Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="evildmguy" data-source="post: 1708917" data-attributes="member: 6092">Greetings!Thanks for the well thought out responses to my post.  I appreciate that!  I hope to emulate and live up to those standards that have been set.In terms of a contract, I would completely agree that I don't know what Tolkien promises.  The issue is that I don't like old style prose, which Tolkien writes.  It is very "heavy handed" to me.  I am not completely a product of current times, but the writings of the 19th and early 20th century are very tough for me to read because of the style.  (Dracula, Frankenstein, etc.)  I will also agree that many hobbits probably could have carried the ring and made it.  From what I saw of Samwise, he seemed a better candidate for it than Frodo, in that he wanted to share the burden.  It seems to me, though, that the contract was that Frodo could do it, whether through judgment or ability, and he couldn't.  There is no fine print to contracts like this, according to what I have read on writing.  As to the specifics you mention, I will talk about that more later.  And that probably fits the times in which he was writing.  It also makes it very Greek, by having some sort of Deus Ex Machina come and save the day.  However . . .My point here is not to bash Tolkien but to explain what I didn't like in what I have read and heard and what I saw in the movies.  I hope that is understand.  Even in that, I respect Tolkien for what he did even if I don't like it or agree with it.  I still don't like what Tolkien did, sticking to the bare bones of what is probably in the books, in terms of how he resolved the issue.  There is no mention of gods that I have heard, only of evil through Sauron, and to say that it is God's grace that saved everyone comes out of no where for me.  Had it been set up or had Frodo been shown to be religious (to any god(s)) then it would be easier for me to accept that ending.  As it was, even for a Deus Ex Machina, it feels too heavy handed, more as if he wanted it to end with the rings destruction but wrote himself into a corner and wasn't sure how to do it.  I haven't read the books, as I have said, but in what I have seen, I can't buy that the ring exacts its price on Gollum through its destruction.  Yes, you can read into this by saying Evil feeds upon itself and the moment of the rings glory was also its downfall.  Again, it feels TOO forced to me.  The ring, or Sauron, has shown too much intelligence to fail exactly when it did.  Again, the Deus Ex Machina feels too heavy handed.  However, those aside, my issue is still Frodo.  Again from what I saw, he might not be happy that he couldn't do it, but he still received all of the accolades of being a hero.  What should be a tragedy, and if he had a martyr complex that should have come into play to destroy the ring, isn't because Frodo is still seen as a hero, regardless of how he perceives himself.  In the end, I don't think the Fellowship, because the soldier is always forgotten in large scale battles, sacrificed enough to complete the quest.  They were all changed, yes, but we always change and it can be argued about whether that change was enough.  However, in terms of sacrifice by the heroes, to me, it didn't feel like enough.  Some examples of what I think was enough.  Theseus killing the minotaur but it cost him his father because he forgot about the sails.  Antigone burying her brother and then having to commit suicide.  Othello losing everything because he was willing to listen to Iago.  (For more modern examples, I can only think of Babylon 5 right now, but it has a lot.)Marcus sacrificing himself so that Ivanova can live.  The irony that is Mollari.  He wanted his people to be rulers as they were and everything he did caused their downfall, with him as the emperor of an even more weak and decaying empire.  Kosh's willingness to die to give the rebellion what it needed.  Sheridan's willingness to die to strike at the heart of the enemy.  (Okay, he came back so it isn't a tragedy but he was still willing to die.)  In any event, my point is that all most character's change through the course of a story.  With few exceptions, the mother in Ordinary People comes to mind as one such exception, most characters go through a change by the end of their story.  The fact that Frodo changed isn't in question for me.  However, I didn't feel it was enough.  Again, though, perhaps the books would have given me what I was wanting to see in his character.  Good discussion!  Thanks!  edgAlternity Pimp</blockquote>

Verification