Samwise Gamgee

Probably Sam was born on 6 April 2983. 'Samwise' means 'half-wise' (i.e. simple or foolish).

Sam Gamgee is a servant of Frodo the Ring-bearer. Samwise is a gardener and he loves trees and plants. He left the Shire with his master and then went to Rivendell. Later he went to the great journey to destroy the One Ring with The Fellowshi of the Ring. After breaking the Fellowship he remained with Frodo . He helped the Bearer from the beginnig to the End. Sanwise himself was Ring-Bearer for a while.
After the War of the Ring he wed Rose Cotton and he has 13 children and some are gardeners.

Is he clever or he isn't? Mustn't he remain in Rivendell? He is a loyal servant. What do you think about Sam?

I don't think that he should be considered less than clever:

(pasting this examples from the thread the discussion initially started)
- Sam remained cautios of Gollum all the way;
- he is instrumental in saving Frodo from the orcs;
- he is concerned well before Frodo about their return route;
- he became mayor of Michel Delving;
- he was named Counsellor of the North Kingdom by Aragorn himself.

Samwise - simple of foolish. Foolish could reffer to hobbits not carring about "serious" matters; simple (my favorite translation) could reffer to Sam's plain, pure heart and nature. And if we care about names, Sam's great-grandfather was Wiseman Gamwich
I don't think he should remain in Rivendell; I would say both Gandalf and Elrond saw in him the 'perfect' hobbit companion for the 'perfect' hobbit ring-bearer.
Loyalty/obedience are traits which are manifest in some of the greatest heroes of M-E, such as Beren or Aragorn. In Tolkien's view, love itself is based on obedience - it is another sign of christian morality influence.

There are a lot of heroes in LOTR, but Sam is the major hero.




I would also give a big, big nod to Rosie. Thirteen children!!!!!

Add to the list of Sam's smart moves:
Thinking ahead to bring things they would need e.g. rope, pots and pans, salt.

Samwise...

• He is a servant of Frodo
• He helped him in his journey to Rivendell
• He wanted to come back to the Shire when he was in Lórien
• He didn't leave Frodo when the Fellowship broke
• He was cautious with Gollum and he didn't like him (that's very good)
• He was Ring-Bearer for a while
• He decided to help Frodo and not to go alone to Mordor to destroy the Ring

Samwise is a loyal fellow, very important character in the War of the Ring. He is the One who helped the Ring-bearer to destroy the One Ring and without Sam that destruction wouldn't come true. Though Sam is not very clever he is one of the most interesting heroes in thr LotR.

Ingwe, I ask you on this thread also, do you have any reason to believe that Sam wasn't clever? And if you care to read , no one on this thread, not even you, have provided anything to sustain that claim.

I agree, I mean maybe he was not clever in that obnoxious way that some people are who can't stop playing with their cleverness in everyone's faces. He did not spend his time combing through the scrolls in M.T. but he was wise in botany and in relationships to say the least.

He was self-effacive and would be the last to call himself clever but a wise reader is not fooled. He was the only one of the fellowship to catch Frodo trying to sneak away at Parth Galen. Not even Aragorn or Legolas caught that.

Ingwe, I ask you on this thread also, do you have any reason to believe that Sam wasn't clever? And if you care to read , no one on this thread, not even you, have provided anything to sustain that claim.

Click to expand...

Yes, I still think he is not clever. Well, he is not stupid but he can be more clever. As I previously mentioned, Samwise is simple of foolish. And I think you remember the quote from the chapter 'The Mirror of Galadriel' in which he shows he is simple, plain. And he shows that in the other parts of the Book. But he helped Frodo because he is good friend.

I am not very sure what quote your reffering to. So, to wrap things up, is simplicity of nature the only basis for calling Sam not clever? And if so, how did you reason?

Greenwood said:

There are a lot of heroes in LOTR, but Sam is the major hero.

I would also give a big, big nod to Rosie. Thirteen children!!!!!

Click to expand...

I think that Sam should also get an honorable mention there — after all, it does take an equal amount of "filial cooperation"...

I tried to find the thread in which we hear from a woman in England whose last name in Gamgee. Couldn't dig it up.

But Tolkien himself said that Sam Gamgee is THE hero of LOTR:

"...the highest love-story, that of Aragorn and Arwen Elrond's daughter is only alluded to as a known thing. It is told elsewhere in a short tale. Of Aragorn and Arwen Undómiel. I think the simple 'rustic' love of Sam and his Rosie (nowhere elaborated) is absolutely essential to the study of his (the chief hero's) character, and to the theme of the relation of ordinary life (breathing, eating, working, begetting) and quests, sacrifice, causes, and the 'longing for Elves', and sheer beauty." —Letter #131

Barley

Barliman Butterbur said:

I think that Sam should also get an honorable mention there — after all, it does take an equal amount of "filial cooperation"...

