Thanks for the link. I agree very much with the post, particularly in this case where slash is such a relatively new concept compared to when this book was originally written. Sam and Frodo were not intended in any way to be a gay relationship. I wouldn't say that it cheapens the story to slash them because of the gay aspect. That would imply that the case would be different if Sam and Frodo were a male and a female who were friends; that it wouldn't cheapen the story if it was a straight relationship, when the fact is, it would. Entering any sort of sexuality into this section of the story cheapens it, because it is about issues and almost Platonic ideals far more important than if there is an attraction between the characters. That reduces all of the actions that they take into questioning whether it is because of an underlying sexual subtext (Frodo "choosing" Gollum over Sam, for instance, and for anyone whose mind goes there, may I say "Ewwwww!!"?) when the true focus of the story is the ring, the effect it is having on Frodo, and Sam's extreme loyalty and (non-sexual) love of Frodo in protecting his friend, both due to his friendship with him and due to his promise to Gandalf to take care of him. There are stories where gay subtext can enrich and even add new depth to a relationship, such as between Spike and Angel (for the record, I don't think that there was an actual sexual relationship, but there is some definite sexual tension between them, due to the intertwininess of their relationships with Dru among other things), but this story just does not lend itself to it. Frodo is the knight, and Sam is the good, loyal, faithful squire; Frodo bears the weight of the quest in protecting the ring, and Sam protects Frodo.