"The Shadow of the Past" - Ben's Thoughts

My general thought about "The Shadow of the Past" is "heavy on exposition." Pretty simplistic and obvious, but there it is. On my re-reads of LOTR, this chapter always strikes me as one that was probably a lot more fun to read the first time through. It tends to drag on subsequent re-reads. Let's dive right into Gandalf's explanation of the Ring that sets up the rest of the story, and I'll get to the bookends of the chapter -- characterization of Sam Gamgee -- in a minute.

Right from the beginning of Gandalf and Frodo's chat, the reader is clued in to the fact that LOTR is going to be "darker and edgier" (™) than The Hobbit. "Goblins" have become "orcs," trolls are no longer dull-witted (no Bert and Fred in evidence here), and "worse things" are apparently abroad (no real follow-up on this, perhaps Gandalf was referring to the Nazgûl, but if I recall correctly he seems genuinely surprised that they show up in the Shire later). This chapter alone references not only Sauron and his minions, but dwarves, ancient elves (both high-Elves and wood-elves), men of "Westernesse" (I had no idea what this was referring to before I read Silmarillion), and the names of hobbit breeds (Stoors vs. Fallohides, particularly). A ton of complexity added in just one short chapter.

This change from Hobbit's simplicity is both a blessing and a boon at these early stages. Some things (like "Westernesse") leave the reader out to sea, I believe. I don't think Tolkien does a good enough job of clarifying what the relationship of Sauron was to the Ring-makers in this chapter. When I was a kid, I had no idea who or what they were; even the appendices did not clear that up much (the name of the chief Ring-maker, "Celebrimbor," was exceedingly opaque) and not until the Silmarillion did I understand that these were Noldor, led by a descendant of Feänor. Since the history of the rings is never really very relevant to the story after this point, I suppose that Tolkien didn't need to spend a lot of time on it or clarify it to the degree that would have pleased me, but it does seem like something of a flaw.

Additionally, the existence of "rings" within the story always felt a little odd after delving into Tolkien's mythos a bit more. From Silmarillion, it's clear that Elves (especially the Eldar, or those that chose to go to "Valinor," Tolkien's take on the Asgard of Norse myths) had a lot of power in and of themselves, but it was mainly linked to their personal righteousness and morality -- when the Elves became more concerned with material things (a recurring theme throughout the Silmarillion) and especially when they made questionable decisions connected with their lust after comforts and objects that represented physical beauty, their powers waned and they were able to be overcome by the powers of evil (the fallen god Morgoth in Silmarillion, of whom Sauron was only a lieutenant). So where do rings fit in with that spectrum of power and morality? It's kind of hand-waved that Celebrimbor and the Ring-makers were able to pour parts of their own power into the Rings of Power (thus sort-of explaining why the power of the Elves fades at the end of the book, when the Three Rings become useless), but how exactly does the One Ring have power over the other races' rings? And how exactly did Sauron corrupt the work of the Ring-makers with respect to the Seven and Nine rings? It's all very fuzzy, and, I think, something of a cheap hand-wave to explain why a "magic ring" is the MacGuffin of the story when it really doesn't fit in all that well. It seems to me that Tolkien was boxed in a little bit by the fact that The Hobbit had a magic ring in it 'because that's the sort of thing that shows up in these stories' (I think there's even a line in Hobbit to that effect).

Now, don't get me wrong, the Ring is a compelling icon in the books, even in this initial chapter. Its insidious effect is quite potent, and brings forth interesting facets in all the characters that encounter it directly. Even here, the physical description of the Ring itself gets more screen-time than any description of the physical attributes of Frodo himself (a concept I think I'll touch on in subsequent chapters more than here):

"It now appeared plain and smooth, without mark or device that he could see. The gold looked very fair and pure, and Frodo thought how rich and beautiful was its color, how perfect was its roundness. It was an admirable thing and altogether precious." [Note how he sneaks the word 'precious' in there, after Gandalf made such a big deal about it earlier. Very clever.]

