Do you think Bilbo Baggins is a hero or an anti-hero?

[viktòria]

I'm currently writing an essay for school and I just need a couple more opinions on this topic...

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Definitely hero! Because The Hobbit is a children's story, where one of the themes is about growing up, Bilbo begins as a rather naive, "normal" character who grows into his role.

Curiously enough, there's a somewhat related discussion going on at the moment you might find of interest:

https://thetolkien.forum/threads/do...villain-or-an-anti-villain.31615/#post-597182

And welcome to our forum, viktòria!
I hope you'll consider sticking around -- there's much to discover, and much fun to be had here. If you'd like to introduce yourself "formally" we have a New Members forum:

https://thetolkien.forum/forums/new-members.58/

 

[Maeglin]

Is this a question that you formulated, or a prompt that was given to you by your instructor? If it was your own, I am curious as to why you think Bilbo would be considered an anti-hero?

If it was from your instructor, I'm curious as to why they would provide this prompt. It seems a bit simplistic, or rather, it uses too simplistic of a text for the prompt, in my opinion. From a literary perspective, I can see some of the qualities of an anti-hero, but ultimately Bilbo's actions fall much more into the category of purely heroic than anything particularly resembling an anti-hero.

And yes, I left everything above intentionally vague and elusive because the English / literature teacher in me wants to make sure this young poster is using their own reasoning based on textual evidence, not just what we might say and provide here in this thread (what can I say, the teacher bit of me is almost part of my dna at this point).

 

[Ent]

the English / literature teacher in me wants to make sure this young poster is using their own reasoning based on textual evidence

Indeed, the 'teacher of many colours' in me agrees, yet also knows 'input' (as long as it's carefully considered) can be very helpful for spurring alternate perspective.

That said, the question would be better stated "...Baggins is a hero or anti-hero, and WHY... based on WHAT? Provide textual support please."

(That's also why I provide definitions at times. If our foundation isn't accurate, the building will collapse.)

'Learning never ends, Watson. Life is a series of lessons, with the greatest for the last.' (Sherlock Holmes)

 

[Deimos]

Do you think Bilbo Baggins is a hero or an anti-hero?​

Actually I think this is a trick question.
The obvious answer is that he is a hero.... But that's too easy.
Even tho' he has heroic thoughts, and does heroic things (if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...),
Well, maybe he's not a duck hero...maybe he's an incognito anti-hero.
But what if that's what your supposed to think: that the question is too easy, and the teacher knows how you will likely answer it, so there is a hidden meaning in the question.
But you know that he/she knows that you know, so maybe the answer is that he really is a hero.
But he/she no doubt has guessed that you know that he/she knows that you know the real answer.
We need someone of surpassing wit to answer this....

 

[Ent]

We need someone of surpassing wit to answer this....

One of my all time favorite scenes.

 

[Maeglin]

Do you think Bilbo Baggins is a hero or an anti-hero?​

Actually I think this is a trick question.
The obvious answer is that he is a hero.... But that's too easy.
Even tho' he has heroic thoughts, and does heroic things (if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...),
Well, maybe he's not a duck hero...maybe he's an incognito anti-hero.
But what if that's what your supposed to think: that the question is too easy, and the teacher knows how you will likely answer it, so there is a hidden meaning in the question.
But you know that he/she knows that you know, so maybe the answer is that he really is a hero.
But he/she no doubt has guessed that you know that he/she knows that you know the real answer.
We need someone of surpassing wit to answer this....

Love it! I watch this movie almost every christmas (not sure why, since it's not remotely a christmas movie) and now you've got me excited and looking forward to it again!

 

[Deimos]

Love it! I watch this movie almost every christmas (not sure why, since it's not remotely a christmas movie) and now you've got me excited and looking forward to it again!

Me too... but not just Christmas...anytime I'm feeling down.
(Chicken Run lifts my spirits too😊)

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Yay! Let's make every thread a movie thread! 😄

So here's a question about my favorite pick-me-up movie: is Rick hero or antihero?

My answer is hero -- despite his originally "antiheroic" stance, he comes through in the end.

And the same is true of Bilbo -- despite the "Baggins side" of his personality.

Heroic arcs come in varieties: some, like Aragorn, are heroic from the beginning. Some like Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam, become heroes.

 

[Deimos]

Yay! Let's make every thread a movie thread! 😄

So here's a question about my favorite pick-me-up movie: is Rick hero or antihero?
View attachment 26927
My answer is hero -- despite his originally "antiheroic" stance, he comes through in the end.

And the same is true of Bilbo -- despite the "Baggins side" of his personality.

Heroic arcs come in varieties: some, like Aragorn, are heroic from the beginning. Some like Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam, become heroes.

Anti-hero is not someone who doesn't want to be a hero, or doesn't intend to be a hero (or heroic)
Those folks (Bilbo, Sam, Aragorn et al) are what may better be described as "reluctant heroes". And Boromir is a tragic hero.
And Rick Blaine is merely cynical, but no anti-hero.

