Least Favorite Characters in Tolkien's Writings

[Willow Oran]

I refuse to be saved by a whiny, emo, incompetent. Let Hurin kill Morgoth. Way cooler than his son and he's the one who was really wronged.

Though I do have to say, the saving grace of the story of the Children of Hurin is that it accomplishes admirably its story-internal purpose. It tortures its audience quite well.

[Curufin]

All these hate messages towards Túrin are a bit ironic since Turin's the one that kills Morgoth in the end, thus saving all of us.

In some versions. But I can selectively choose to ignore those versions.

I refuse to be saved by a whiny, emo, incompetent. Let Hurin kill Morgoth. Way cooler than his son and he's the one who was really wronged.

Though I do have to say, the saving grace of the story of the Children of Hurin is that it accomplishes admirably its story-internal purpose. It tortures its audience quite well.

And at least the gene pool dies with Túrin. Thank god he didn't have any children...er...nieces or nephews?

[Finarfin-1]

Least favorite characters:

Feanor: Self-involved to the point of narcissism, controlling to the point of megalomania, insecure to the point of psychosis and the ingrate of all ingrates. I could understand him denying everyone the Silmarils when the Trees were poisoned, everyone *except* Yavanna. If he so clearly understood how painful it was to lose the masterwork of your immortal life, and had to acknowledge on SOME level that his masterwork owed what made it great to her Trees it's impossible for him by his very nature to be unaware just how deeply and permanently he was hurting her. Feanor must have loved the light of the Trees if it came into his heart, the inspiration to preserve their light I mean. To abandon the Trees to their fate when (it seemed) it was within his power to save them is on par with knowing as he died that the Noldor would never be able to defeat Morgoth, but still charging his sons to keep their Oath with his dying breath. My hatred for Feanor has never been eclipsed, not in all the thousands of fantasy novels I've read.

Frodo: God, could he have been any weaker emotionally/psychologically? His incredibly poor judgment, combined with the ugliness of his personality that the Ring only highlighted. I guess it wouldn't have bothered me so much, except for the fact everyone considered him this huge hero for failing JUST LIKE Isildur did. It was wrong (but perfectly in-character) for Samwise not to tell them what really happened.

Yup, I'll join the Turin hate-club as well. For all the reasons so eloquently stated.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I agree wholeheartedly regarding Feanor. I'd like to see some textual support for your description of Frodo. You sound like you're talking about movie-Frodo more than book-Frodo.

[Finarfin-1]

Hmm,
Maybe my views of Frodo have been colored by the movies. I know I was/am susceptible to it, since he always seemed weak and wishy-washy to me. Perhaps I should give him a pass because of it.

I'm rather Anti-Hobbit to begin with. I could have lived quite nicely without Tolkien ever infecting Middle Earth with them. Think that's why I adore the Silm. so much, it's a much more serious/high fantasy work. No goofball hobbits and their stupid overactive appetites and quivering at danger and...bleh, you get my point.

The man committed to a work of high fantasy. Trying to stick an Everyman in there just didn't work for me.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Finarfin-1

I'm rather Anti-Hobbit to begin with. I could have lived quite nicely without Tolkien ever infecting Middle Earth with them.

I agree!

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

Problem is, they're US. They're what ties that world to our own. It could have been done with Men, but Men who act like Hobbits are nothing more than tall Hobbits. The Hobbits were necessary for what Tolkien was trying to do.

That said, it would have been a very cool story, and I'll concede perhaps even cooler, without them.

[Finarfin-1]

Oh don't get me wrong,
I get what Tolkien was trying to say with/through the Hobbits, and he did a great job doing it. My problem is with his adding those elements at all.

What I find very interesting is that the bulk of Tolkien's later work in his last years was related to refining and expanding Silmarillion content. The Lord of the Rings were pretty much "finished", but Tolkien never seemed to feel like he'd said/done enough with the First and Second Ages.

When you read things like Aldarion and Erendis in the unfinished tales you almost get the feeling that Tolkien regretted to an extent going in the natural direction of Entropy. There's this subtle recurring theme present everywhere that he allows something major to be destroyed. Not simply renewal from the ashes of the old. Almost a return to the old. It's hard to explain.

[frodomerryandaragornrock]

Hobbit : probably Thorin. He's such a JERK!!! He bugged the HECK out of me!!! He's SO vain and greedy, I just wanted to punch him square in the face!

