Talk:Samwise Gamgee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles. Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.
Assessment B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film. Article upgrading needed: You can help! WP:IA   Stub to Start-Class Upgrading Instructions for Films Note that instructions for articles on other types of film topics within the scope of WikiProject Films are currently under development. To contribute in upgrading this stub article to Start class, the following requirements must be met: Significant intro (list the title, alternate titles, year released, director, actors starring in the film, summary of headings, etc.) Film infobox ({{infobox film}}) Picture: Consult WikiProject Free Images for freely released images from a film shoot, opening, or other relevant free image. Non-free and unlicensed images are to be avoided if at all possible, but if used should include a detailed fair use rationale. (An image is not required for start class if unavailable.) Plot summary Include cast and crew information. At least two other developed sections of information (production, reception (including box office figures), awards and honors, themes, differences from novel or TV show, soundtrack, sequels, DVD release, etc.) Categories (by year, country, language, and genre(s))  Helpful links: WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF, WP:WAF Once this article has fulfilled these requirements, the film can be reassessed to Start class and this template will be removed automatically.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

It is requested that a screenshot or screenshots be included in this article to improve its quality.

- for the 1980 cartoon

Contents 1 Older comments 2 Commentary 3 Images and weapons 4 Footnotes are broken 5 Gardner 6 Death

[edit] Older comments

The comment at the end suggesting that Sam and Frodo MIGHT have a homoerotic relationship, even though it says it is ambiguous, should be removed. It isn't ambiguous. Sam is the brother he never had, etc. It's like old epic tales were "bands of brothers" share bonds of purely platonic love during time of war and trials.

It is probably fair to say that Tolkien would never have even dreamed of such a thing. However, it is something that people frequently bring up. -Aranel ("Sarah") 04:38, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No it's the way it's phrased; a new edit that wasn't here a few months ago.

Morwen, Pigsonthewing -

I found the following reference at http://www.planet-tolkien.com/board/cat/3/thread/1909/0 :

"Tolkien did not know that there really was a Sam Gamgee until he received a letter from the gentleman on March 13, 1956 and he was very surprised indeed. Gamgee was a word used for cotton-wool, after it's inventor Sampson Gamgee."

Also:

Back in March of 1956, the Professor got a letter ...from a gentleman whose name was... Sam Gamgee ! It seems Mr. Gamgee had heard that his name was, ahem, mentioned in The Lord of the Rings, though he had not read the book. On March 18th, the Professor replied with a letter which ran, in part :

"Dear Mr. Gamgee,

It was very kind of you to write. You can imagine my astonishment when I saw your signature! I can only say, for your comfort, I hope, that the 'Sam Gamgee' of my story is a most heroic character, now widely beloved by many readers, even though his origins are rustic. So that perhaps you will not be displeased at the coincidence of the name of this imaginary character of supposedly many centuries ago being the same as yours."

The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, ed. Humphrey Carpenter

He proceeded to send Mr. Gamgee signed copies of all three volumes of the book. However, this entire incident did start a bit of a worry, as recorded in his biography.

"For some time I lived in fear of receiving a letter signed 'S. Gollum'. That would have been more difficult to deal with. "

Tolkien: A Biography by Humphrey Carpenter

( http://quenta-narwen.blogspot.com/2003_03_16_quenta-narwen_archive.htm )

So in short, it seems that Sam Gamgee was indeed named after the tissue, not the man. -- ChrisO 19:24, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

There's a better quote in letter 257

"The choice of Gamgee was primarily directed by alliteration; but I did not invent it. It was caught out of childhood memory, as a comic word or name. It was in fact the name when I was small (in Birmingham) for 'cotton-wool'. (Hence the association of the Gamgees with the Cottons.) I knew nothing of its origin.

Morwen - Talk 19:35, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Nice one - I've added that to the article. However, it doesn't really explain why of all names he chose Sam, so I suspect there was something subconscious going on there! -- ChrisO 20:18, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I removed this from after the first paragraph:

"An unusually funny scene from the LOTR films, where Sam enunciates out the meaning of 'taters' to Gollum, became an internet meme for a short while."

It's very obscure (evidence?) and it doesn't belong at the top of this article. I'd like to see evidence that it's significant enough for inclusion anywhere before putting it elsewhere. --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 19:46, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Edited to correct typo in link to "Gamgee Tissue" (Name section)

[edit] Commentary

While all that information in the Commentary section is interesting, I don't think it's necessarily important enough to have its own section. (I am talking about the content, not the quanity or quality). Personally, I think it could be shortened and cut a whole lot more and go under a section called 'Trivia'. —Mirlen 00:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images and weapons

first comment copied from User talk:Carcharoth

Instead of revert the edits I thought it would be better to ask you in your talk page. I have a few questions about your recent edits to Samwise Gamgee.