An anti-hero is a person whose behavior is bad [evil], even criminal. They are typically not very likeable.
If he does something that that has good results, whatever it is he has done is not for the good result but for his own selfish reasons.
The good result is a secondary, even unintended, outcome. Whatever good resulted secondarily can be sure the primary outcome was for his own benefit.
Harry Flashman is an excellent example of an anti-hero (except that he was written as more as picaresque anti-hero, someone who has some [limited] appeal.)

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I quoted my idea of "antihero" in the thread I linked above.

An anti-hero is a person whose behavior is bad [evil], even criminal.

That definition would include some of the greatest tragic heroes of literature. Maybe my understanding of the concept is flawed, but I can't see Turin or Boromir as antiheroes; they follow a familiar story-arc of the traditional tragic hero.

BTW, as far as I know, only movie-Aragorn is in any way reluctant.

 

[Deimos]

I quoted my idea of "antihero" in the thread I linked above.

That definition would include some of the greatest tragic heroes of literature. Maybe my understanding of the concept is flawed, but I can't see Turin or Boromir as antiheroes; they follow a familiar story-arc of the traditional tragic hero.

BTW, as far as I know, only movie-Aragorn is in any way reluctant.

From where are you getting your definition of "anti-hero"?

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I gave one source here:
Post in thread 'Do you think Gollum is closer to a villain or an anti-villain?' https://thetolkien.forum/threads/do...-villain-or-an-anti-villain.31615/post-597116

Edit: I readily admit that several different definitions exist.

 

[Deimos]

I gave one source here:
Post in thread 'Do you think Gollum is closer to a villain or an anti-villain?' https://thetolkien.forum/threads/do...-villain-or-an-anti-villain.31615/post-597116

Edit: I readily admit that several different definitions exist.

I've decided to back away from this discussion (the serious part) because there currently is no common definition of anti-hero.
I do maintain that Bilbo was a reluctant hero (and I know the "reluctant hero" Aragorn was a movie invention), and Boromir was a tragic hero.
I suppose you could define it as a character who displays none of the exceptionally virtuous qualities normally associated with heroes, traditionally identified as such. Yet who, at some point(s) in the narrative still act heroically. But that is a more modern definition.

It was not always so. Prior to the 18th C. an anti hero was someone who not only didn't display heroic qualities, he was displayed the exact opposite qualities; anti- meaning "against" i.e cowardice (against bravery), rudeness (against honor/nobility), mendacity (against honesty), imprudence (patience/good judgement) drunkenness (against temperance) .
He wasn't a villain; he was just a character who had no heroic qualities at all, for which you despised him.
Thersites of the Iliad was used as an example of an anti-hero.
Odysseus beat him up for his bad behavior. And you, the reader were glad that he got beaten up.
If you go buy the old definition you can see that Boromir is not an antihero and I guess Turin not either (tho' I haven't read the Sil).
(And neither is Ricky 😉)

 

[finarvyn]

To me, it's obvious that Bilbo is a hero. True, he acquires the Ring in a slightly unheroic manner and he does bend the truth about it (depending upon the version you read) but fundamentally he is a good person doing good things. He is trying to help his friends and colleagues achieve their goals. He is trying to do things to help good people and defeat evil ones. While I can't defend each and every one of his actions, the totality of the character of Bilbo is clearly significantly more hero than anti-hero. In my opinion. (And some of those negative actions could be attributed to properties of the Ring, although that material hadn't been written yet.)

 

[Olorgando]

If you go buy the old definition you can see that Boromir is not an antihero and I guess Turin not either (tho' I haven't read the Sil).

Mentioning Túrin always makes me think of the source that inspired JRRT for this character, Kullervo from the Finnish Kalevala.
When JRRT actually wrote his version is difficult to pin down. Verlyn Flieger, editor of the 2015 book "The Story of Kullervo", puts the best guess at 1912-14, during JRRT's time as n undergraduate at Oxford. He smoothed some of the roughness of the Finnish original, and smoothed more when he transformed the figure into Túrin Turambar. So the Finnish Kullervo (with which I'm unfamiliar) may have fit the concept of anti-hero quite well.
Another figure of northern Europe is Loki of the Norse pantheon. I've only browsed a bit in a book we have about the Elder or Poetic Edda, but gave it up because the characters seemed to be a bunch of nut-cases. A lot of the "fundamental unreason" that JRRT ascribed in a letter to Celtic mythology. I've read a bit of that (Cu Chulainn and Finn Mac Cumhal), and fail to see much if any difference in that aspect.

 

[Ent]

I have written on this elsewhere, but feel I would add these last few words.
Rather than laying down my own opinion of them all, and whether I think they be heroes or anti-heroes, I think I'll look into the text.
How did Aragorn view Bilbo? How Galadriel and Elrond? And how did they view Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin?
And how was Boromir seen by all?
And lastly, how did Tolkien view them? What can we discern from his Letters?

