This is often the most overlooked character of the story. After all, it's not the hero himself we're talking about, they're not protagonists and surely, if the loyal side-kick hadn't been there to do so-and-so thing, then someone else would've stepped up to the job. It wasn't vital. It's not like only Sam can accompany Frodo on his journey to Mordor...is it?
Is it?
Often enough, the sidekick is also used to provide some comic relief, playing the funny, sometimes goofy character and that doesn't really help in taking them seriously. And besides, the sidekick's main purpose, as far as the story is concerned, is to be with the main character. That is pretty much it.
It's quite interesting to see how these archetypes are defined by the protagonist of the story – the mentor has to guide someone and the sidekick has to be at someone's side. They are heroes, but only as long as there is a main character to exist around.
There is a fine line between mentor and sidekick, though. It used to be clear that the mentor teaches the hero and the hero teaches the sidekick, never the other way around. But nowadays, the lines have perhaps become a bit blurred. Sidekicks can sometimes take on the role of mentor as well. But unlike mentors, sidekicks have to stay the full story. Whereas mentors can and often need to disappear at some point (in order for the hero to stand on his own legs), the sidekick's whole point is to take the whole journey alongside the hero.
The sidekick can be a secondary character, staying within the boundaries of helper and just that, but he can also be developed into a larger character, eventually even becoming co-protagonist. For example, Ron Weasley in the Harry Potter series is a sidekick, but not just. He does have his own personal story and while he is there to help Harry on his journey, he has his own journey to take. That's an example of a developed sidekick.
But let us look at some sidekick examples, shall we? I promise there are interesting things ahead.
Since I just mentioned Ron, it seemed only natural to start with these two. Ron and Hermione are two interesting examples because they take on other roles as well. Besides being a sidekick, Hermione takes on the role of mentor, sometimes, because of her vast magical knowledge. She sometimes serves as teacher to Harry, but remains a sidekick (accompanying Harry to the very end of the story).
Also, Ron Weasley often provides comedic moments, lightening the mood, and turning into the joker character ever so often. He also is on a journey of proving his self-worth and often provides the muscle factor to the story.
They both have their own personal story-arcs and while important to the story, neither actually takes over the main plot. They are supported within the main story-arc, but neither is quite as profound as Harry Potter's own journey.
So they remain in the shoes of sidekicks.
This one is another classic. It's usually the role of the sidekick that besides loyal companion, they also provide a contrast to the protagonist. John Watson rises up to that role. He is the scientific side as opposed to his friend's deductive side. He is the gentleman, the more traditionally Victorian character, as opposed to Sherlock's eccentric, more analytic character. And finally, he is the more humane type, often contrasting Sherlock's apparent lack of emotions.
This is a very important part of the sidekick's role – through contrast, they must bring out important traits in the protagonist. Like the mentor, they must challenge the main character while also supporting him. Because the sidekick, in this case Watson, is also very much alike the main character. Despite a few key opposing points, the protagonist and the sidekick are two sides of the same coin, they must have a common core in order for the story to work. The sidekick's job is to keep in check the worse part of the main character while also bringing out the good.
Dr Watson constantly does this for Sherlock Holmes, always being the wall off of which Sherlock can bounce back. And not only.
Holmes was a man of habits... and I had become one of them... a comrade... upon whose nerve he could place some reliance... a whetstone for his mind. I stimulated him... If I irritated him by a certain methodical slowness in my mentality, that irritation served only to make his own flame-like intuitions and impressions flash up the more vividly and swiftly. Such was my humble role in our alliance.
-Dr Watson in "The Adventure of the Creeping Man"
I've left Sam for last although he's the first sidekick example that comes to mind. The truth is Sam is a very tricky character and I first needed to establish the traditional part of the sidekick before taking on the character of Sam. Why?
Because Sam transcends the job of “just a sidekick”. Interestingly, JRR Tolkien actually went on to say that Samwise was the real hero of the story and not Frodo Baggins, as you are led to believe. And this is a very strange thing to say, because by all accounts, Frodo seems to be the main character – a lot of the story is told from his perspective and he is, after all, the Ringbearer. All other journeys, at least throughout the trilogy, relate to his journey to destroy the Ring.
So why did Tolkien say this?
Well, if you think about it, Sam is the character who undertakes the greatest transformation. He goes from a simple farmer who dreams of adventures, of elves and magic, to actually being one of the main characters in such an epic journey. It's an adventure that is to be expected for Frodo, being after all a Baggins, but not for Sam. Also, it's interesting to note that the story doesn't end with Frodo leaving Middle-Earth with the elves, but rather with Sam coming home to his Rosie.
'I'm back.' he says. Now, why would the story end like that if Sam was nothing but a sidekick? Why not with Frodo going with the elves? It seems more epic, surely.
And Sam saves the world, let's not forget. The actual destruction of the Ring only comes about through Sam's determination. Frodo nearly throws it all away. Sam has many interesting, often overlooked sides to him. He carries Frodo up the mountain, no easy task. He is the only Ringbearer to be undamaged by its power (he carries the ring when Frodo is wounded in Shelob's Lair) and let's not forget, he kills a huge, terrifying spider in one-on-one combat.
And while Frodo is damaged beyond repair by his journey, losing something essential of himself, Sam is not. He has a far more optimistic view and throughout, he is fueled by love (for Frodo, the Shire, Rosie, his life up to now) whereas Frodo is fueled by a sense of duty.
And so, while Samwise seems the typical sidekick character, I don't think he is. A hidden hero, perhaps? A sidekick-turned-hero? I don't know, but I guess he just goes to show things aren't always as they seem.
In any story.
References:
Dr Watson - Wikipedia
Character Archetypes - S for Sidekick
All About Sam – Why the Main Character of ‘The Lord of the Rings’ is Really Samwise Gamgee
Did Tolkien really explicitly consider Sam the true hero of The Lord of the Rings?
@honeydueVote 
Witness proposal is here:
Go To Steem Witness Page
In the bottom of the page type: adsactly-witness and press vote.
Use small letters and no "@" sign. Or, click here to vote directly!
Thank you!
