Convincing Character Should be a Mixture of Good and Evil in Book Four of Lord of the Rings

909 Words2 Pages

Convincing Character Should be a Mixture of Good and Evil in Book Four of Lord of the Rings

In this essay I intend to look at Book Four of Lord of the Rings and

look for evidence in it that suggests a convincing character should

not be wholly good or evil but a mixture of both.

I shall start by looking at the character of Sméagol, as his character

shows most clearly how a convincing character should not be wholly

good or evil. In Book Four of Lord of the Rings, Tolkien portrays

Sméagol not as an entirely convincing character , yet not as a wholly

good or evil one. Instead, Sméagol is depicted as being unsure

himself. A well known part of the play on the topic of the good and

evil of this character shows how Sméagol seems to change characters

while he is alone, and have a debate within himself as to what is

right and wrong.

" 'Sméagol promised,' said the first thought.

Yes, yes, my precious,' came the answer, 'we promised: to save our

Precious, not to let Him have it- never. But its going to Him, yes,

nearer every step. What's the hobbit going to do with it we wonders,

yes we wonders' "

This quote is from a debate that Gollum/Sméagol has with himself. It

shows how Sméagol doesn't know what to do, or what is right. He tries

to argue that one thing is right, but then is unsure and knows it's

wrong.

Sméagol character is inconsistent throughout the whole play. It is

possible that Tolkien has done this to make us question whether

Sméagol is good or evil, or neither. The uncertainty in Sméagol's

character is by no means on a minor scale, but instead Sméagol's

temperament affects the storyline itself at various points. As we can

see, Tolkien uses several different methods to incorporate the view of

Sméagol as both good and evil, and in my opinion, he does this quite

successfully, and to good effect. It seems though, that rather than

Open Document