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 attempting to create a realistic good and evil character into one, Tolkien splits Sméagol’s character into two nearly separate personalities; which he can switch between almost instantaneously, and this is shown at different times throughout the book.
“ ‘very very good, eh, my precious? Let’s be good, good as fish sweet one, but to ourselves. Not Hurt the Nice hobbit, of Course, no, no.’
‘But the precious hold the precious,’ the voice of Sméagol objected. The take it, said the other, and let’s hold it ourselves!’ ”
Not only does Sméagol have this debate within his head as though holding both sides of an argument, but Tolkien actually names the two sides to Sméagol’s character different names. The caring and good side to the character is known as Sméagol, while the deceitful and evil side to his character is referred to as Gollum, and this is the more common state of mind that this character is in throughout the book. Tolkien describes physical change in the character as he changes states of mind, as we can see from this.
“Sméagol was holding a debate with some other thought that used the same voice, but made it squeak and hiss. A pale light and a green light alternated in his eyes as he spoke”
This quote is a good example of how Tolkien describes Sméagol’s physical changes that occur while he changes character. The only time that these physical changes influence the play, is when Sam is awakened by Sméagol talking to himself, and he notices these physical changes occurring. These, with what Sméagol is saying combine to grow great suspicion over Sméagol’s character in Sam’s mind.
There is evidence in the story that Gollum is evil, yet this contradicts evidence that he is good, although it is possible that his good is purely motivated by self gain. This quote shows evidence of Gollum’s evil.
“ ‘Got him!’ hissed Gollum in his ear. ‘At last, my precious, we’ve got him, yes, the nasty hobbit. We takes this one. She’ll get the other. O yes, Shelob will get him, not Sméagol: he promised; he won’t hurt master at all. But he’s got you, you nasty filthy little sneak!’”
This quote shows Gollum being evil and divisive. He manipulates even conditions where he is choosing an opponent to restrain and plans to kill, to suit himself the best, in a very selfish way. This is the evil side of Gollum. However, there are also times where Gollum can appear good, and this adds to the uncertainty over Gollum’s character.
“‘Yess, yes indeed,’ said Gollum sitting up. ‘Nice Hobbits! We will come with them. Fine them safe paths in the dark, yes we will’”
This quote shows how eager Gollum is to help the hobbits on their journey. However nice and good this may make Gollum appear though, we later find out that he is motivated again by himself, even in doing what appears to be good. This egocentric way of thinking on Gollum’s part makes him an interesting character, as ultimately, all his goals are to benefit himself and no one else.
The view that a convincing character should not be wholly good or wholly evil is also illustrated in the character of Frodo. Although no character in Lord of the Rings is portrayed as wholly good, Frodo is close. Despite his occasional over defensiveness and aggression towards Sméagol, Frodo usually does his best for the good.
“I do not feel any pity for Gollum. He deserves death. Deserves death! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some die that deserve life.”
This quote highlights how although Frodo may not always appear to have good at heart initially, he often does. To Frodo, death does not seem much of a punishment, but more of a ‘state’; you are living or dead. Although the simple fact of this is true, Frodo’s aspect seems, from this quote to have little emotion tied in with it. He states that although Gollum deserves death, he isn’t dead, and that some who do die, deserve to live. So what may appear as Frodo being harsh; considering killing Sméagol, he is simply being practical and realistic, not retaliating to anger or hatred with violence. Despite all this, Frodo’s efforts to be good do appear unrealistic, as his calmness through considering something as terminal as death seams almost insane and not at all human like. His lack of emotion is like that of an autistic human; and I have no reason to believe that Frodo is playing the role of an autistic character.
I have looked at how the character of Frodo plays a fairly good role, who can stay calm through what seems to be any situation, and how the character of Sméagol alternates between good and evil, yet never being consistent with one or the other. From looking at my evidence, I think that a convincing character cannot be wholly good or wholly evil, if they are based on humans. In this story, Hobbits share many characteristics of a human in their communication and thought, and the over-composed character of Frodo, and the unsettled state of the character of Sméagol I find it unconvincing.