Actually, the relationship in question may have been modeled on the one that develops between soldiers fighting together in a war, which is a relationship Tolkien would have been familiar with. So they would be more like brothers, which is admittedly closer than master/servant, but not quite Ho Yay either.
Exactly and this line "Sam does not correct her comments as a childish misunderstanding. Neither does he explain to Elanor that he is in fact married to Rose Cotton, or that the two relationships are of a different nature; instead he says that his sadness has lessened and confides that he hopes to see Frodo again, thereby implicitly validating his daughter's insights."
That's just wishful thinking on the parts of certain shippers. Sam doesn't correct her because she's a child and not implying anything of the sort. They're both too innocent to notice any need for correction. Plus, as mentioned, the culture is more openly affectionate, so Elanor implying that Sam had strong feelings for Frodo does not imply anything more.
It bugs me that people need to read such a strong bond between two people as automatically being romantic or sexual. Its limits and diminishes us all.
"Finally, it must be mentioned that neither Rose nor any of her family appear in Fellowship at all, which renders Sam's first thoughts of her and her brothers in the middle of R.o.t.K. as a Remember the New Guy? moment. It is likely that Tolkien was aware of the fumble he had committed at the end of The Two Towers (the first quote above) and created Rosie to counteract it."
Except that Tolkien didn't write The Return of the King after The Two Towers came out; the entirety of The Lord of the Rings was a single long novel which he wrote, rewrote, and endlessly revised prior to its publication. If Rose is first mentioned in Book VI, that's the way he wanted it, not a last-minute fix.
Edited by trystero11