Agree with u Ashley. without Sam ,frodo cudnt even cross the Emyn Muil forget about Mt Doom. i like him as he is . stupid , blundering fellow who would die for his master.i wud have been better if Frodo was potrayed as his friend and not his master. thats right Ash, Sam does have qualities which are lacking in most people nowadays. but i must also say that no one can be like Sam completely coz Sam's character at some point is a bit too ideal and cannot be found in the real world.
oh , Welcome to PT! Ashley dear ,i hope u have a great stay at PT.
Ashley276: Rambling isn't an offence as long as it makes sense, which your post does. My old eyes often get lost in such lenthy posts making it dificult for my mind to find its way back to where it left the author's argument. Were all lengthy posts broken up into subparagraphs of approximately five lines each, they would be much easier to read.
Thank you all for the nice comments I guess that I just got a little over the top on that post. But I really liked Sam and I just thought that his loyalty was overwhelming at points "I can't carry it for you but I can carry it and you" I mean now that is loyalty at its ideal. I really like this site and the posts are so well written and the replies are even better even when I do not agree and that is refreshing to find.
I was browsing through some of the other posts and I noticed an interesting one on Sam's treatment on Gollum. I think that maybe that was a wee bit of a flaw on Sam's part but not as a whole. I am not sure if it should be called a flaw really, I think that Sam's treatment of Gollum was beacause Sam saw that Gollum was truly corrupted and like he said "there's naught left in him but lies and decit" I think that his treatment of him was based on his lack of understanding that it was the ring that made Gollum evil and that Frodo wanted better yet Frodo needed to believe that Gollum could be saved because otherwise Frodo could end up like that. I am not sure if that made any sense at all. But IMO in the end Sam was right and there was nothing left in Gollum but lies, decit and a flaming desire to possess that ring. All Sam wanted to do was protect Frodo from Gollum if he could since he knew that he really could not protect him from the Ring really. I am not sure but maybe this post belongs in a thread about Gollum if there is one?? Is there??
I am not sure where I read this, but it seems to me that Tolkien confesses to not liking Sam much and distinctly disliking the Gaffer because of a certain dumb arrogance. It's probably in the letters, the one book I would like to have and don't. Somewhere else, Carpenter's bio probably, it says that he hated the army but was very impressed with the moral fibre of the common british soldier and someone (Shippey?) feels that Sam comes from that experience.
I haven't liked Sam much either. He's irritating and kind of ignorant. However, that's not the point, I think. Not for us nor for Tolkien. I know people I love to be with whom I don't much respect and I know people who are, for me, a bore, but are far far better human beings than I. We can't rate people because of their entertainment value. Sam is a great hero whether or not he is the ideal dinner guest.
For that matter, these books are great books because they are more than just entertainment. They are even great entertainment because they are more than entertainment.
I am not sure but maybe this post belongs in a thread about Gollum if there is one?? Is there?
There is this one
A New Perspective on Gollum