysis of the ring explains a lot to me! Thanx
He is the essence of the good in us that consciously rejects the evil opportunities we have. (Did Tolkien explicitly say that he didn't think of Frodo as a "hero"?) Because I think that Frodo failing in the end was _absolutely necessary_ from a position of Christian theology: like if Jesus could have a moment of doubt on the cross, then Frodo can't possibly do better than that, right? Every person, no matter how *_heroic,_* necessarily has that failing in him, absolutely integral to his person. (I feel like there's an assumption in this video that "heroes are perfect".) That Frodo is a hero who failed in the end seems undeniable in my mind, is what I'm saying. The whole Fellowship, they were all heroes.
(Because I would imagine that to Tolkien, however important it is to recognize we all have that failing inside us... we all have that capacity for heroism in us.)
One of the hardest issues and character arcs to navigate. And it definitely sounds like you've read Becca Tarnas' commentary on the matter. Good job!
Great video!💕
I've finished reading the Return of the King for the first time in my life recently. Frodo is definitely my favourite character from LotR, because of how human, vulnerable, yet extremely selfless and determined he is. He chose to carry the heavy burden and sacrifice himself, so that others, braver and stronger than him, could not worry about this danger and could take care of all the important things that needed to be protected from the evil. I think we should appreciate those people who simply put things out of our concern. The problem is, we tend to overlook someone's job if it doesn't have some visible or noticeable impact on our lives. Characters like Frodo make us care more, and I find it great✨️
There is this trendy song "Daylight" by David Kushner, and for some reason it makes me think of Frodo and Gollum, and their struggle with the influence of the ring in particular. I would say it captures the feeling of despair and some inevitable power over you.
LotR is one of the best things that happened to me this year, and your video essays have helped me so much while analysing the characters❤
This was fantastic. Excellent analysis
Excellent discussion of this powerful, ingenious element in Tolkien's storytelling. An analogy I've thought of to empathize w/Frodo is alcoholism. (Or drug addiction, but whatever). A severe alcoholic is given a Magic Bottle. Full of his favorite drink, it is bottomless, and will never run dry. But, to save the world, he must destroy it by casting it into Mount Doom. And he is told that AFTER doing so, there will NEVER be ANY alcohol to be found in all the world ever again. Might be an approximation of the "addictive" power of the One Ring.
I think Frodo's "failure" is meant to prove Tolkien's perspective of evil and heroism. Frodo is, traditionally, the "ideal" hero but he still fails because nobody can ever truly overcome evil because we've all got evil in ourselves. Gollum knocking the ring into Mount Doom proves his greater point though, that evil is, inherently, self defeating and will ultimately bring about its own destruction by its own corruptive nature.
Jess you are spot on with your analysis. Totally agree.
Yes, Frodo did fail.
You said at 14:26 , "evil had become irresistible". Was it evil that was irresistible? or was it the power of the ring? Was the ring powerful because it was evil, or because a Maia put his own strength in it? I mean, if Olórin had poured his mercy, his benevolence, and his will to heal all life into a ring, would any ring-bearer be able to resit?
As usual, I didn't find anything I'd argue with you about. Good analysis and video, as always.