📯 The Redemption of Boromir

What Boromir's final fate says about Tolkien's view of Good and Evil

Credit: New Line Cinema

A common criticism (or occasionally praise) of Tolkien I have encountered repeatedly on the internet is that The Lord of the Rings is a story of capital-G Good versus capital-E Evil, with none of the "morally grey" ambiguity that characterizes much of modern fantasy. But such a criticism (or celebration) of Tolkien reveals a basic lack of familiarity with or understanding of Tolkien. For, as we will see, the depiction of good and evil in The Lord of the Rings is much more nuanced than one might assume.

It turns out this contention that The Lord of the Rings is a simple story of Good and Evil is not a new interpretation. Tolkien himself encountered this response to his work in some of the reviews of the book that appeared following its release, and he even went so far as to specifically respond to it and demonstrate why it is a faulty analysis of the tale. Tolkien addresses this critique in Letter 154:

Some reviewers have called the whole thing simple-minded, just a plain fight between Good and Evil, with all the good just good, and the bad just bad. Pardonable, perhaps (though at least Boromir has been overlooked) in people in a hurry, and with only a fragment to read, and, of course, without the earlier written but unpublished Elvish histories. But the Elves are not wholly good or in the right. Not so much because they had flirted with Sauron; as because with or without his assistance they were 'embalmers'. They wanted to have their cake and eat it: to live in the mortal historical Middle-earth because they had become fond of it...and so tried to stop its change and history, stop its growth, keep it as a pleasaunce, even largely a desert, where they could be 'artists' – and they were overburdened with sadness and nostalgic regret. In their way the Men of Gondor were similar: a withering people whose only 'hallows' were their tombs. But in any case this is a tale about a war, and if war is allowed (at least, as a topic and a setting) it is not much good complaining that all the people on one side are against those on the other. Not that I have made even this issue quite so simple: there are Saruman, and Denethor, and Boromir; and there are treacheries and strife even among the Orcs.

Tolkien here reiterates the criticism before responding to it: some saw Lord of the Rings as “simple-minded, just a plain fight between Good and Evil.” He then produces his proofs that this critique is wrong. He begins with Boromir, discusses the complex morality that drove the Elves, mentions how the Men of Gondor were similar to the Elves in a way, and then ends by listing more examples of morally complex characters from The Lord of the Rings: Saruman, Denethor, Boromir again, and even the Orcs.

There is so much to discuss here in Tolkien’s reply that’s fascinating! If you’re only familiar with the portrayal of the Elves in Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings films, this description of them by Tolkien as “not wholly good or in the right” may be surprising (though the members of the “I finished The Silmarillion” club are not at all shocked).

The description of the Men of Gondor as “a withering people whose only ‘hallows’ were their tombs’ deserves an entire essay of its own!¹

The nuances in the morality of the Orcs is also a tempting topic of exploration—especially with the [overblown, in my opinion] uproar over portions of the portrayal of orcs in the second season of The Rings of Power.

And the triumvirate of Saruman, Denethor, and Boromir would be intriguing to set against one another to compare and contrast.

But for today, I will content myself to focus on Boromir, whom Tolkien mentions twice here in his response.

Boromir is one of Tolkien’s tragic figures: a great captain of men, he follows a prophetic vision to Rivendell and joins the Fellowship in the quest to destroy the only weapon that might possibly be able to save the home and people that he loves.

As it gradually becomes clear that Frodo will not take the Ring to Gondor, Boromir begins to feel his best and perhaps only chance of saving his people slipping away. He attempts to persuade Frodo to come to Gondor and let him use the Ring (temporarily, of course), and then attempts to take it from the halfling by force when Frodo refuses.

Frodo slips away using the Ring. When Boromir realizes (with the assistance of a sharp blow to the head) what he has done, he is stricken with regret.

The Fellowship is soon beset by orcs, and Boromir is mortally wounded defending Merry and Pippen, who are captured after he falls.

Boromir speaks his final words to Aragorn:

‘They have gone: the Halflings: the Orcs have taken them. I think they are not dead. Orcs bound them.’ He paused and his eyes closed wearily. After a moment he spoke again.
‘Farewell, Aragorn! Go to Minas Tirith and save my people! I have failed.’²

At the moment of his death, Boromir is convinced he has failed, likely on multiple fronts. He has not saved his people: they are in fact weaker now that their great captain is slain. He has not brought them a great weapon against their Enemy. He has betrayed Frodo, attempting to take the Ring by force. He has given in to the tempting power of the Ring, being overcome by desire for it and the power that it promises. And lastly, he has failed to protect Merry and Pippin.

This last bit is especially important, as it was the last action Boromir attempted. Furthermore, it was more significant than just him defending his friends or fighting off Orcs. In protecting Merry and Pippin, Boromir was attempting to atone for his failure with Frodo.

Tolkien himself explicitly describes Boromir’s efforts to defend Merry and Pippin as an attempt at redemption:

"The book [Book II] ends with the death of Boromir fighting the Orcs in an effort to redeem himself for his fall – he had tried to take the Ring from Frodo by force. (Letter 131)

So of the many meanings of Boromir’s “I have failed,” this is perhaps one of the most crucial.

Is Boromir right, though? Has he failed totally? He failed with Frodo, yes. But has he failed completely? And was it too late for him to be redeemed?

In a tale where the Good is simply good and the Bad is nothing but bad, Boromir’s pronouncement that he had failed would have been right. He would have failed completely, and his failure would reveal he had never been good in the first place, transform him into an unrepentant and wholly evil character, or some other obvious, extreme outcome.

But The Lord of the Rings is not “a plain fight between Good and Evil” and Boromir is not totally defined by his failure.

Instead, we find a nuanced portrayal of a character who yearns to do what is right but who finds himself increasingly struggling to determine what that is.

Boromir’s failure is a tragic component of his story, yes. But Boromir’s failure is not the final word in his story.

In the trial and triumph of Boromir, Tolkien masterfully explores the perils and temptation of power alongside the possibility of sacrifice and love as pathways to redemption.

Yes, redemption! Tolkien depicts Boromir’s redemption in at least three primary places within the text of the story itself. Let’s look together at each of these three evidences of Boromir’s redemption and call three witnesses to the stand in Boromir’s defense: Aragorn, Faramir, and Gandalf.

Special shout-out to all the Jokien with Tolkien: Extended Edition members who help make today’s newsletter possible! I so appreciate each and every paid subscriber and your support of me and this newsletter. Enjoy the rest of this Extended Edition Exclusive Essay.

To join the Extended Edition members in reading the full version of essays like this and to unlock the full archive of over fifty Extended Edition exclusive posts, upgrade today!

Subscriptions not your thing? Check out my e-books on Amazon (which includes a collection of essays like this!) or leave a one-time gift in my tip-jar for a month’s access to the archives of paid content like this essay!