Lord of the Rings - Frodo's drama

[cysto]

@Lakis

I would suggest that the transformation here signifies the IC change as much as it does growth in the RS.

You’ve got a quote about the books when before you mentioned you were considering the movies. In the movies they are friends from the start. Even if you change your mind in that, the fact that it has been “changed” in the movies means either it isn’t important to the storyform of movie and book (if they are the same), or Peter Jackson ended up with a different story form (based on you saying that servant to friends is the relationship throughline).

@Lakis

In the storyform that you posit – the complete one – what is the goal? If it’s the destruction of the ring, then the story ends in Success. Then what Is the Judgment? How is achieving the OS Solution connected to the MC Solution to create the narrative argument that Tolkien is trying to make?

Yeah as i said it’s the destruction of the ring, and the judgement is bad. This isn’t contradictory. It’s linked because Frodo was also trying to destroy the ring and failed.

@Lakis

Hmm. This seems like a very roundabout explanation, leading to a muddled message from Tolkien!

That was my exact point. That the deus ex machina is weak storytelling, but for Tolkien it was more important to include all the messages he wanted.

@Lakis

But why is that a separate point? You use the word “falter” which is different from “fall” or “fail”. Steadfast characters falter all the time. On the question of resolve, you have to look at the beginning and the end of the story to see where the resolve is. Cutting off the story at the moment of Frodo’s failure (or just to when the ring id destroyed?) seems arbitrary and actually contrary to broader point Tolkien is trying to make, especially as we never get a story judgement from that.

Resolve is strong at the start, falters throughout, and fails at the end. A clear progression to me. It’s not an arbitrary cut - it’s the point immediately before the storytelling point to include an intervention from god which resets much of the conflict from before.

@Lakis

Doesn’t it make more sense that Tolkien was suggesting that at the moment of ultimate temptation we will no longer be able to rely only on ourselves, but that providence will carry us through, as long as we have been as Steadfast and Faithful for as long as humanly possible?

I don’t think so. That seems like quite a stretch. In Tolkien’s work, interventions from a higher power happen to save someone from danger after doing the right thing, not to take away responsibility from sinning.

Remember that Frodo was also a broken man (hobbit) after the ordeal, which to me is showing the bad judgement continuing. It is the opposite of triumphant. He was forgiven, but the scars of his failure, both physical and emotional, continue to haunt him.

Perhaps most importantly, if you are saying that Frodo is steadfast, then either Sam or Gollum (others have mentioned it, but i know you are talking about Sam for IC) is a change character. Sam is utterly loyal to Frodo and the quest the whole way through, so he doesn’t change (which is why i think he is a faith character), and Gollum remains obsessed by the ring the whole way through, so he also doesn’t change. I don’t think there is an argument for either of them being change characters, but i’d love to hear one.

@Lakis

This sounds like storytelling to me rather than the source of conflict.

Consider that much epic fantasy and sci fi has the OS domain of Activity. I think the Dramatica book even talks about this (the Screenwriting one does too).

@Lakis

The question is, what is the source of conflict? What is the problem that affects every character throughout the story, that continually comes up to create conflict and make things worse for all the characters? Why does Gandalf refuse to take the ring? Why are they all forced to rely on this little, physically weak Hobbit rather than a stronger, more heroic type to carry the ring? Why does the Fellowship of the Ring fall apart (with Boromir’s betrayal)? Temptation.

I don’t think that is wrong, it’s just when you take a step back, the story is about Frodo’s temptation above all. Dramatica doesn’t preclude things appearing in different places, and i would say the character-interactions around temptation are pushed to the front of the OS throughline, without it being the OS driver. Note also that almost all instances of temptation are interactions with the MC anyway (Gandalf, Bilbo, Aragorn, Boromir, Sam, Gollum, Galadriel, Faramir), showing Frodo the different arguments for remaining steadfast or succumbing to temptation while being influenced by Sauron.

@mlucas

staying their hands against killing Gollum

“Thou shalt not kill” Maybe it was as simple as that. That only god can judge sin and dole out punishment, it’s not up to us.

@mlucas

And brilliant that he had Frodo put the Ring on in the end, because it gave their earlier acts of conscience meaning.

Not sure about the connection here. Frodo succumbed to temptation, but that moment gave meaning to the act of not killing Gollum in the past?

Keep it up please! This is great

[mlucas]

@cysto

the story is about Frodo’s temptation above all

What about Pippin & the Palantir? (see earlier post)

[Prish]

@cysto

that moment gave meaning to the act of not killing Gollum in the past?

Without that moment of compassion, the world would not have been saved. I wonder how that plays out in the story forming.

