LOTR, Hope, and the Theory of Courage

[MaidenOfTheShieldarm]

This topic has been bubbling in my mind for ages and ages but it hasn't gotten any clearer really so I'm just going to throw it all in and hope it makes some sort of sense. And of course, you all have probably discussed this before but it's going to bother me if it just keeps percolating in my brain, so here goes.

This really all starts with the theory of courage, which I discovered while reading Tom Shippey for a paper I was writing. Tolkien described it as "the main spring of despair." It shows up in "The Battle of Maldon" (an Old English epic) as "Heart shall be bolder, harder be purpose, / more proud the spirit, as our power lessens . . . ." This struck me because it was the first time I'd seen verbalized that which I think is one of the things that draws me most to LOTR and to all of Tolkien’s works. I have always found tragedy and sorrow more realistic, more compelling, and above all more beautiful than comedy. And for all that it has a happy ending (one could argue) LOTR has an awful lot of despair. Frodo, Sam, Éowyn, Denethor, possibly Boromir, none of them have hope. I’m sure the list in the Silm is even longer. It's a word that shows up a lot in the books, too. I reread them this summer and noticed all sorts of things that I can't remember now because it was a month and a half ago and I didn't have anything to note it down with or some other poor excuse like that.

That said, I think it's interesting that those who really succeed and do something major in the books often are the ones with absolutely no hope whatsoever. Merry describes Dernhelm as having "the face of one without hope, who goes in search of death," and he 's not wrong about that. Éowyn wants to die and she wants to die in battle. Even so, Is that what makes her brave enough to face the Witch King? She is described as ‘faithless beyond fear’ so perhaps it is her love of Théoden, but the rest of his knights also presumably love him. What is it that gives Éowyn alone the power to withstand the generally overwhelming aura of fear of the Witch King? Perhaps she simply has absolutely nothing left to lose. With nothing to lose and everything to gain -- she did, after all, go in search of death and glory – why not stand up to this foe? It is her despair. She is doing the deed for the deed itself and it will grant her exactly what she wants – death and glory.

Another line that stands out to me is in the cry of the Rohirrim:

"Out of doubt, out of dark, to the day's rising,
I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking,
Now for wrath, now for ruin, and a red nightfal."

What an odd combination. To hope's end and heart's breaking seems to be the uttermost depths of despair -- they are not going to win and they know it. But juxtaposed with that is 'Out of doubt, out of dark' and even more strangely, 'I came singing in the sun.' I come singing in the sun all the time and it's not usually because I think I'm about to meet my forefathers after a possibly agonizing death. In the case of the Pelennor Fields it is of course because the sun actually rose for the first time then, but even so, does it not sound like a line full of hope? I came singing in the sun, out of doubt, out of dark. Does this mean simply that they are ready now to meet their deaths with courage and perhaps even joy?
Further, Éomer’s battle cry after discovering both his uncle and his sister dead is “Death!” Whose death? The Orcs and Easterlings? That would probably make more sense, but somehow I always interpreted in my mind as his own death. Again, it sounds like a sort of fey and despairing joy to me. And it is so beautiful that it makes me want to cry.

So, moving on to Sam and Frodo, which is probably where I should have started but I’m very stream of consciousness so there you have it. Sam, in some ways, is a lot more interesting than Éowyn in terms of hope. He’s the one in the series that seems to say “Sure, why shouldn’t we do it?” Unlike most of the other characters, his loss of hope is a marked change, a defined moment. But that moment is when we really see what Sam is made of.

He had never had any real hope in the affair from the beginning; but being a cheerful hobbit he bad not needed hope, as long as despair could be postponed. Now they had come to the bitter end.

Just as he loses hope, he gains the strength and will he needs to go on, which is sort of odd. It seems that hope should be the thing that keeps you going, even if it’s that tiny glimmer of maybe not quite certain death, only probable death. For Éowyn, her hope IS death, so that makes sense. Even in death she wants glory and great deeds, but Sam doesn’t care about glory – even the Ring can’t make him want power. He doesn’t even think that Gandalf or Aragorn will ever know what they did. I really am fascinated by this because perhaps he just keeps going because it’s the right thing to do. He will get no reward, none whatsoever, but he feels that he must keep going and honestly, I don’t think he could have told himself why either, except that it’s because he said he would and he has to take care of Frodo.