I have this morning reviewed much text. (Though far from all.)
I can find no inkling of 'anti-hero' seen in any of them among the persons with whom they had to do.
They all seem to be revered.

And in the end, we need to remember even Lobelia Sckville-Baggins was perceived as a 'hero' in her turnaround from selfish corruption. Perhaps she is the classic anti-villain, who knows.

But it seems in the mind of man, what counts is not where we come FROM... but where we end up in the end, defining 'our life' as a whole.

Bilbo was a clueless carrier of the ring, and needed help in letting it go. Yet he bore it as he was intended to do, until the time for it to move on came...and to no ill-will.

And we recall he was the first to step forward to take the Ring to Mt. Doom to destroy it, but was 'rejected', it not being his task. When he did this, he was no longer 'clueless', but very well informed.

Frodo bore the ring for a lesser time, but did so with his eyes wide open. It could be said he was 'reluctant', as the decision took some time for him to make, and 'a great dread fell on him...' as the realization came upon him.

I'm not exactly sure what makes an 'anti-hero', but I'm relatively certain what makes for a 'hero.'

My own trust will be in the text and its maker, and the attributes given the people within the text in these matters...and how they are perceived by others in the end.

In Bilbo's case (to the thread title) I hardly think a trip West would have been his, were he but an 'anti-hero'.

As Shannon L. Alder said: “Heroes are not made. They are born out of circumstances and rise to the occasion when their spirit can no longer coexist with the hypocrisy of injustice to others.”

Anti-Hero: "a central character in a story, movie, or drama who lacks conventional heroic attributes."

Gollum probably qualifies as the very image of an anti-hero according to this definition: He's central, and in the end is the 'employed cause' of the Ring's destruction. But he holds no other heroic characteristics of one. He will forever be pitied by all to a degree, but it was his own weak character driving him to where he went.

Some may put Saruman in the 'anti-hero' category, but I can't. He had heroic attributes in the beginning, but was slowly overthrown by his own personal choices, becomming simply a villain.

Boromir fell to the ring as Gollum had, even without having possession of it... though it took more time... and who knows what would have happened had he gotten it. Yet he was spared by the ring escaping his grasp, and 'recovered' due to its further distance from him, to end on a 'heroic' note.

Anyway, for me, once again, after much pondering, all the text seems to indicate Bilbo is a hero, who had a final moment of failure with the ring, just as Frodo ultimately did. The 'anti-hero' finished the task... and there is a reason for Tolkien's employing that technique.

 

[viktòria]

hey sorry, I just wanted to clear things up, the actual question of my essay is 'To what extent can Bilbo be described as a quintessential hero?' however a part of my essay is about, whether Bilbo can be called an anti-hero and since I had some troubles there and needed a second opinion I thought why not ask other people that have an idea what I'm talking about. Also, the word quintessential is more or less a synonym for the word ideal or perfect. But apart from that thank you so much for all your replies in such a short amount of time, I really appreciate it🙏🙏

Is this a question that you formulated, or a prompt that was given to you by your instructor? If it was your own, I am curious as to why you think Bilbo would be considered an anti-hero?

If it was from your instructor, I'm curious as to why they would provide this prompt. It seems a bit simplistic, or rather, it uses too simplistic of a text for the prompt, in my opinion. From a literary perspective, I can see some of the qualities of an anti-hero, but ultimately Bilbo's actions fall much more into the category of purely heroic than anything particularly resembling an anti-hero.

And yes, I left everything above intentionally vague and elusive because the English / literature teacher in me wants to make sure this young poster is using their own reasoning based on textual evidence, not just what we might say and provide here in this thread (what can I say, the teacher bit of me is almost part of my dna at this point).

Hey Maeglin!! the question and the whole idea of the essay were indeed given to me by my instructor since my essay that I wrote before was almost finished when they told me that it did not fit in any categories of the IB in the extended essay. Since I should have already been finished but had to start again my instructor gave me an idea of a question that would still be related to the Hobbit or Tolkien.

 

[Ent]

But apart from that thank you so much for all your replies in such a short amount of time, I really appreciate it

Ah, @viktòria, should you hang out amongst us for any length of time, you'll find the most clear and innocent question can send our family here into pages and pages of discussion over minutiae, with many tangential discussions included.

We're all about probing, learning, sharing and growing.
Thank you for the opportunity to peer into the hallways and corners of the subject.

ADDED NOTE: To your direct question: was he the 'quintessential' hero? No, I think not. He failed in the end. The quintessential hero does not fail.

The quintessential hero is a work of fiction. No one is above failure at some point. Tolkien wrote of reality, in the midst of his fantasy.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

He failed in the end.

Where, exactly? Certainly not in The Hobbit. And not in LOTR, though he came close.

I'd be interested in more on your idea. Maybe I missed something. 🤔