Heroism in Lord of the Rings, its Character Structures, and Aragorn's Relationship to Strider

My response to a conversation on Twitter regarding heroism, its conceit, and Aragorn's relationship to Strider (see Stina Leicht's post.)

Heroism is one of the most unifying themes in fantasy literature.  Even those stories that reject it do so in recognition of it.  This tradition begins with Joseph W. Campbell's monomyth, a term borrowed from James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake, that he expanded on in his 1949 treatise The Hero with a Thousand Faces.  In this seminal text he sets out what the hero's journey is:

A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man.

If this is the accepted definition of The Hero, and I would argue that it is, who then is The Hero of J.R.R. Tolkein's Lord of the Rings?  By my estimation there are four candidates -- Frodo, Samwise, Gollum, and Aragorn -- and only one answer.  Aragorn.

While Frodo and Samwise are heroic hobbits, neither are The Hero of the story.  In the end, Frodo yields to the ring, putting it on his finger in triumph instead of casting it into the pit.  Only through Gollum's intervention is the ring destroyed.  This failure doesn't diminish the trials Frodo suffered, but it invalidates him as The Hero.  Likewise, Samwise does not bear the burden that Frodo does, despite his attempts to share it.

Obviously, an argument exists that there are many types of heroes, both in literature and reality, beyond that proscribed by Campbell.  I would agree, and I think there's a case to be made that Frodo, Samwise, Gollum, even Arwen, are part of Tolkein's heroic conceit.  However, under Campbell's definition, The Hero is Aragorn.  He consciously chooses to set forth from a common world into a conflict with supernatural forces.  He wins a decisive victory and returns to his people with the power to set right the wrongs wrought by Sauron's influence on the world.

From a structural perspective, Tolkein wrote his series with two protagonists who operate independently of one another beginning mid-way through The Fellowship of the Ring until the series' conclusion.  Frodo and Aragorn drive the two pronged narrative.  Both suffer from the same antagonist, Sauron and his minions, and both have distinct foils that serve to couch all that they do.  In Frodo's case, the foils are obvious in Gollum and Samwise who both reveal Frodo's strength and weakness respectively.  Aragorn's is not so simple or perhaps too simple.

It's my contention that Aragorn's foil is himself, or rather his alter-ego Strider.  Aragorn is surrounded by other characters in the story, but none that challenge his value as The Hero.  Only he can do that as Strider.  His fears, his acceptance of the inevitable, and the loss of Arwen, are all tied to Strider.  Strider never manifests himself completely once Aragorn accepts his legacy, but the remembrance of him and what he represents never leave entirely.  My argument isn't that Aragorn has a second personality, or that Strider isn't part of who Aragorn is, but rather from a structural perspective Strider and Aragorn exist in the heroic conceit as separate and distinct characters.

Is the entire discussion semantics? Probably.  If I accept my argument is true though, I begin to look at things differently, specifically Gollum's relationship to his former self which is probably an actual multiple personality situation.  He too suffers from many of the same fears exhibited by Aragorn/Strider, but reacts quite differently.  I wonder now if there's a case to be made that Gollum is as much a foil to Aragorn as he is to Frodo.  Something to think about anyway.

Now, feel free to tell me I'm full of shit.