Side character
Definitely the main character.
Tolkien explicitly stated that Sam was the main character:
The reason Sam could give up One Ring was because he wanted nothing more than a small garden to tend to. He never desired anything more. Hence, The Ring couldn’t tempt him.
Edit: To clarify, Sam never attempted to steal The Ring from Frodo. That is because Sam could resist the temptation of the ring because of his simple desires.
I thought it was cuz he never directly carried it, at least not for long. If The Ring couldn’t tempt him, why couldn’t he be the one to carry it instead of Frodo?
I think Sam wouldn’t have the conviction to get things done. He wasn’t the one who stood up and accepted the ring at the council. Sam was loyal and didn’t have lofty desires, but he didn’t have the spirit of adventure and perseverance that Frodo had. He was the perfect ally to help Frodo, but he wouldn’t have made a good Ring bearer himself.
I like this idea. Is it canonical?
GigaChad, Hobbit edition
Slammed prime Hobbitussy
That’s gotta be a brand new sentence
Tolkien said that Sam is actually the hero in LOTR
That’s fine. Sam didn’t do it for the fame, he just did it for his friend Frodo.
"went home, kicked sarumans ass for good, and then got to slammin…
Oh right, the whole battle of the shire isn’t a thing because some dork chopped it and Tom bombadil completely out of a movie script.
What? No… I’m not bitter… much
They’re saving it for the sequel, “The Shire, An Inconvenient Truth”
