On Tuesday, we talked about different characters, their choices, and the significance of those choices as they relate to the entire outcome of the Lord of the Rings. These choices are very similar to everyday choices we make, because we determine the significance of our choices based on why we make them, rather than the outcome they bring. This is a scary thought, because we can only have good intentions but cannot determine how even the choices made with good intention will affect our lives. When thinking about Gollum and his choices, one of the most significant choices, I think, is his decision not to kill the Hobbits directly. While he did intend to lead them into inevitable death, Sméagol keeps Gollum from killing them along the way and ultimately allows the journey to be completed.
Do y'all think Tolkien sufficiently answers the question, "Why didn't Gollum just kill the Hobbits and take the Ring?" with Sméagol being the only one to hold Gollum back, or do you think this explanation is not enough to justify this choice?
3 comments:
I think that you are correct in saying Sméagol, or Gollum’s less evil side, held him back from just directly killing the Hobbits. However this is partially due to Frodo. Frodo is able to empathize with Gollum in a way nobody else could because he knows what it is like to bear the ring. His compassion for Gollum brings out a little of Gollum’s good side and makes him feel bad about directly killing the Hobbits. In that perspective I think Tolkien sufficiently explains Gollum’s choice. Instead he decides to let Shelob kill the Hobbits since it’s less direct. I also think another factor is Sam’s defensiveness. Gollum is scared since Sam protects and watches over Frodo so carefully, and would rather take the hobbits to something he knows for sure will kill them. Except, of course, he underestimates the endurance of Hobbits.
~Ulmo
I think that the complexity of Sméagol and Gollum is one of my favorite parts of Tolkien's writing: this character seems to have more meaning than just a reasoning to destroy the ring. Even though that might not be the case, then the character at least justifies the ending.
I think that it is interesting to see how our choices culminate, which is why I think Gollum and Sméagol are especially important. Some of the actions Gollum takes seem like they are controlled by Sméagol and vise versa, but I think that it is somewhat difficult to fully disentangle who is in control of which actions. Although Gollum seems to be nefarious, he exhibits an occasional patience with Sam and Frodo that doesn't seem to be entirely evil. And we also discussed in class how Sméagol had his own greed that led to Gollum, which shows that while Sméagol was not evil, he had touches of corruption. I think that because the two personalities are so tangled it is difficult to say that Sméagol was the one who held back from killing, especially because when Sméagol first got the ring, it was the first thing he did. I think that it would be interesting to elaborate more on Sméagol and maybe have a story about him to understand where his decisions come from-which I think would help us understand this particular decision.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.