Boromir

[andave_ya]

As I'm sure you've noticed, Boromir is one of my favorite literary characters for these reasons:

1. He is principled.
For Boromir, right is right and wrong is wrong, though one may be deceived by what one thinks is right and what one thinks is wrong. Of course, here I am referring to the Ring. He thought that it was the right thing to do, but when he finally understood, at the end, that it is altogether evil, and that it would be wrong to take it, he stood for right and redeemed himself marvellously.

2. He is patriotic.
That is, truly patriotic. Enough said.

3. He is courageous.
Most obvious example: he died facing hordes of Orcs, unflinching, and in honor.

4. He is loyal.
In three areas: Gondor, his father and brother, Aragorn and the Fellowship. Because he was loyal to Gondor he wanted to use the ring. In part, Boromir's loyalty to his father and brother was more shown in Faramir's parts rather than Boromir's. Boromir acknowledged Aragorn as King, though at first he did not. More than once, after his death, Merry and Pippin spoke of Boromir lovingly, and with telling words.

5. He gave all to those he loved.

What do you think of him? I'd love your opinion.

[Etienne]

I think he is a cereal box character.

[andave_ya]

:eek2: .....

Why?

Lol, that's kind of weird.

[mtpspur]

May has well weigh in. My favorite was always Strider the ranger (before being revealed as Aragorn). Now my principle opinion of Boromr is that he is a contrast to Aragorn to show how a man of high principles , valor and bravery can be derailed from a righteous quest by taking the seemly 'easy' route. Take ring--destory evil--done deal. Piece of cake. I feel that Boromir did not have a wider perspective on what the Ring was capable of doing. This can be much related to the Lord Christ going the way of the cross instead of booting the Romans out of Jerusalem as the Jews expected of the Messiah if I may present that anology. Aragorn is the very best man has to offer, Boromir is the man with the fatal flaw--expediency justifies taking shortcuts. With respect. I think you have admirably displayed why Boromir is worthy of admiration and have actually raised the character in my esteem but I had always read him in counterpoint to Aragorn.

[Pensive]

I would have to say I didn't like him much. He was okay, but nothing special (except if you think everyone is special in her/his own way).

I preferred Aragorn, his style. Eowyn was cool too.

[Hira]

Yes, I think he did redeem himself in the end, fought so valiantly. Very noble.

[Idril]

You know I have something to say about this. :p I think Boromir has such depth, he's not the cookie cutter good guy that Aragorn is. I like Aragorn, there is much to admire there, of course, but Boromir is a much more complicated character, an essentially good man who made some bad choices and did what he could to correct them, much like Isildur before him, who is another favorite character of mine. :D I love Boromir's relationship with the Hobbits, he's so protective of them and not just at that last moment, he is consistantly concerned about their welfare. It echos his nuturing relationship with Faramir. I know the book proper doesn't say too much about that but there are some wonderful passages in the appendix that sheds a little more light on that relationship which really adds tremendous depth to Boromir. It shows that you can't let that one weak moment define the character.

[JBI]

Tolkien I would say is one of the worst writers, when it comes to character. Boromir is no exception; he never goes beyond character, or does something unsuspected.

[amalia1985]

I agree with Idril. In my opinion, Tolkien presented a very "realistic" character in the face of Boromir. A man with principles, faced with his demons, falling in the trap of weakness, but overcoming it, by redeeming himself, as Hira mentioned.

I think he is a very "human" character, with an equal amount of good and evil in his soul. Most humans are made in such way, and I have to admit that I've always felt close to him, as well. He is not the "hero", who is always good. He is not the "villain", he is human. And I really like that when it comes to fictional characters.

[manolia]

He was my least favourite from the fellowship. I always had a soft spot for Legolas :p

[Bakiryu]

He was my least favourite from the fellowship. I always had a soft spot for Legolas :p

*nod, nod*


I always liked Frodo myself. But Boromir was a great character, he's a little bit boring tho.

