Other Titles > Short Stories & Others

On the goodness of evil

(1/3) > >>

Gorgorotterath:
I had a cursorily read to the foreword "On the goodness of evil" as published on the Grimdark Magazine anthology (it is visible for everyone to see on the Amazon preview). I do not want to address the core of the argument, but mostly the misinterpretation of Tolkien and The Lord of the Rings metaphysics of evil,  offered as a prop to sustain Bakker's argument.


--- Quote ---Sauron is evil in the absolute sense.
--- End quote ---
This is false, as stated by Elrond in the Council and asserted by Tolkien in many of his Letters. There is no quest to destroy "evil" in any absolute sense, and Elrond affirms this as well when referring to the destruction of Thangorodhrim at the end of the First Age. Not all means are allowed to fight Sauron and his servants, and if anything Tolkien tries to stage a Quest where the enemy is not defeated through Power but renouncing to Power. This probably is not completely successful, but the use of strength is limited to the natural capabilities of each character and some unavoidable fantastic help.

--- Quote ---Orcs can be killed by the thousands, but no Orc can be murdered, simply because murder is intrinsecally immoral, and to destroy evil is to do good in Middle-earth.
--- End quote ---

While it may be true that no Orc can be murdered (Tolkien could not make up is mind on whether his Orcs had souls or not and mostly sticked on them being soulles [see Morgoth's Ring]), saying that "to destroy evil is to do good in Middle-earth" is false.
Faramir said to Sam "I would not snare even an orc with a falsehood" (TT, Book IV, Chapter 5), and I think reasonable infer from that that he would not kill an Orc either if not for self-defense. Faramir is the character Tolkien identified with most. Somewhere else, in Morgoth's Ring I think (I will check on this later), it is stated as well that Elves would not kill an Orc just for being an Orc, and if taken prisoners the would treat them with dignity even if with duress. Tolkien wrote himself in a corner with Orcs I think, and there is room for ambiguity here. Many characters do not show mercy for Orcs, but there are not the ones considered Wise. The topic is quite complicated, but just the same the absolutistic view described in few words by Bakker is misleading, and to verify this it is sufficient to read The Lord of the Rings alone.
So I wonder if this misreading is intentional to further an argument, or if it just underlies a lack of understanding of Tolkien's worldview

H:
I certainly lack a real scholarly, full understanding of Tolkien's world-view, having only actually read LotR once and none of the Similarion.

However, while it does factor to me that Bakker's characterization of "evil" in Middle Earth is rather simplistic, I am unsure that your argument on why that is incorrect leaves me convinced that Bakker demonstrably wrong.  As you say, "Tolkien wrote himself in a corner with Orcs I think, and there is room for ambiguity here."  The issue of Orcs is that it is very difficult, at least for me, because they are such caricatures.  Or at least, so it seems from my shallow reading.  I am unsure if an Orc would ever charactarize itself, or it's kind as good.  Perhaps they would, but that would certainly be a different version of "good" from any we would humanly consider it.  I mean, cursory looks at Orc's origins point to them being "all identical in their hate for everything that Ilúvatar and the Valar had constructed (including themselves) to resemble the hate that lay within Melkor."

It's a tough sell to even point to perspective here as a driver of such a dichotomy, when one group is driven only by hate and envy.  I mean, it even points to Orcs hating themselves, which again seems to imply that Orcs would not even regard themselves as actually good.

As for Sauron, again, I must plead some ignorance on the deeper subject, but the Quest being not the destroy evil doesn't really point to Sauron not being evil.  The quest, of course, is to destroy the Ring though, right?  So, indeed, while not specifically to "destroy" evil, the Quest is set to deny evil it's greatest weapon?  (Perhaps an overstatement, but the sentiment being to deny it an instrument of evil.)  If Sauron wasn't actually evil, why is there a need to be rid of the Ring at all?

Again, I do lack a real deep understanding of Tolkien though, so any further elucidation is much appreciated.

Gorgorotterath:
Sauron isevil, no doubt on that. But Sauron is not absolutely evil. He may be irredeemably evil, at least within the framework of The Lord of the Rings, but he remains a creature God (in Tolkien's secondary world).
Tolkien does not explain away evil (otherwise he would be the ur-grimdark author!). The existence and persistence of evil is a core theme of his legendarium. However, Tolkien does not explain evil either, or if it attempts an explanation that is done in mythological terms (i.e. Ainulindalë).
Upon rereading LotR two years ago after decades, I was actually surprised to notice how the Dark Lord figure is quite relativized. There are many other evils, in Middle-earth and competing interests, and possibility of Falls that could turn good characters (Boromir, Galadriel, Gandalf) to evil.
What I contest is that you can reduce the Tolkienian treatment of evil to a pure "Us vs. Them" dichotomy, or reducing evil in his work as a pure matter of perspective. It has be done, notably in a few rewritings, but you end up with something rather different from LotR at its kernel.

Sorry, maybe I am murking things even more. I guess you're right, it would require a way longer discussion to conclude that Bakker is wrong. I have to give up on Orcs, the matter is really convoluted and there would be too much to write. On one hand they are born of hate, but on the other Tolkien stated and restated that "the Shadow cannot make only mock".  I add two quotes on their nature, that could help to further the discussion.

From Letter 153, Tolkien's Letters

--- Quote ---[Eru/God] gave special 'sub-creative' powers to certain of His highest created beings: that is a guarantee that what they devised and made should be given the reality of Creation. Of course within limits, and of course subject to certain commands or prohibitions. But if they 'fell', as the Diabolus Morgoth did, and started making things 'for himself, to be their Lord', these would then 'be', even if Morgoth broke the supreme ban against making other 'rational' creatures like Elves or Men. They would at least 'be' real physical realities in the physical world, however evil they might prove, even 'mocking' the Children of God. They would be Morgoth's greatest Sins, abuses of his highest privilege, and would be creatures begotten of Sin, and naturally bad. (I nearly wrote 'irredeemably bad'; but that would be going too far. Because by accepting or tolerating their making — necessary to their actual existence — even Orcs would become part of the World, which is God's and ultimately good.) But whether they could have 'souls' or 'spirits' seems a different question; and since in my myth at any rate I do not conceive of the making of souls or spirits, things of an equal order if not an equal power to the Valar, as a possible 'delegation', I have represented at least the Orcs as pre-existing real beings on whom the Dark Lord has exerted the fullness of his power in remodelling and corrupting them, not making them.

--- End quote ---

And this, about how to deal with them according to the "Wise" (Myths Transformed, section VIII, in Morgoth's Ring):

--- Quote ---But even before this wickedness of Morgoth was suspected the Wise in the Elder Days taught always that the Orcs were not 'made' by Melkor, and therefore were not in their origin evil. They might have become irredeemable (at least by Elves and Men), but they remained within the Law. That is, that though of necessity, being the fingers of the hand of Morgoth, they must be fought with the utmost severity, they must not be dealt with in their own terms of cruelty or treachery. Captives must not be tormented, not even to discover information for the defence of the homes of Elves and Men. If any Orcs surrendered and asked for mercy, they must be granted it, even at a cost.* This was the teaching of the Wise, though in the horror of the War it was not always heeded.
--- End quote ---

Tolkien wrote a lot of controversial statements on the origin and the nature of Orcs, and he could not find a proper solution that fit with his worldview. So there is room for ambiguity, but to insofar as to state they are outside the Law (of Eru/God).

Wilshire:
Just checking out your argument, let me know if I'm not understanding you.


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 11:36:14 am ---
--- Quote ---Sauron is evil in the absolute sense.
--- End quote ---
This is false, as stated by Elrond in the Council and asserted by Tolkien in many of his Letters.

--- End quote ---
I'm not sure being stated once in the text absolutely invalidates the claim. Definitely a point against it, but maybe something that could easily be overlooked?


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 11:36:14 am ---There is no quest to destroy "evil" in any absolute sense, and Elrond affirms this as well when referring to the destruction of Thangorodhrim at the end of the First Age.

--- End quote ---
There not being a quest to destroy evil doesn't address whether or not Sauron is a swell guy. I'm under the impression that LOTR is all about stopping Sauron, and it's not because he's making life better for everyone.


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 11:36:14 am ---Not all means are allowed to fight Sauron and his servants,

--- End quote ---
I think this is addressed in the 'no orc can be murdered bit', which you address later, and at best can fairly be interpreted either way.


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 11:36:14 am ---and if anything Tolkien tries to stage a Quest where the enemy is not defeated through Power but renouncing to Power. This probably is not completely successful, but the use of strength is limited to the natural capabilities of each character and some unavoidable fantastic help.

--- End quote ---
I don't follow this regarding the argument for whether or not Sauron is evil. Lots of people/things have power in LOTR, from hobbits to Gandalf to Sauron. Power isn't the question here, its evil.


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 11:36:14 am ---So I wonder if this misreading is intentional to further an argument, or if it just underlies a lack of understanding of Tolkien's worldview

--- End quote ---
I think the dichotomy you just laid out here is as bad or worse than what you describe above. Why are the only two options intentional falsehood or idiocy? I think it equally likely that there are plenty of arguments for his interpretation, but it seems you've dismissed any outright already, so what's the discussion happening here?

Don't get me wrong, your arguments seem reasonable. I don't know enough about LOTR to really make a stance either way. Both you and Bakker seem reasonably assured of yourselves, but I'm not going to call you out as a liar or a dullard for having a different view.

Perhaps you didn't intend to be as critical in that last sentence as it came off to me. If not, I do apologize, and would ask for some further clarity. Is it not possible that another option rather than stupidity or evil-intentions is at play here?

Wilshire:
Oops, you posted just before I did. Going to have to double post to address :)


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 02:06:10 pm ---Sauron isevil, no doubt on that. But Sauron is not absolutely evil. He may be irredeemably evil, at least within the framework of The Lord of the Rings, but he remains a creature God (in Tolkien's secondary world).

--- End quote ---
I read the first sentance and thought "I don't get it, what's the difference", but then the next sentence:
Really? (read: as one generally astounded by new information. Not to be read as incredulous)
That's something I never once considered. If that really is the case, and its clear elsewhere in LOTR, then I begin to understand where you're coming from.


--- Quote from: Gorgorotterath on June 02, 2017, 02:06:10 pm ---Tolkien does not explain away evil (otherwise he would be the ur-grimdark author!). The existence and persistence of evil is a core theme of his legendarium. However, Tolkien does not explain evil either, or if it attempts an explanation that is done in mythological terms (i.e. Ainulindalë).

--- End quote ---
This seems to conflict with the above. Isn't mythological evil the kind of good/bad dichotomy Bakker is pointing out? I've not read Silmarillion, btw.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page