1. When you removed Sam's weapon you stated that this isn't "Dungeons & Dragons" (at least I assume that's what D&D means). You also mentioned this in the "Template talk:Infobox Tolkien". What does that mean?
2. Why did you remove the image in the infobox? Do you plan on doing this for all charecter's articles? Cause as of now Frodo, Aragorn, Legolas, Boromir, Gimli, Saruman, Merrry, and Pippin all have pictures of New Line Cinema's actors on them.

--Ted87 20:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

1) I removed the weapons bit because I don't think Sam having a barrowblade is an important thing to know. In general, I would only fill in the weapon section if the weapon has a name. So I would agree for things like Aiglos, Narsil, Sting, Glamdring etc, but not just some barrowblade. The general trend towards putting a weapon in even when it is not really relevant - I mean Sam is not really a warrior - is what I meant by the Dungeons and Dragons comment. Does the proposal to only include weapons if they are named or relevant (eg - Legolas with a bow and Gimli with an axe, I would agree with) sound reasonable? Carcharoth 21:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

2) About the images, I was just trying out what I saw someone else doing. I discussed it with that editor here, and suggested that he move images to the "Portrayals" section, rather than remove them completely. Argonath and Balrog are examples of places where the images have been moved from the infobox to the "portrayals" section. I then got worried about images being "lost", and so I trawled the Tolkien categories and came up with over 300 images that are now linked (and displayed as gallery thumbnails) from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Middle-earth/Images. This editing of the Sam article was trying things out. Unfortunately, with the "Portrayals" section being so small, the pictures don't fit very well with the text. Especially when there are two of them, as here. Ideally, there would be a screenshot from the Rankin Bass Return of the King as well, but we don't have that. I'd prefer to see the images kept in the portrayals section, with the main infobox dealing with material from the book, and having a separate infobox to go in the portrayals section. That might also cure some of the layout problems. Does this sound reasonable? Carcharoth 21:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand the weapons rationale, but if you're going to change the format of the infobox then you should: One, do it for all articles, or like you said it is "absolutely contradictory to the text or use stuff that could misguide the reader", which Sam's image is not. And two, it should be done with a consensus (unless it was and I missed it).

--Ted87 22:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying out a new template at Frodo Baggins. See what you think. If I'm going ahead too fast, please revert all this and we can discuss at the WikiProject. Carcharoth 23:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I just put the image back for now. As for the infobox for Frodo, shouldn't the section say "Horse" or "Steed" instead of "Pony"? Since it is a more general term and most charecters don't have/use a pony. --Ted87 00:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Frodo Baggins. Carcharoth 07:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Footnotes are broken

For some reason the three footnotes don't appear in the References section but I can't fathom out why. Thu 11:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gardner

Is there more information regarding the house of Gardner? It might be nice to expand on that a little. Prometheus^-X303- 19:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Death

I changed the death from "Fourth Age" to "unknown." He departed to Aman, the land of eternal life, and it is unclear whether he, as a mortal being, would die there or live eternally with the elves. Any guess as to his death is pure speculation. Papercrab 20:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Well we can presume he died in the Fourth Age because he is not immortal. Saying "presumably" doesn't seem to inappropriate. --Ted87 07:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

While he may not have been immortal, he was a ringbearer, which counts for something. However, I think that we can have "unknown, presumably fourth age" would be best -Rebent 21:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Tolkien says in The Letters of J. R. R. Tolkien that mortals would still die in Aman. Uthanc 11:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

It might be worth noting that it appears to be within the power of the Valar to grant immortality to mortals who live in the Undying Lands. Tuor for example, at least according to Middle Earth legend. Elrond and Elros are also specifically offered this choice, although unlike Tuor they are at least half-elven. It is not inconceivable that a similar choice might be set before the ring-bearers.

Is this written anywhere? No, but nor is it written that Sam or Frodo die. In the absence of any evidence either way, "unknown" seems more accurate than "Fourth Age" for Sam's death. Euryalus 11:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

"As for Frodo or other mortals, they could only dwell in Aman for a limited time -whether brief or long. The Valar had neither the power nor the right to confer 'immortality' upon them. Their sojourn was a 'purgatory', but one of peace and healing and they would eventually pass away (die at their own desire and of free will) to destinations of which the Elves knew nothing." Letter #325 [1] Uthanc 01:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's pretty conclusive - Died it is. Out of idle curiosity, I note the letter is not available at the website - do you know anywhere else it can be read online? Euryalus 01:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

It is - see on the fifth post. Uthanc 08:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)