[cysto]

@mlucas

What about Pippin & the Palantir? (see earlier post)

Yeah we covered that. In 10 hours of movies and 1200 pages of books you can likely find an example for any choice of story points. And as i mentioned it could just be to parallel Frodo’s story given the separation of the characters, without being the main focus.[quote=“Prish, post:98, topic:436”]
Without that moment of compassion, the world would not have been saved. I wonder how that plays out in the story forming.
[/quote]
We’re not talking about the moment of compassion here, but the moment Frodo puts on the ring.

[mlucas]

@cysto

Not sure about the connection here. Frodo succumbed to temptation, but that moment gave meaning to the act of not killing Gollum in the past?

Right – not killing Gollum is the OS Solution at work. It doesn’t matter that it happens a few moments before the concluding Story Driver. All I meant by “brilliant” is that it was brilliant how Tolkien set everything up like that, so that the storytelling came together with the storyform in the end.

@cysto

Keep it up please! This is great

Agreed. I’m pretty darn convinced the OS Problem is Temptation, BTW, but it’s always good to keep an open mind. I’m somewhat less than 100% on Resolve and therefore what the MC vs. IC Problem is.

But I do feel like you can look almost anywhere in the narrative and find examples of Temptation causing conflict, and as a drive. For example, the temptation of the Palantir didn’t just cause trouble for Pippin, but it was also the cause of Saruman’s corruption (according to Gandalf he couldn’t resist pointing it at Barad-Dur).

Saruman’s drive for temptation continues as he is tempted to outdo Sauron by creating his own army. He tries to tempt Gandalf into joining him when he lures him to Isengard and tries to get him to divulge the location of the Ring.

[cysto]

@mlucas

I’m pretty darn convinced the OS Problem is Temptation, BTW, but it’s always good to keep an open mind. I’m somewhat less than 100% on Resolve and therefore what the MC vs. IC Problem is.

But this still leaves you with a weak and unconvincing RS. You and Lakis have argued for a steadfast Frodo, rewarded for his steadfastness, but this requires a changed Sam which isn’t the case.

Whether the OS is Temptation or Activity for me could go either way in itself, but when you consider the RS i think OS can therefore only be Activity, which still fits.

[mlucas]

@cysto

Whether the OS is Temptation or Activity for me could go either way in itself, but when you consider the RS i think OS can therefore only be Activity, which still fits.

?? Are you getting Temptation mixed up with Psychology? I think we all agree on the OS in Activity (Physics) and the RS in Psychology. Temptation comes under Physics/Obtaining/Morality (same OS problem quad as The Matrix).

To me, Becoming works really well for the RS between Sam and Frodo. Even though they do start out as friends, the point of the relationship is how it becomes something much more than that initial friendship, and the struggles that come from that change of nature. It’s almost like friends -> brothers.

[Lakis]

Also Galadriel. And Gollum too—remember those scenes where he’s arguing with himself?

[Prish]

@cysto

that moment gave meaning to the act of not killing Gollum in the past?

I wouldn’t get a connection of meaning, since the grasping succumbing to temptation was immediate and totally personal. Maybe, it’s MC throughline, and Gollum spared in the past and finishing the task unintentionally is OS throughline?

[Prish]

@mlucas

It’s almost like friends -> brothers.

And to caregiver? I wonder what it was when he was sent away.

[mlucas]

I’ve been thinking about this a lot and browsing through the books, and had some ideas. What if instead of Temptation the OS Problem is Disbelief, mostly showing up as distrust and skepticism:

• initially the hobbits are skeptical that the Enemy could reach them all the way in the Shire
• initial distrust of Strider
• a lot of “being unpersuadable” and difficulty convincing – the Council of Elrond, Gandalf and Aragorn having trouble convincing each other about taking the mountain pass vs. Moria route
• doubting, like Gandalf doubted how bad Moria could be; or various characters (esp. Boromir) doubted whether a hobbit was the right choice of Ring-Bearer
• Sauron doesn’t believe they would ever try to destroy the Ring

This makes the OS Focus Temptation, which is a decent fit. I mean, they do talk about Temptation and “see” it as a problem a lot, not just Gandalf but a lot of others. @Lakis I think you had some other examples about Temptation -> Conscience as Focus/Direction too?

And Faith is nice as the Solution in this story. Believing that Frodo can get the job done – so much so that they’re all willing to lay their lives on the line and march on Mordor. Getting Sauron to believe that the main threat is the army at his gates. The Crucial Element then becomes Conscience, which also feels right – doing the right thing instead of taking the easy road.

And for Sam as the Changed IC, it could be that he moves to a place where he has Faith in himself, where he’s the one getting the job done and listening to his own instincts.

[Lakis]

@mlucas

@Lakis I think you had some other examples about Temptation -> Conscience as Focus/Direction too?