Click to expand...

Barley,

I think you had better run for cover. The women on the Forum are going to flay you alive for the suggestion that nine months of pregancy and followed by childbirth are comparable to the male's contribution.

<Greenwood runs, very rapidly, for cover before the bloodshed starts.>

Hello all, just thought I'd put in my opinion here. I've been a member of this forum for 8 months, and I think I've posted once

Among people today I see a pattern of seemingly contrasting characteristics: Smart people ("smart" defined as people with high IQ's and such) tend to do the stupid things that cause problems, while people with lesser logical powers tend to have it a bit easier. And before everyone jumps on me for this statement, let me just say that this is a generalization and does not apply to everyone. I said it's a tendency.
I consider myself a fairly intelligent person, and I have done some pretty stupid things in my life. I know someone who claims to have a high IQ (genius-level) who has done some REALLY stupid things (like drive drunk across a field in front of two cop cars outside a police station and then dricing the wrong way down a one-way road). On the contrast, I know some people who might be considered "simple" people, and they generally tend to be happier people, and see matters in a simpler light that more intelligent people might overcomplicate. Intelligent people have a tendency to read into things too much. Think of it as some people can think withing the box real well, but can't think outside of it, while some people are the opposite.
Simply put, smart people do dumb things sometimes, and dumb people can be prone to profound insights. Which brings us to the topic:
Sam is a simple creature, even by hobbit standards. While Frodo is definitely a more intelligent hobbit, his thoughts are on a higher level, and, as a result, he tends to overlook things that might be obvious from another perspective (such as Gollum's two-faced nature), the reason probably being that he overanalyzes and tries to weigh everything fairly, whereas Samwise, who lacks the brainpower of his master, relies on handed-down lessons and common sense to make judgements. So, though he is not necessarily "knowledgeable" (four days after departing from Rivendell, he expected to see Orodruin), he does have a healthy supply of common sense.
As far as his "cleverness", I would say that overall he is not very clever, but due to his good common sense and simple thought process, he does tend to see some things that others would not.

Oh yes, and one more thing:

Loyalty/obedience are traits which are manifest in some of the greatest heroes of M-E, such as Beren or Aragorn. In Tolkien's view, love itself is based on obedience - it is another sign of christian morality influence.

Click to expand...

IMO, this is backwards...obedience is based on love, not vice versa. The idea that love is based on obedience doesn't seem like love to me...and would pretty much make void the idea of "unconditional love". If it exists, it would have to have its roots in the creative force, ie, God.

Well, that's my opinion. Hopefully I haven't made myself look like a rambling fool

- Eruërthiel the Minstrel of Aman -

Greenwood said:

Barley,

I think you had better run for cover. The women on the Forum are going to flay you alive for the suggestion that nine months of pregnancy and followed by childbirth are comparable to the male's contribution.

<Greenwood runs, very rapidly, for cover before the bloodshed starts.>

Click to expand...

Hey — whatever they say, Rosie couldn'ta dunnit without Sam! And I said cooperation — there was no implication whatever of an equal distribution of labor!

Barley

Eruërthiel, beside your gut feeling, can you reffer anything to sustain your claim that he wasn't clever? I know Ingwe hasn't done so so far, maybe you will.

The fact that Aragorn and Arwen marry only after his quest is fulfilled was enough reason for me to say that love is based on obedience (and a somewhat similar story happened between Luthien and Beren). However, since, as far as I know, Tolkien didn't make any comment on love as related to obedience, I guess we are each entitled to our own opinion.

Furthermore, about obedience and heroism, Tolkien says that: "it is the heroism of obedience and love not of pride or willfulness that is the most heroic and the most moving".

Having already had some fun on this thread, I think it is now time for me to be a bit more serious on the topic.

I think people are getting a bit hung-up on modern connotations of words like, simple and clever. Clearly Frodo and Sam were extraordinary hobbits. I will have to find the exact quote, but I remember it being said once that Gandalf thought Frodo the best hobbit in the Shire. Now Sam is not as learned, or perhaps as smart as Frodo, but he certainly is not stupid. He is literate, having learned to read and write from Bilbo, something we are told most hobbits never learn. As has been pointed out Tolkien considered Sma the true hero of the story, though Tolkien himself describes Sam as a simple person. However, he does not mean simple to imply stupid. In this case simple means uncomplicated. Sam does not undertake the quest to destroy the Ring out of any grandiose goal of defeating evil and saving the world. It does it for the far simpler reasons of friendship and love.