Shippey says that this is Tolkien’s morality coming into play – people should do something because it is right not because of some inherent reward, which is essentially what Aragorn says to Éowyn, though I couldn’t tell you what the quote is.

Frodo is a different sort of take on it. He also never really had any hope in the affair, but this doesn’t seem to strengthen or weaken him. It’s just there, a part of existence like the certainty of Ragnorak was to the Norse. This goes along with Tolkien’s morality again. Whatever happens afterward isn’t important – Frodo knows he’s not going to make it and that’s essentially okay with him as long as he can do what needs to be done. Hope is extraneous.

Skipping over to the Sil/Children of Húrin (because I haven’t read it in ages so this is all I feel qualified to talk about), Túrin is sort of like Éowyn. He seems to know he is doomed. Betrayal follows him everywhere. He is betrayed or betrayor everywhere he goes and to everyone he loves, most notably of Beleg and Nienor. How can you have hope living like that, fleeing from fate? I don’t think he ever does, but he rails against it nonetheless. Unlike Éowyn and Sam and Denethor, I would say that Túrin actively fights against his complete lack of hope. Instead he is Turambar, master of fate. He loses anyway of course, but everyone else seems to take despair into stride.

Although the theory of courage is obviously very Northern I think it may also have been related to Tolkien’s experiences in the First World War. That was a ridiculous war. What hope is there in fighting for inches of mud, in desperate charges against a no man’s land, in filthy trenches? The war was pointless and thus no matter who surrendered to whom, everyone lost. And yet, despite all that, there was undoubtedly great courage and honour shown. One of my favourite stories from history in the 1914 Christmas in the trenches. Even without hope, even with the knowledge that it was probably all fruitless, they forged on holding off defeat and death as long as they could, just like Frodo and Sam.

So, there are some very incomplete and disorganized thoughts. I feel like I have more to say but after working on this for two weeks I still don’t know what, so do with them what you will.

Editted for bad coding.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

What a great post, Mossy! It's going to take some time before I can organize my own thoughts and come up with a proper response, but I wanted to take a moment to acknowledge it now.

I'll be back!!!!!!1

[WampusCat]

Ever since my very first reading of LOTR as a child, the theme that spoke to me the most -- thrilled me, even -- was that of endurance beyond hope. It definitely has the flavor of Norse mythology, as I learned later. But it is powerfully expressed by Tolkien.

It shaped my concept of courage. Before LOTR, I might have said that courage was the absence of fear, or at least the persistence of action because of an inner conviction that you would prevail. But how much more courageous is it to persist even though you do not expect to prevail, even though you see the goal as impossible to achieve, even though there is only darkness at the end of the tunnel?

[Inanna]

What a lovely post, mossy and .

I think one of the things I had found most heart-rending was when Frodo meets Gildor in the Lord of the Rings and asks:

But where shall I find courage? That is what I chiefly need.

Just imagine poor Frodo treading the unknown, waiting for Gandalf to appear and show him the way. At this point, he is a very young, innocent Hobbit who just wants to do this one errand and be back home. And while his second journey from Rivendell to Mordor was definitely the one with more despair, and required more courage, per se, it is always this Frodo that I think of - who slowly stepped into the outer world. Like the first step a baby takes.

I think the below sentence from LOTR is relevant:

There is a seed of courage hidden (often deeply, it is true) in the heart of the fattest and most timid hobbit, wailing for some final and desperate danger to make it grow

The Professor in this sentence almost makes courage, an alive, living thing of its own "wailing" for a chance to come out. However, what I wanted to focus on was the fact that the little hobbit does not know he has courage. He wants to find it... the thing hidden deep inside.

[Alatar]

Excellent post Mossy. The thing I'd be most interested in is the difference between Túrin and your other examples. Where each of the others met or embraced their despair/destiny, Túrin fought, ran and hid from his, to his eventual undoing and the loss of all he held dear. It appears that Tolkien would have us believe that acceptance of ones fate is the ideal state, but even Frodo who you refer to as never having had hope needs to fight the odds.

In some ways it reads a little like the christian ideal of sacrifice. Only by accepting death can you be saved. I wonder if Tolkien was deliberately saying this, or if it simply permeated his whole belief system to such an extent that it shines through in his writing. Is this "Christian" ideal also present in the older sagas that Tolkien preferred?

[MaidenOfTheShieldarm]

Excellent post Mossy. The thing I'd be most interested in is the difference between Túrin and your other examples. Where each of the others met or embraced their despair/destiny, Túrin fought, ran and hid from his, to his eventual undoing and the loss of all he held dear. It appears that Tolkien would have us believe that acceptance of ones fate is the ideal state, but even Frodo who you refer to as never having had hope needs to fight the odds.

In some ways it reads a little like the christian ideal of sacrifice. Only by accepting death can you be saved. I wonder if Tolkien was deliberately saying this, or if it simply permeated his whole belief system to such an extent that it shines through in his writing. Is this "Christian" ideal also present in the older sagas that Tolkien preferred?

Thanks Alatar. I think that's what interests me most, as well, though it only occurred to me just as I finished writing. I seem to recall Christopher Tolkien writing that the tale of Túrin was first written during or shortly after the First World War, while LOTR was written during and after the Second. They were awfully different wars which would produce and require very different attitudes. Túrin isn't really fighting anything specific. He's fighting fate, thus Turambar. WWI wasn't, as far as I know, about anything in particular so much as it was politics and jingoism. No one was after land or resources so much as they were after national pride which is a very elusive goal. So once you're in the war (which I suppose is true of any war, actually), you're just trying to survive, to get by, to win and get the whole blasted thing over with, which is essentially what Túrin is trying to do except for the getting it over with. World War Two had a very different sort of goal -- they were trying to defeat a very concrete and terrifying enemy, as were Frodo and Sam. That doesn't need hope. It's just something you have to do, just keep going no matter what. But for Túrin, with no tangible goal, fighting for that bit of hope that he might be able to conquer his doom was really all he had to go on.

You make a good point about the Christian ideal of sacrifice. I'm not sure if it's present in the older sagas but it wouldn't suprise me if it showed up to some degree. Even though Éowyn, Frodo, and Sam all accept their deaths without question, none of them stop fighting. In fact, Éowyn actively goes out to seek death just as Túrin goes out to actively seek some sort of life -- although she's still willing to sacrifice herself. Does this make Éowyn more noble than Túrin? More 'ideal'?

Wampus, I completely agree to the point that I don't think there is anything I could possibly add.

Thanks, Mahima. I like those quotes you pointed out. I suppose the Professor's answer to the first would be "In despair." Once you have no hope, you have nothing else to lose, do you?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I seem to recall Christopher Tolkien writing that the tale of Túrin was first written during or shortly after the First World War, while LOTR was written during and after the Second.

As if often the case, it is more complicated than that. LOTR was started before WWII began, and many of its most important themes were in place before that war began. And while the original version of the tale of Túrin was written as part of the Lost Tales in the late teens, not long after World War I ended, it was in the late forties and into the fifties, just after WWII was over, that the tale of Túrin became the chief matter that Tolkien was concerned with, and he drafted the incredibly complex array of materials that provided the fodder for both the version in the Silmarillion and the versions in Unfinished Tales and The Children of Húrin.

When I think of courage in Tolkien's work, I think most of Beren, and particularly, Lúthien. As Sam said, they faced an even darker place than he and Frodo did. Lúthien had the courage to challenge even Morgoth in his own lair. This is in contrast to Fingolfin, who challenged Morgoth out of desperation, and despair, and, yes, an utter lack of hope. I would not call Fingolfin act one of courage, but I would so call Lúthien's. And where did she find that courage. Of course, as the daughter of Thingol and Melian, and she had great inner resources. But the real source of her courage was her love of Beren. And the same with Beren. The same can be said, of course, about Samwise the Brave; the source of his courage was his love for his master. As for Éowyn, what was it that saved her from the death that she so actively sought? It was, of course, the love for her that awakened in the heart of Merry the courage to deal the Witchking such a vital blow at just the right time.

[truehobbit]

Lovely topic, Mossy, and good to see you again!

I'm not sure where to start. Maybe by saying that I haven't read CoH yet (though I got the book recently - go me! ), so I can't comment too much on Túrin.

I would like to say several things at once, so this is probably going to be a bit confused, as there is a mulitude of problems and questions involved for me in the ideas you present.

Let's start with the least pleasant: nordic courage.

The 'Battle of Maldon'-spirit, the Rohirrim-spirit are what you rightly, I think, connect to 'nordic courage', the 'Ragnarök'-mindset that sees death and doom as the inevitable end and yet draws its very determination for fighting from this.
It's the mindset that to a large extent inspired the culture and cult of Death the Nazis developed. You fight the harder because you mean to die. Death is the ultimate aim of the fight, really, because only in Death is glory.

Seeing this mindset as the result of following the 'nordic' concept to its logical conclusion, obviously I want to find an alternative strand of thought in Tolkien's use of the idea of courage unto death.

I think I can find it in thinking that, at least in LOTR, only Éowyn and the Rohirrim 'mean' to find death.
I admit I don't know enough about the Rohirrim as a culture, so I'll leave them for now.
Éowyn, however, IMO is not a 'normal' case. She's in no way what she should be, she's way off track with her wishes and hopes in life. And she wants to die because she despairs.
Yes, I think her 'nothing to lose' mindset helped her find her courage, but that is not a role-model. I don't think Tolkien meant to say: only if you've nothing to lose but all to gain can you find the necessary courage. She meant to die there, but fate intervened and threw a means of redeeming her suicidal notions in her way - Éowyn is not Dernhelm.
It was Dernhelm who was desparate enough to want to die, but I think it is a glimmer of hope that brings her back to being Éowyn - the Wiki has told her that if she is not a man, she may overcome him.

"Éowyn it was, and Dernhelm also." we hear the description of what Merry sees.
To me, this means they are two different aspects of her character. Dernhelm was an aberration, a creation of despair. Despair is not an acceptable condition. When Dernhelm leaves, Éowyn can come back.

Which brings me to the next problem: despair.

I think the word can be used in different senses. It's true that it comes up very often in LOTR, but sometimes it seems less serious than at other times.

For example, the hobbits look at the closed Black Gates 'in despair' - but that's more a feeling of powerlessness, of being aware there's nothing they can do, I think - they don't really feel hit very deeply by despair at this time.
At other times, 'despair' is the title of the Wiki, a weapon of Mordor - a much more profound kind of despair, I think.

In the 'Anne of Green Gables'-series (sorry if that seems like a flippant source to draw from, but I've always found this line very memorable), Marilla once answers Anne's question whether she had been 'in the depths of despair' by saying: "to despair is to turn your back on God".
I think this is quite correct, and, for me, a reason that Tolkien can't have considered despair an acceptable state of mind.

So, I also don't think that Frodo or Sam 'despair' to achieve their aim, even though they don't have hope to succeed and even though they 'despair' of achieving their task explicitly a lot. They don't fall victim to the kind of despair the Wiki spreads around him, the kind that paralyses the victim and takes all power of resistance from him. It seems to me that the word is used differently there.

I think what comes in here is Tolkien's idea of a hope that goes beyond reason; a hope not for something that can be expected by calculating however slim a chance, but a hope or trust that remains even after all humanly possibly calculations have led to a zero result, a point at which human calculations would recommend despair, but the very point at which Frodo and Sam do not despair.
(I seem to remember Tolkien had a word for this, but I can't think of what it was.)

For me, to counteract all that nordic doom and talk of despair is what Alatar mentioned, the Christian ideal of sacrifice.

Only by accepting death can you be saved

In the context of LOTR, I'd generalise it even a bit more and say: only by accepting whatever sacrifice is asked - it might be your life, but it needn't be, but the point is you can't draw a line anywhere and say 'this is how much I'll give but not more'.

(And, in fact, I think this is a humanly universally valid thing: that there are situations where you're lost as soon as you limit your willingness to give, quite un-metaphysical situations that ask your 'all', i.e. I wouldn't determine whether Tolkien was thinking in Christian or in human terms here - but I hope that readers who are a bit offended by pointing out Christian parallels will understand that it's striking to me, so that's why I call it what it is to me.)

Yes, I think that Frodo's acceptance is the key to his 'success' (a debatable term, I know ). But I wouldn't call what he accepts 'fate', but the task that destiny had meant for him in the hope that he would accept.

This sacrifice is no desperate running into death because all else seems futile. It's an altruistic act, whereas the old running into death for glory is essentially selfish.
And that's where I think I can see Tolkien taking the 'nordic' ideas off their gruesome tracks and setting them on a new course.


None of which really answers the question of the thread, I guess, which I think boils down to: is it hope or despair that gives courage to the characters in LOTR?

I think it's neither. They don't have hope, that's true. Despair can give strength (there's a German idiomatic expression, to do something 'with the strength/courage of despair' - is there something similar in English?), but true despair is an agent of evil.

What gives the characters the strength and courage to persevere is a kind of trust, I think, the trust that is hope beyond reason.
But also their own sacrifice - what you said right at the beginning, Mossy, doing something because it's right, because it's giving a willingly accepted sacrifice with no expectations of reward for themselves.



ETA: crossposted with Voronwë

Lúthien had the courage to challenge even Morgoth in his own lair. This is in contrast to Fingolfin, who challenged Morgoth out of desperation, and despair, and, yes, an utter lack of hope. I would not call Fingolfin act one of courage, but I would so call Lúthien's. And where did she find that courage. Of course, as the daughter of Thingol and Melian, and she had great inner resources. But the real source of her courage was her love of Beren. And the same with Beren. The same can be said, of course, about Samwise the Brave; the source of his courage was his love for his master. As for Éowyn, what was it that saved her from the death that she so actively sought? It was, of course, the love for her that awakened in the heart of Merry the courage to deal the Witchking such a vital blow at just the right time.

I think that's spot-on, Voronwë! And Frodo's love was the Shire.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

And Frodo's love was the Shire.

Very true. Thanks for filling that detail in, hobby!

[MaidenOfTheShieldarm]

That was a really interesting post (and certainly less confused than mine!), Hobby, and it's nice to see you, too.

None of which really answers the question of the thread, I guess, which I think boils down to: is it hope or despair that gives courage to the characters in LOTR?

I think it's neither. They don't have hope, that's true. Despair can give strength (there's a German idiomatic expression, to do something 'with the strength/courage of despair' - is there something similar in English?), but true despair is an agent of evil.

What gives the characters the strength and courage to persevere is a kind of trust, I think, the trust that is hope beyond reason.
But also their own sacrifice - what you said right at the beginning, Mossy, doing something because it's right, because it's giving a willingly accepted sacrifice with no expectations of reward for themselves.

Lúthien had the courage to challenge even Morgoth in his own lair. This is in contrast to Fingolfin, who challenged Morgoth out of desperation, and despair, and, yes, an utter lack of hope. I would not call Fingolfin act one of courage, but I would so call Lúthien's. And where did she find that courage. Of course, as the daughter of Thingol and Melian, and she had great inner resources. But the real source of her courage was her love of Beren. And the same with Beren. The same can be said, of course, about Samwise the Brave; the source of his courage was his love for his master. As for Éowyn, what was it that saved her from the death that she so actively sought? It was, of course, the love for her that awakened in the heart of Merry the courage to deal the Witchking such a vital blow at just the right time.

Perhaps, even probably, I'm looking at this wrong then. It is love that turns Dernhelm back into Éowyn and love that ultimately saves Éowyn. It is love that keeps Frodo and Sam going. It is love that gives Beren and Lúthien the strength to do what they do. Sacrificing all that you have, giving up any concern for what may happen to you, is in a way the ultimate act of love.

Does that tie in somehow with the theory of courage? I wonder if you're right, that Tolkien did find despair abhorrent. I don't think he did, although perhaps I'm projecting. It goes back to what Alatar was saying about the ideal of sacrifice. If you mean to die (or do whatever necessary) and do not hope to survive, you are willing to give more. Once you've accepted that it's easier to give everything up, because otherwise, like Sam wanting to ration for the way back, you may be inclined to hold back things you might need.

I think what comes in here is Tolkien's idea of a hope that goes beyond reason; a hope not for something that can be expected by calculating however slim a chance, but a hope or trust that remains even after all humanly possibly calculations have led to a zero result, a point at which human calculations would recommend despair, but the very point at which Frodo and Sam do not despair.

I think we may be talking about the same sort of thing from different perspectives. The hope they have is that somehow what they are doing will save the Shire and Middle-earth. It's not really success that they explicitly hope for. Again, it's doing what they have to do for no other reason than that it needs to be done. But I do think they honestly despair because neither of them expect even a chance of getting back and in the end they aren't even sure that anyone will even know what they've done (which is an interesting contrast to their conversation about whether stories will be told about them).

And that's where I think I can see Tolkien taking the 'nordic' ideas off their gruesome tracks and setting them on a new course.

Agreed, and that is where the beauty comes from.

[Andreth]

While I need to read this thread more carefully, I did have this little saying to add: "Courage is fear that has said it's prayers."

[Inanna]

Tolkien coined a term when discussing "Fairy-stories" in his essay: eucatastrophe - happy ending snatched from the possibility and imminence of total failure. He says:

[eucatastrophe] denies (in the face of much evidence, if you will) universal final defeat and is so far is evangelium, giving a fleeting glimpse of Joy, Joy beyond the walls of the world, poignant as grief

Now, whether "despair" captures the feeling of "universal final defeat" or not is debatable, but Tolkien seems to be stressing this point of fighting in the face of no hope at all.... and going towards "Joy". In this light, I would say Fingolfin showed courage, as did Lúthien, Éowyn, Frodo and Sam. Whether the actions are driven by love, or a blinding desire to do something, that action is towards the path of Joy.

[solicitr]

I think there's a disttinction to be made between the Ragnarok-spirit exhibited by Éowyn and the Rohirrim, and true *despair*, such as the Nazgûl spread:

...letting their weapons fall from nerveless hands while into their minds a blackness came, and they thought no more of war; but only of hiding and crawling, and of death.*

Despair involves a sense not just of futility but of impotence, of personal irrelevance.

This is as clear as anywhere in Denethor. Is this not, in effect, what he does? We learn at the end he has waked and slept in mail and sword like some uberCatholic's hair-shirt; so why, if he sensed the end, did he not go out to the fight, and "make a good end" such as Éomer sought?


*Surely Tolkien himself had observed this under the hideous shelling on the Western Front: Tommies mentally breaking in just such a fashion.

[Lhaewin]

Despair involves a sense not just of futility but of impotence, of personal irrelevance.

This is as clear as anywhere in Denethor. Is this not, in effect, what he does? We learn at the end he has waked and slept in mail and sword like some uberCatholic's hair-shirt; so why, if he sensed the end, did he not go out to the fight, and "make a good end" such as Éomer sought?

Denethor is probably the opposite of all those "courageous" characters who keep focussing on their goals like Éowyn (glory in death), Frodo (the destruction of the Ring), Sam (the protection and support of his master) etc. although there is only dark to be expected at the end of the tunnel (very striking image, Wampus).

Denethor can't cope with Boromir's death and he experiences despair (as described by solicitr) in the most negative meaning of the word. He can't see any sense in fighting because the loss deprives him of his spirit and probably his sanity. Without his first-born son neither death in battle nor survival is a desirable achievement. Duty, as in "what has to be done" becomes irrelevant for him. (If he was a character in Harry Potter, I should say that he met a Dementor. )

[Jnyusa]

Wow, super post, Mossy!

Apologies that I can't compose a fitting response for the next few days, but I'll be back.