In the end, all this makes me wonder how Tolkien changed "Bilbo's magic ring" to "The One Ring" conceptually in his mind, and whether that was the plan all along. I doubt it. I'm sure someone who is more versed in Tolkien lore than I would be able to answer this question, but I don't know if anyone else here can -- would I be wrong in saying that I have read the most Tolkien between the three of us? Has anyone else read The Silmarillion? What about any of the Unfinished Tales or other supplemental material published by Christopher Tolkien? I have read a few of these, but certainly not everything that's out there.

Anyway, moving on. Beyond the backstory, what I was most interested in during my read of this chapter was the characterization. Gandalf doesn't get too much, aside from being mysterious -- although it is telling that he makes several quite cutting put-downs towards Frodo. Like this one, for example, when Frodo asks why he was chosen (by the mysterious 'powers that be' that Gandalf referenced; what exactly was he talking about there? The Valar?):

"'Such questions cannot be answered,' said Gandalf. 'You may be sure that [you did not receive the Ring] for any merit that others do not possess: not for power or wisdom, at any rate. But you have been chosen, and you must therefore use such strength and heart and wits as you have.'"

Ouch. Gandalf is also quite arrogant about his knowledge and power, refusing to share things with Frodo even when asked point-blank. I wonder if Tolkien is here setting him up for his fall in his confrontation with Saruman. I always thought Tolkien was quite clever in removing Gandalf from much of Book 1 of "Fellowship," because it raises the stakes for the poor bumbling hobbits, but it is interesting in light of how much we see of him at this point.

Tolkien also spends a bit more time on Frodo here -- finally -- and I can certainly relate to Frodo's restlessness. He feels something pulling him towards the mountains, towards adventure (even so much that mountains are appearing in his dreams), and I don't think this is any insidious effect of the Ring -- I think it is his own nature that wishes to explore the wide world. I myself feel a very powerful connection to mountains in particular. I live in a (relatively) flat place, and deeply miss the mountains of my college days. Frodo's sense of time passing and and anxiousness to get in motion is something that I believe we have all experienced in our lives. Our finite existence (depending on what you believe, at least finite in our present state of being) continually presses upon us.

Finally we get to Sam. Right off the bat, Sam is presented extremely sympathetically, standing up to Ted Sandyman and generally coming across as a thoughtful individual quite different from most of the hobbits we have encountered to this point. Perhaps more tellingly is the fact that Sam walks home thoughtful under the stars -- stars are almost always associated with the Elves in Tolkien's mythos (they are called, after all, the "Quendi" -- "people of the stars"), and an interest in Elves is always associated with a sense of self and community greater than just the immediate here and now.

But what is interesting about this introduction is what a contrast it is with the buffoonish Sam we encounter at the end of the chapter. Here he's characterized with bad jokes, poor excuses, and, perhaps most damningly, a pair of "Lor bless me"s that could not be further from his quiet strength we saw earlier. Why this change? Was it simply that Tolkien wrote one of these scenes earlier than the other, and didn't reconcile the two Sam's? That would make a lot of sense to me -- the Sam at the beginning of the chapter is a lot like the thoughtful hero we encounter in "Return of the King." Or perhaps Tolkien was emphasizing the class disparity between Frodo and Sam; the dialect is certainly played up in the scene that features the two of them together. I don't know if I have any answers, but I was decidedly put-off by the "dunce" Sam that we see at the end of the chapter.

In the end, "Shadow of the Past" glided through almost completely neutrally for me. I didn't talk much about the backstory itself, because it didn't do a lot for me -- I have read about it so many times before that it doesn't feel fresh anymore. I loved Sam's introduction at the beginning -- but that was all undone by his final appearance in the chapter. Dunno. I'm beginning to recall that this stretch of Book 1 was a little tedious. Things don't really pick up until we get to Bree. We'll have to see going forward.