As for Sam being less trusting of Gollum than Frodo, we must remember that Frodo was at least partly under the spell of the Ring. Also as Ringbearer, Frodo knew firsthand some of the torment the desire for the Ring inflicted on Gollum. For his own sake he had to hope there was a chance for redemption for Gollum. If there wasn't, what chance was there for himself? In one of his letters Tolkien says he considers the saddest moment in the book the moment when Gollum comes down from the pass of Cirith Ungol (before leading Frodo and Sam to Shelob's trap) and is on the verge of repentance but Sam wakes suddenly and misinterprets Gollum's reaching to touch Frodo. Sam speaks harshly to Gollum and the brief chance at repentance is gone forever. In the end on Mount Doom, when Sam at last has the chance to take revenge on Gollum for all his treachery, Sam stays his hand. Having briefly carried the Ring he now has some of the understanding of Gollum's torment that Frodo had shown earlier. Sam is a less complex character than Frodo and is in that sense simpler, but it does not mean he is stupid. Less clever than Frodo, perhaps, but not stupid.

Greenwood said:

Having already had some fun on this thread, I think it is now time for me to be a bit more serious on the topic.

Click to expand...

Great post, m'friend!

Barley

It seems I may have put out the impression that I thought Samwise is stupid. I don't think that at all. I just don't believe that he is, overall, as quick-witted as Frodo; though he is definitely no idiot. And I do not think "simple" means "stupid"; if so, it would mean I was striving to live an idiotic life by keeping things uncomplicated No, I think a simple life is much easier and in some ways more rewarding.
A good comparison to Sam's character would be, to anyone who has read the Dragonlance novels, Caramon Majere (besides the valorious fighter attitude). Since he is not quick to come to an answer to a problem, people would deem him slow and maybe stupid, when in fact, he analyzes a problem thoroughly before reaching a conclusion. And also, his love for his brother is very comparable to Sam's love for Frodo, except that Frodo cares for Sam as well. All this, combined with the fact that Samwise is anything but "worldly" (The Shire and his garden is all he really knows) might make others, especially most Men, look down on him.
I do truly believe that Sam is the true hero of the story, simply because of his love of his master and his steadfast commitment to him. Any "intelligent" person would have thought the quest was pure folly and might have tried to dissuade Frodo from his mission. Sam, while he didn't truly understand the dangers he would face, he did not cow before them or turn back, even when hope seemed completely lost. Even when Frodo no longer had the will to go on, Sam was there to keep him going. He had heart, and it was a good heart, and that can be more valuable than intelligence.

Furthermore, about obedience and heroism, Tolkien says that: "it is the heroism of obedience and love not of pride or willfulness that is the most heroic and the most moving".

Click to expand...

I agree on that. That does not state that love is based on obedience, however, which was the point I was arguing. But yes, I believe that the good done through obedience and love is what makes The Lord of the Rings one of the most satisfying books I've ever read.

Thorondor, there aren't many things that I can mention about Sam... Maybe I think he is not clever because he is a hobbit and the Hobbits are strange race. They don't want to know about the other world. Sam is a Hobbit and as I said he is simple, plain. Maybe I think he is not clevar because of his race.

I think people are getting a bit hung-up on modern connotations of words like, simple and clever. Clearly Frodo and Sam were extraordinary hobbits. I will have to find the exact quote, but I remember it being said once that Gandalf thought Frodo the best hobbit in the Shire. Now Sam is not as learned, or perhaps as smart as Frodo

Click to expand...

Perhas this is one more reason why he is not clever. But I don't say he is stupid! He didn't study but he learned many things during his life.

Thorondor, there aren't many things that I can mention about Sam... Maybe I think he is not clever because he is a hobbit and the Hobbits are strange race. They don't want to know about the other world. Sam is a Hobbit and as I said he is simple, plain. Maybe I think he is not clevar because of his race.

Click to expand...

Geez... "cultural violence" all over again ...

Perhas this is one more reason why he is not clever

Click to expand...

"Not as smart as" someone else doesn't imply "not clever" .

Thorondor_ said:

Geez... "cultural violence" all over again ...

Click to expand...

What do you mean?

"Not as smart as" someone else doesn't imply "not clever" .

Click to expand...

The hobbits aren't as smart as the other races. You know: they don't like machines, they are interested only about things copncerning the Shire and their relations. And not as smart as those who aren't smart is not very clever.