Frodo and Gollum: Illuminating Dante’s Contrapasso
By Cass Kay
Image Credit: Intveen, Nicole. “Lotr - Gollum - Frodo.” Flickr, September 1, 2015, https://www.flickr.com/photos/135458114@N08/20436651173. Accessed October 30, 2023.
In his epic fantasy The Lord of the Rings, J.R.R. Tolkien is not shy about his Christian influences. While not as explicitly stated as it is in other works, nor as literal, Lord of the Rings focuses on themes of brotherhood, spirituality, and punishment derived from a Christian lens. This is no accident; Tolkien has been noted to believe that a Christian artist’s work is simply a reiteration of the Christian God’s creative endeavors (Hartt). A book is never just a book – the message must be in line with God’s word.
Tolkien’s creative philosophy lines up with that of Dante Alighieri, author of The Divine Comedy and one of Tolkien’s theological and literary sources. Dante sees evil as something chosen rather than absolute (Seland), which should be punished appropriately. We are all born with a likelihood to sin, but we can all choose to reject that temptation and become one with God, or vice versa. The choice we make will condemn us to Hell or lead us to Purgatory and later, after cleansing from where we inevitably indulged, to Paradise. It is akin to Aristotle’s idea of contrapasso: for every sin, there is an equal punishment. Part of what determines these equal punishments is our intentions when we sin. To Dante, sin can be driven by three progressively worse motivations: incontinence (an overwhelming desire that goes against reason), violence (an overwhelming desire that hurts others impulsively), and treason/malice (an overwhelming desire that hurts others purposefully). This is very similar to Tolkien.
To Tolkien, evil cannot exist without good to leech off of (Seland). It is parasitic and needs a host. The problem is some hosts are more willing than others. As such, if two hosts are afflicted by the same type of evil parasite, their responses are what dictate if they can be saved from it. If a host chooses to conjoin with their evil parasite, they can no longer be meaningfully separated, and they will be doomed with their chosen parasite to the same fate. Like Dante, Tolkien sees sin as an uncontrolled extension of desire, usually for power, and that sin must be dealt with accordingly depending on motivation. This is the form of divine punishment Tolkien subscribes to – and it is also the form of divine punishment Dante Alighieri subscribed to.
A poignant example of Dante’s Artistotlean idea of contrapasso in Tolkien’s work is the differences between Frodo and Gollum’s fates. In the end, both commit the same sin of falling under the Ring’s influence (see the attached image). However, Frodo was not doomed to die in fire like Gollum was. This is due to their intentions whilst sinning.
Frodo committed his sin due to a brief, but overwhelming excess of desire. He wanted the power to stop his pain. Carrying the Ring for about six months when he arrived at Mount Doom, Frodo carried a tremendous burden that few others have managed (generally it took the Ring days or less to corrupt hearts). The Ring had leeched Frodo’s memories and perception: he had forgotten what he was fighting for, so there was only his desperation to make it stop. It made it seem wise to use the Ring’s power to comfort himself rather than destroy it and lose, seemingly, all the power he held. It was a sin, certainly, and straddles the line between incontinence and violence because even a few seconds of withholding the Ring from destruction led to deaths at the Black Gate, where Aragorn and the others were fighting to keep Sauron distracted from Frodo. However, Frodo was not in his right mind when he committed it, and he made up for it when the moment passed. He was punished accordingly by losing his finger. He understood why he was wrong and desired to get better, and because of that, he was granted entrance to the Undying Lands, Tolkien’s version of an elvish Heaven of sorts (certainly a Paradise).
Gollum, on the other hand, was malicious in his sin of falling for the Ring’s spell. Originally, he was similar to Frodo. He simply was overcome with lust for the Ring, and the killing of his cousin, Deagol, was violent but not premeditated. However, when given a second chance by Frodo to repent and make up for his sins, Gollum decided against it, more enraptured with the Ring than repentance. The second he made this choice, his sin became one of a malicious nature, not just an incontinent/violent one. Gollum planned to kill Frodo and Sam by intentionally leading them to the cave of the giant spider, Shelob, who would kill and eat them, and he could take the Ring back. When this plan failed, Gollum still pursued them, attacking once more on the slope of Mount Doom, and then again inside. He finally got his Ring back when he bit Frodo’s finger off, causing both of them to lose balance from the grapple, and leading to Gollum falling into the fire with his Ring in hand, a hellish punishment.
The reason Frodo’s fate was more forgiving than Gollum’s is because of their intention with their sins, as is the crux for the concept of contrapasso held by Tolkien, and therefore Dante. Despite the basis of their sin being the same, their motivations and surrounding actions (such as Gollum’s multiple attacks versus Frodo’s single offense) were different. Thus, the same crime resulted in different degrees of punishment. Frodo lost his finger but survived and eventually moved to the Undying Lands, while Gollum died alongside his precious Ring.
Works Cited
Dante Alighieri and Mark Musa. Inferno. New York, Penguin Books/Penguin Group, 2003.
Hartt, Walter F. “Godly Influences: The Theology of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.” Studies in
the Literary Imagination, 14, 2, 1981.
Seland, John. “Dante and Tolkien: Their Ideas about Evil.” Inklings Forever, A Collection of
Essays Presented at the Fifth Frances White Ewbank Colloquium on C.S. Lewis &
Friends, Volume 5, Article 30, 2006.