We also see Gandalf and Galadriel resist their temptation (conscience). But you could make an argument that the real source of their problems is that they don’t trust themselves (disbelief) to carry the ring.

And even Boromir, after his failure, makes an effort to redeem himself (conscience).

EDIT: Isn’t Boromir’s justification for taking the ring a lack of faith (disbelief) in the plan?

At length [Boromir] spoke… ‘If you wish… to destroy the armed might of the Dark Lord, then it is folly to go without force into his domain; and folly to throw away.’ He paused suddenly… ‘It would be folly to throw lives away, I mean,’ he ended…

But I could see that example both ways – disbelief could be symptom or response, with temptation as the real problem.

So I think there’s a pretty good case for your arrangement here @mlucas.

[mlucas]

@Lakis

We also see Gandalf and Galadriel resist their temptation (conscience). But you could make an argument that the real source of their problems is that they don’t trust themselves (disbelief) to carry the ring.

Very cool. And note, just because it’s a source of conflict or drive for them, doesn’t mean it’s “wrong” – i.e. it doesn’t mean they should have taken the Ring, just that this necessary disbelief is causing them difficulty. (A similar example is in the Fugitive when he Helps the misdiagnosed child, it’s not like the narrative is saying that was the wrong thing to do, just that it was doomed to cause difficulties for him until the Solution was brought in.)

Agree with you on the Boromir quote. Ah, poor Boromir!

[Etherbeard]

@cysto

Sam is utterly loyal to Frodo and the quest the whole way through, so he doesn’t change (which is why i think he is a faith character), and Gollum remains obsessed by the ring the whole way through, so he also doesn’t change. I don’t think there is an argument for either of them being change characters, but i’d love to hear one.

I apologize if this has been addressed. I didn’t see it, if so.

I don’t recall the particulars from the books, but in the movies the argument for Sam’s change would be shown by his interactions with Rosie Cotton. In the beginning he wants to ask her out or whatever the Hobbit equivalent is, but he’s too shy and nervous and sits muttering about the advances made toward her by other Hobbits. In the end, in a scene mirroring a scene from the beginning, he approaches her. Here the behavior of Frodo, Merry, and Pippin is basically identical to the earlier scene.

Sam has moved on from being Frodo’s “batman” to forging a life for himself.

[Lakis]

@Etherbeard

I apologize if this has been addressed. I didn’t see it, if so.

I thought I mentioned this upthread but I may have just thought it! In any case I’ll take it as independent support of Sam’s change!

@Etherbeard

mirroring a scene from the beginning

This can’t be an accident! Having a scene from the beginning mirrored at the end in this way feels like a pretty strong indication of the author’s intent to show change.

@Etherbeard

Sam has moved on from being Frodo’s “batman” to forging a life for himself.

Yes. He moves from Be-er (adapt yourself – kind of the definition of being a “batman”) to forging a life (Do-er). Also he moves from Subconscious (Innermost Desires – unrequited love) to Future (having a future for himself).

[mlucas]

I know this hasn’t been updated in 5 years (!) but I was referencing it recently on another forum and realized that although we landed on a final storyform and were very satisfied with it, we never really posted the details. I’m certain this is the correct storyform for the Lord of the Rings book trilogy, I’ve gone back to it many times and everything seems to fit perfectly. In addition, @JohnDusenberry analyzed the movies and found the exact same storyform with one difference – the movies are Holistic/Female mental sex while the books are Linear/Male. (Probably showcases a difference between Tolkien and Peter Jackson as storytellers.)

Anyway, the book storyform is: Steadfast, Stop, Do-er, Male, Decision, Optionlock, Success, Good, Obtaining, Disbelief. (With a crucial element of Temptation.)

Note: I don’t know if we ever fully came to consensus on the Driver in this thread, but if you re-read the beginning it’s pretty clear that the First Driver is Bilbo deciding to retire & give up the Ring (even though he almost doesn’t ), and the Final Driver is Sam deciding to spare Gollum. @JohnDusenberry can you confirm if you had Decision for yours? For some reason it’s not loading on Subtxt – thanks!

[jhull]

Oh wow - this is incredible. Thanks so much Mike!

I did have the Storyform up in Subtxt, but removed it because I wasn’t sure about the Mental Sex - this explanation - about books Male, film Female is AWESOME!

[jhull]

I put it back up, and will put up the novel version this weekend - thanks again!

[Prish]

I sure noticed this after reading the books some years before, then watching the movies. I never could figure out emotionally what that difference was, and being they both were spectacular events in my life, I wasn’t inclined to force my mind to consider them analytically. You know how that goes … haha. Thanks!

[bobRaskoph]

I don’t know why, but I think that’s rather amusing: Akeelah and the Bee - Analysis - Dramatica