(And the position of "gardener" is a long way from "slave". If he has a job then he may as well work for Frodo. To portray Sam as "ordinary" by the standards of pre-WW2 Britain then he has to have a job. Having Sam be genuinely "working class" makes his point much better. But if Tolkien had written all the Hobbits of the Fellowship as wealthy upper-class he could reasonably be accused of portraying a situation in which it is only wealthy upper-class people who get to save the world. It is stated in many places that Tolkien at least partly wrote LOTR as a parallel to WWI, in which he believed that the doggedness and strength of the ordinary Britisher got them through. If Sam were depicted as his equal he would also be wealthy. He owns a house, he throws large parties, he doesn't need to work, he has inherited wealth from Bilbo. If we expected readers to apply their understanding of the British class system to Middle Earth, then Frodo is quite definitely a member of the wealthy class. Class distinctions were very much stronger then than they are now. You very much have to remember the world in which Tolkien was writing. The entire character of Sam basically confuses me. Perhaps Tolkien made Sam a "slave" specifically for there to be a maximum contrast once he has been through all the trials and comes back as a leader? Although, even then, he still seems like he looks up to Frodo, in spite of basically carrying Frodo to Mount Doom. Hobbits seem like they all mostly live in peace and harmony, with not many power struggles and things of that nature. Since Hobbits are fictional entities, it wasn't strictly necessary for Tolkien to have such as "master/slave" tradition included in the story, at least among Hobbits. Still, there's something about it which makes me uncomfortable. I'm not at all ignorant about actual history, and I know that until very recently, this kind of relationship was extremely common. Is there some specific point in making Sam play the role he has? Could it be that it's simply his (perhaps largely imagined) low intelligence that makes him so submissive toward Frodo? As in, "good ol' Frodo is so smart, so he'd better call the shots"? Low self-esteem, perhaps as a result from being talked down to all his life in Hobbiton by the older hobbits? With this in mind, is there any particular reason that Tolkien decided to not just make Sam Frodo's close and trusty friend, who might do work for him but isn't in any way a "servant" or "slave"? Would this really have changed the story in a major way? Perhaps I'm failing to see it just because I want him to be "normal" or on "equal terms" with Frodo? It's heavily implied that Sam isn't the sharpest individual, but I mostly don't notice any of this supposed stupidity. Perhaps because I'm essentially Sam in terms of social status, if even that.Īlthough he ends up being extremely heroic and important, and (spoiler warning) eventually becomes the long-time mayor of Hobbiton, during the entire epic journey, he is always somehow "below" Frodo, and Frodo is always the "obvious" leader, even though he barely seems to have any more wits than Sam in most situations. This fundamentally bothers me, for some reason. Tolkien canon, but it IS Sean Astin approved.If I have to find one "flaw" about The Lord of the Rings, it may be the fact that Sam is more or less the slave of Frodo, albeit a willing servant. Sam and Frodo being a couple may not be J. And so, whatever people want to conceptualize with them is fine with us.” Anyhow, our instinct when the movie came out was to just love how the fans embraced the movie and the characters. When it came out! Like coming out of the closet! Omigosh. The point is, Astin then declares, “First of all, how do know they didn’t? You know what I mean? It’s a long trek to Mordor.”Īstin went on, “We loved the gay fan fiction when it came out. We have no idea who Rachel is, perhaps she’s the person who paid for Cameo as a gift to the receiver. He then notes Rachel says he should say that sort of kidding. “So I think Sam and Frodo should have kissed,” Astin says. Sean Astin talking about how Sam and Frodo should have/might have kissed. That vid has since hit Tumblr, TikTok, and Twitter where LGBTQA+ fans and allies are elated. During one such call, Astin shared his thoughts on the shipping of Sam and Frodo. This enticing bombshell dropped on Cameo, where fans can get a video message from a celeb they love. Sure, they never kissed onscreen, but now Sean Astin, who played Sam in the Lord of the Rings movies, is saying they should have! Is there a love more pure than that between Samwise Gamgee and Frodo Baggins? They went to Mordor and back together, inspiring not only the imaginations of generations but also slash fictions that imagined these adorable Hobbits crossing from friends to lovers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |