Personally, I feel that Frodo's mission was successful, but ultimately it wasn't because of him, at least at the end. He choked at the end. It is certainly reminiscent to Isildur. He had the opportunity to destroy the ring, but he just couldn't do it. To me, especially in the books, Frodo doesn't really seem like the hero of the books. He is definitely a necessary character, but if anything he is more of a martyr. We watch the ring destroy Frodo. All of the other protagonists seem to grow throughout the books, but Frodo is torn down. He is not the same Hobbit on the return journey. It seems that Frodo's personality is as much of a casualty of the books as other characters who actually die, like Theoden or Boromir.
It truly is a disappointment at the end when Frodo comes up short, but it certainly reaffirms the importance of Sam. It also shows that even the Hobbits are not immune to the corruption of the ring. I would doubt many other people would be able to bear the ring in Mordor itself without being torn apart from the inside out though. It is amazing that Frodo was able to deal with it as long as he did, and we are just lucky the he finally cracked at the very end. If he caved any sooner, the mission would have almost certainly been a failure, and the realm of Middle-earth would be destroyed by Sauron and his forces.
I had never thought of Frodo as a casualty in the war before. That is such an interesting idea! We walked a little bit in class about how Tolkien didn't like how Disney put a "happily ever after" spin on fairy tales and your post supports that idea. I also think that breaking down Frodo in the end was a very powerful and poignant move on Tolkien's part. Frodo dealt with some serious trauma throughout his journey so it wouldn't really fit that he came out of it better than before. I think Tolkien is trying to show that there is darkness in the world and that we can't escape the darkness unscathed.
ReplyDelete*talked not walked
ReplyDelete