Jn

[River]

I didn't know much about the nordic outlook on life and death before reading this thread. As I saw it, the courage in the LOTR and the Sil was born of that weird power that comes from having nothing left to lose. So much of what we fear boils down to the fear of loss. If there's nothing left to lose, then what's the point in being afraid? I wouldn't call that state of mind despair though. There is no strength in despair. Desperation would be a better word. If the good side in either the Sil or LOTR had despaired, they would have surrendered as Denethor ultimately did. Instead, they held on to the end, fighting past all hope because they would not surrender.

I'm not so sure about the Túrin/Éowyn parallel to be honest. Túrin was chained up in a curse, as were the rest of his kin. Éowyn, however, was not so shackled. She made her choices, and rode to battle out of both the desperation of the situation in Rohan and every other free territory west of Mordor and the desperation of unrequited love. I've always been a little irritated with Éowyn. It was definitely a good thing she showed up, but, at the same time, she had a job to do back in Rohan and she abandoned her responsibilities. There was courage in what she did, but there was selfishness as well.

[WampusCat]

Suicide is inherently selfish, even if takes the form of throwing your life away in glorious battle. And I always felt that Éowyn was seeking death more than glory when she rode as Dernhelm. Even her desire to protect and fight with those she loved was less of a motivation, I think.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[I split off the discussion about Fate and Free Will in LOTR and the Silmarillion to avoid continuing to osgiliate Mossy's thread.

[Faramond]

Frodo and Sam probably should have died. There were in the heart of Mordor when the ring was destroyed, surrounded by fire, smoke, upheavals of earth, that sort of thing. I honestly don't remember the specifics. They were effectively dead. I guess they knew it. They stayed alive as long as they could, and then their fate came for them.

Given the situation they were in, that fate should have been death. But Tolkien chose life. He lifted them out of the fire by whatever contrivance was handy and made them keep on living. Life is harder than death. But especially for Frodo. He was all set up for a noble sacrifice, and he didn't get it. Gandalf could have told everyone what Frodo did, the sacrifice he made. He would have been dead, at peace, and effectively canonized as a sort of Middle-Earth saint.

But no, he had to live on. He had to live and remember the failure and humiliation of claiming the ring. Is that right, humiliation? Just a little bit. To get all that way, work so hard, and then screw up at the very end? He fell short of his own inner goals. But that's often life. There's a lot of humiliation in life, if you go looking for it. If you can't accept certain limitations and truths I guess it will find you quite often. Life teaches humility or it forces humiliation. For Frodo it must have been mostly been humility, but insofar as he blamed himself for his failure at the end it was humiliation.

The courageous do not hide. When the Rohirrim shout their dark battle cry, when one of them such as Éomer shouts "death", they are making themselves visible to death. They aren't hiding from it. They are riding toward it. But that's not the same as suicide. Suicide is hiding from life; cowardice is hiding from death.

I consider fate as not a path you are set to follow no matter what but the events that have arrived around you, the choices that have fallen to you. Usually difficult choices, else one won't bother calling them fate.

I guess it's appropriate that the ring makes most wearers hidden. It's an escape from the difficulties everyone else presents, the fates they bring. Claiming the ring means listening to no one else, considering no one else. No other voices but the voice of the ring. No fate, no difficult choices. The user of the ring hides inside of it.

Éowyn does appear seek death when she rides out as Dernhelm. I know many argue she deserted her duty by abandoning the task set for her, but I think it's daft to expect her to suddenly follow a man's duty when she has never before been treated as someone who could take on a man's duty. All that she had ever seen in her life was that courage was to embrace the possibility of death and ride into battle. That was her culture. Even when all hope was gone from her she would not hide. She embraced courage the only way she knew how: she rode out to meet her death.

[axordil]

I guess it's appropriate that the ring makes most wearers hidden. It's an escape from the difficulties everyone else presents, the fates they bring. Claiming the ring means listening to no one else, considering no one else. No other voices but the voice of the ring. No fate, no difficult choices. The user of the ring hides inside of it.

And yet it's only an illusory escape. Perhaps all such escapes are.

Good discussion, fun to read, lots to think about.