[ntropyincarnate]

I've been coming to appreciate Boromir more and more recently. Although he is noble, he is more representative of the "ordinary" man. Aragorn, with his pure Numenorean blood, is in a class by himself, but Boromir is a character we can identify with. He is fallible, he has his weaknesses, he succumbs to temptation - but in the end he repents and redeems himself. He is a man with some of the best qualities of the human race, but still an imperfect one, like us.

[Dori]

Boromir is one of my favorite characters from LOTR, but I much prefer Pippin. :D

[andave_ya]

May has well weigh in. My favorite was always Strider the ranger (before being revealed as Aragorn). Now my principle opinion of Boromr is that he is a contrast to Aragorn to show how a man of high principles , valor and bravery can be derailed from a righteous quest by taking the seemly 'easy' route. Take ring--destory evil--done deal. Piece of cake. I feel that Boromir did not have a wider perspective on what the Ring was capable of doing. This can be much related to the Lord Christ going the way of the cross instead of booting the Romans out of Jerusalem as the Jews expected of the Messiah if I may present that anology. Aragorn is the very best man has to offer, Boromir is the man with the fatal flaw--expediency justifies taking shortcuts. With respect. I think you have admirably displayed why Boromir is worthy of admiration and have actually raised the character in my esteem but I had always read him in counterpoint to Aragorn.

Many people feel that way about Boromir, so don't worry, I'm not offended. However, would it not be easy for the Ring to control the mind of a man who's desperate to save his people as well as worried about the mental state of his father? In essence, Boromir had to rule Gondor without ruling it, as well as hold his family together. He had to deal with a Denethor going mad, a younger brother in the battlefield, and everyday, the deaths of more of his men, men that he had laughed, cried, and lived with. A man can only take so much. I don't know how Aragorn would have dealt with that. Yes Aragorn went through much -- but he had some foundation in Elrond and Arwen and the Rivendell household.

However, I do think you might be right in saying that Boromir didn't have a wider perspective on the Ring's capabilities, though. But maybe he's justified, because he had all of Gondor screaming for help on his mind.


Tolkien I would say is one of the worst writers, when it comes to character. Boromir is no exception; he never goes beyond character, or does something unsuspected.

As Tolkien is one of my favorite authors, I have no idea what to say to that. Just some questions: if he's not good at characters, is he good at anything? And what do you consider good fantasy?




I think he is a very "human" character, with an equal amount of good and evil in his soul. Most humans are made in such way, and I have to admit that I've always felt close to him, as well. He is not the "hero", who is always good. He is not the "villain", he is human. And I really like that when it comes to fictional characters.

Thanks. I agree.


He is fallible, he has his weaknesses, he succumbs to temptation - but in the end he repents and redeems himself. He is a man with some of the best qualities of the human race, but still an imperfect one, like us.

Yes we are imperfect, but is it wrong to be desperate to save and protect your people?

[JBI]

"As Tolkien is one of my favorite authors, I have no idea what to say to that. Just some questions: if he's not good at characters, is he good at anything? And what do you consider good fantasy?"

He was exceptionally good with languages, an excellent academic, and a very good world builder. When it comes to character however, he had very little in terms of depth or beauty. When it came to prose style, he was perhaps one of the most boring. When it came to plot, he had something, a curiosity, but not much.

As in good fantasy, excluding classic pre-Tokienien works, Zelazny is probably the best I can think of, Le Guin comes close, as does L. M. Bujold. But lets be honest, how much fantasy literature is worth reading twice? How much is worth studying. Hell, how much is worth reading to begin with? Slim to none, the same with almost any specified genre, from mystery to romance. It is when the author goes beyond genre, beyond what has been done before, that something magical happens.

[ntropyincarnate]

Yes we are imperfect, but is it wrong to be desperate to save and protect your people?

My point exactly, that's what I like about Boromir. I wasn't saying it's wrong to be desperate to protect your people, at all.