Lord of the Rings Fanatics Plaza

It has been supposed by some that 'The Scouring of the Shire' reflects the situation in England at the time when I was finishing my tale. It does not. It is an essential part of the plot foreseen from the outset,... (Foreward to the Second Edition)

I decided to read The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings again over the past year, and I believe I finally understand why Tolkien said The Scouring was an "essential part of the plot." LOTR is the grander tale of course, but both stories follow the same pattern. They are "There and Back Again" tales.

Tolkien establishes "home" (The Shire), his protagonist (and the reader) is thrust out of home into a mysterious and strange world. But the story can't end there (with the death of Smaug/Battle of Five Armies and the destruction of the Ring). Because of their experiences, they have changed. Home (The Shire) is different to them. And it's not just Bilbo and Frodo that now seem out-of-place in The Shire. Sam goes to the West as well, Merry is buried in Rohan, Pippin in Gondor. None of the hobbits final resting place is the "home" Tolkien establishes in the beginning of both stories.

I also feel like the scouring of the shire is necessary to show that the the Hobbits (who act as the lens for the reader) were not wholly sheltered from the evil which occurred throughout the rest of Middle-earth. Similarly, this also provides an opportunity for the hobbits to participate in the struggle against evil (albeit on their smaller hobbit-scale). In a sense it's a lesson in First they came ...:


First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Romeran wrote: ↑Mon Mar 07, 2022 6:29 pm I also feel like the scouring of the shire is necessary to show that the the Hobbits (who act as the lens for the reader) were not wholly sheltered from the evil which occurred throughout the rest of Middle-earth. Similarly, this also provides an opportunity for the hobbits to participate in the struggle against evil (albeit on their smaller hobbit-scale). In a sense it's a lesson in First they came ...:

Yes, I believe that is another reason. The ending is so bitter-sweet, but I love how Frodo and Lobelia reach an understanding of respect between them, because of Lobelia's courage in standing up to Sharkey's men.

I think The Hobbit is also kind of bitter-sweet. Perhaps not the text itself, because it still reads as a light-hearted children's story. It's essentially a treasure hunt, but Bilbo's a changed person after returning home from the "wide, strange" world. Tolkien (through the narrator's voice) said Bilbo lost the respect of other hobbits, but gained so much more. But I wonder if coming home, after being presumed dead, and in the middle of them auctioning off all his stuff, must have been a bit of a shock. It would certainly upset me. It's not nearly as traumatic as Frodo's return home, but Bilbo seems restless and uncomfortable back in The Shire. I wonder how much of that is from the Ring, but also if being presumed dead and the frustration that caused Bilbo was also a reason?