Frodo indeed 'failed' as a hero, as conceived by simple
minds: he did not endure to the end; he gave in, ratted. I do not say 'simple
minds' with contempt: they often see with clarity the simple truth and the
absolute ideal to which effort must be directed, even if it is unattainable.
Their weakness, however, is twofold. They do not perceive the complexity of any
given situation in Time, in which an absolute ideal is enmeshed. They tend to
forget that strange element in the World that we call Pity or Mercy, which is
also an absolute requirement in moral judgement (since it is present in the
Divine nature). In its highest exercise it belongs to God. For finite judges of
imperfect knowledge it must lead to the use of two different scales of
'morality'. To ourselves we must present the absolute ideal without compromise,
for we do not know our own limits of natural strength (+grace), and if we do
not aim at the highest we shall certainly fall short of the utmost that we
could achieve. To others, in any case of which we know enough to make a
judgement, we must apply a scale tempered by 'mercy': that is, since we can
with good will do this without the bias inevitable in judgements of ourselves,
we must estimate the limits of another's strength and weigh this against the
force of particular circumstances.
I do not think that Frodo's was a moral failure. At the
last moment the pressure of the Ring would reach its maximum – impossible, I
should have said, for anyone to resist, certainly after long possession, months
of increasing torment, and when starved and exhausted. Frodo had done what he could
and spent himself completely (as an instrument of Providence) and had produced
a situation in which the object of his quest could be achieved. His humility
(with which he began) and his sufferings were justly rewarded by the highest
honour; and his exercise of patience and mercy towards Gollum gained him Mercy:
his failure was redressed.
We are finite creatures with absolute limitations upon
the powers of our soul-body structure in either action or endurance. Moral
failure can only be asserted, I think, when a man's effort or endurance falls
short of his limits, and the blame decreases as that limit is closer approached.
Nonetheless, I think it can be observed in history and
experience that some individuals seem to be placed in 'sacrificial' positions:
situations or tasks that for perfection of solution demand powers beyond their
utmost limits, even beyond all possible limits for an incarnate creature in a
physical world – in which a body may be destroyed, or so maimed that it affects
the mind and will.
Judgement upon any such case should then depend on the
motives and disposition with which he started out, and should weigh his actions
against the utmost possibility of his powers, all along the road to whatever
proved the breaking-point.
Frodo undertook his quest out of love – to save the world
he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could; and also in complete
humility, acknowledging that he was wholly inadequate to the task. His real
contract was only to do what he could, to try to find a way, and to go as far
on the road as his strength of mind and body allowed. He did that. I do not myself
see that the breaking of his mind and will under demonic pressure after torment
was any more a moral failure than the breaking of his body would have been...
From a letter to Mrs Eileen Elgar, September 1963 -- J R R Tolkien