LOTR : probably Boromir. The only character I didn't really like. He's just so ignorant and [I]stupid[I] he just annoys me!!

I haven't read the Silmerilion yet, but I'm planning to!!

[ElizabethAnnRoger]

I could never like Frodo. He is just so...pansy!
The real hero in the LOTR is Sam, if you think about it.

[Jon S.]

I love Frodo. He is a true hero.

Tolkien in no way presents Frodo as a young headstrong hero aching for a fight, but rather as a reluctant one full of trepidation and self-doubt. Frodo seems to me more of a modern-day hero — who does his duty for lack of another choice — than a typical fantasy or legendary hero, who does it for the challenge and test of his prowess. This is part of what makes The Lord of the Rings so very different from other fantasy tales. If a typical fantasy writer had written the tale, he or she would undoubtedly have made Aragorn and not Frodo the main hero who confronts and destroys Sauron (as Aragorn's ancestor Isildur did before him). With Frodo, Tolkien does his own take on confronting evil and gives us a more accessible model for our own heroics.

http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dumm...-LANGUAGE.html

[frodomerryandaragornrock]

Originally Posted by ElizabethAnnRoger

I could never like Frodo. He is just so...pansy!
The real hero in the LOTR is Sam, if you think about it.

i think they both were essential to the story, in my opinion....i mean, without Sam, frodo wouldnt have been alive, but without Frodo, the whole story would have been pointless!! but yes, w/out sam the story would be much different/.

[Jon S.]

It's not a zero sum game where if Sam is a hero, Frodo can't be. In fact, they're both heroic.

[Olmer]

The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings
Definitely - Gandalf. A brilliant, shrewd and scary unhuman entity, who, by luck, has acquired a ring, which was enhancing his ability to persuade and manipulate persons by fegning concern and affection, but in reality he has none of human's feelings. Without any remorse and hesitation, he sends on a sure death people who love and trust in him.
The Silmarillion
Eru - out of a boredom has created his own game and was impassively wanching as his kings and knights are feuding, ripping the earth apart. But, anyway, he was not hesitating long in finding a scape-goat to put all blame for his erratic play.
On the other hand, if he started to look like a looser in this chess play, why not to wipe off the chess-pieces from the board, thus a whole population of living and breathing people of Beleriand and Numenor, and begin the game anew?

[hectorberlioz]

How can Gandalf be a least favorite character?!

Truth be told, I was never a big fan of Bob and Nob, the two hobbits who worked for Butterbeer.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

How can Gandalf be a least favorite character?!

I believe the question we answer in this thread is somewhat confusing.

There may be at least 2 meanings of "least favorite":
1. the one we find boring and unnecessary to the story, the one we don't like to read about
2. the one that we find hateful, or unsympathetic. These ones are interesting to read about, but they produce an unexpected emotional response.

I think Gandalf for Olmer falls in the second category.

When I have given my answers, I thought along the lines of boring and unnecessary characters, so named Tom, Ents and Eagles.

As for unsympathetic but interesting ones, for me it is Galadriel and all her dwimmor-realm, Gildor (ugh!), Sam (I find him so irritating!), Faramir (Mr.Perfect). In the Silm it is Eru, hands down.

[jammi567]

Sil - Turgon, simply because you believe that he's going to do the right thing (even if it's the hard choice), but in the end, acts like a ba*tard, just like his step-uncle. And I actually kind of liked him up until he made the choice to ignore Ulmo.

And I don't get the anti-Turin hate. He seemed to act exactly like the majority of the Elves did in that age.

LotR - Perfect Faramir. What makes him so special that he can act exactly like Tom around the Ring - I mean, even Aragorn had a moment in which he was tempted to take it before rejecting.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by jammi567

LotR - Perfect Faramir. What makes him so special that he can act exactly like Tom around the Ring - I mean, even Aragorn had a moment in which he was tempted to take it before rejecting.

Yea. It is unnatural, if you ask me.

BTW, never expected to find another Faramir-hater. Normally people adore him.

Er... did I mention that I don't like Eowyn? Not so much the lass herself, but the view of her as a hero and model.

[Mari]

Hmmm, Frodo is annoying, in the film more than the books.
In the Hobbit, the guy who was the leader of Rivertown was annoying as was that elvenking.

Gordis, I agree with you on Eowyn.

I thought I posted in this thread before.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

I go with "least favorite" being the one I feel is the biggest jerk.

Too many to choose from. I can probably narrow it down to two but I really dislike both Thingol and Feanor.