I'm writing an essay on relativism in LOTR

[IronParrot]

As part of my International Baccalaureate diploma requirements, I am to write a 3500-4000 thesis paper on any subject within certain criteria. I chose to do an English lit study on our favourite novel... hopefully my topic proposal will be accepted. It's on "The Relativist Portrayal of Good and Evil in LOTR". Basically, I'm planning to argue that good and evil do not exist in pure forms in LOTR, and the story is less of a battle between good and evil than one of innocence and corruption.

I think I'll be doing some, er, "research" here at Entmoot, so opinions on the subject are definitely welcome and appreciated.

[easterlinge]

I have trouble with Special Relativity as it is..... why oh why did I do physics?

[Amandil]

Perhaps you could elaborate a bit on good and evil in it's pure form, as opposed to corruption and innocence (and relativism, for that matter!). It might be hard for the posters to provide helpful suggestions when they're not quite sure what you're on about.

Are you getting at (what I would call) dualism, with a simply good "substance" and a simply bad "substance," or monism, with all BEING being good, evil being only a deprivation of good? (I'm taking these ideas from my understanding of St. Augustine's refutation of Manichaean gnosticism.)

I think Tolkien is consistent with the second, "monist" type of metaphysic. Which, if I'm not mistaken, is what you're getting at with "innocence" and "corruption." Orcs are a prime example, I think: Morgoth didn't make an originally evil species, he had to take something that existed already and twist it to make it "corrupt"...

...I'm blabbering...sorry--you don't even know me!

(I'm new here, fresh from the MEVault boards...)

[Ñólendil]

Welcome Amandil, old friend! Ranadwelt here, I though you were a different person! I'm glad you've decided to post here, it's a great place!

[IronParrot]

Well really, what I'm going to get at especially is the question: "Do absolute, pure good and evil actually exist in LOTR?"

And I'm going to try to justify the answer "no". However, I need to be fully aware of both sides of the issue to argue anything in the first place.

[Amandil]

Hi Rana/Lorco/Dylan/Falmaion...Inoldonil...nice new handle!

I was wondering what you were calling yourself on these boards. (If I had known, I would have used your name as the "referral-guy" when I signed up here.) I hadn't been over at the VNBoards for a few months, dropped in yesterday, posted twice, and noticed that your signature said you had moved. So I decided to drop by, and it seems rather nice here. Tis' a pleasure!

(hey, what's this "sapling" bit? Does that mean I'm a newbie or something, sort of like earning stars back at the VNBoards? -- Hang on, now I'm a hobbit, for some reason!)

IronParrot: about pure evil & pure good, again, I'm not quite sure what you MEAN by "pure" etc. is quite clear, just yet.

Anyway...

Love,

[Ñólendil]

Why, you followed me, then? I'm touched. Glad you like the handle, I do too. It was a nickname Glinlosorn gave me, he thought it fit (I agree).

Yes, there are 'ranks' here too, like the stars of the Vault Network. This is how it stands:

Sapling (Minimum Posts: 0)
Hobbit (Minimum Posts: 3)
Enting (Minimum Posts: 50)
Elven Warrior (Minimum Posts: 100)
Elf Lord (Minimum Posts: 500)

Sorry, no Rangers.

Administrators are Ents, but you'll find a few custom titles here and there.

[Amandil]

Ah, I thought I saw somewhere that you were an administrator, but I didn't notice anything in your title about that...until you explained the whole ent thing. Right on. Congrats at being an admin! I'll see you around the boards, once and a while...

(I just stopped by the MM3D-whatever boards for the first time, and scolded blackheart for importing Alastair Crowley into a discussion about Tolkien's metaphysics!)

[Selwythe]

My pointers:

In my opinion, Morgoth is the only purely evil one.

All the others were his creations, subject to his will. Even Sauron was not entirely evil, since he was Aule's Maiar at first and contemplated turning to the good side after Morgoth's fall but the fear of withstanding Manwe's sentence chilled him.

You can refer to that chapter when Sam and Frodo were at Ithilien and this Harad guy fell before Sam and he wondered "did he choose this or was he forced blah blah blah blah blah" quote.

[Ñólendil]

I forgot to mention that Moderators are Huorns (or more properly Huyrn, I guess. I'm not too keen on Sindarin pluralization rules, rather confusing for me).

Thank you for the congratulations! Though in my opinion I've yet to earn the honours. I haven't visited the MM3D boards yet. Blackheart already shuving his magic theories down their throats? Poor guy. Like they'll implement that.

Forgive me for asking, but who's Alastair Crowley?

Selwythe, I agree about Morgoth. Only he was wholly evil, being after all it's originator.

[Michael Martinez]

Who is related to whom really has nothing to do with good and evil in Tolkien. Lotho, for example, was Frodo's cousin, and he was evil.

[Amandil]

Rana: Oh, blackheart's not forcing things down people's throats, it's just that he's reading his peculiar metaphysical ideas into Tolkien's texts (which is illicit, I might add). Too bad, really.

Still a nice guy, though!

Alastair Crowley (sp?) is a dead British fellow, who thought he was Mr. Occult or something, a self-proclaimed antichrist or beast or something. Altogether disagreeable, at any rate. I don't know much about the man because learning about him disgusts me! Let's leave it at that. We're talking about pure evil in the Lord of the Rings, not in 20th century Britain!

I'm still unclear on what IronParrot understands the clause "pure evil" to mean. Sure, Morgoth was the "most evil" of them all. But was he "purely evil," i.e. he was comprised of an evil substance, or was the evil substance, or had no good desires in him whatsoever?

Remember that Morgoth couldn't "create" anything out of nothing (ex nihilo), he could only pervert/twist/corrupt existing good things (i.e. theories about the origin of Orcs...). Had Morgoth been "purely evil" in a metaphysical sense, it would be odd if he resorted to actualizing his evil designs by relying on existing good things.

Besides, Melkor wasn't created evil. Selwythe, Sauron wasn't the only eventual-villain created by Eru. Morgoth was a creature as well. He is/was a contingent being. He was good to start out, but was grossly misdirected. Morgoth himself, then, I think is not "purely evil" in a metaphysical sense, because Eru made him and (presumably) that was a good thing to do.

Morgoth had good desires, too. He wanted to change the world, the way it was run, etc., but he didn't want to OBLITERATE it. The big problem with Morgoth was that he wanted to rule the world himself, rather than as a viceroy for Eru. He didn't want to obliterate the Music of the Ainur, he just refused to listen to the conductor. "Nobody chooses to do evil. They only choose the wrong good, or the good wrongly." (Semi-Augustinian, I think...)

See what I mean? This concept of "pure evil" is, as yet, ambiguous. Otherwise, I wouldn't be ramling on about metaphysical vs. methodological (?) evil!

Sorry about all that...

I'm not sure what MM is talking about with the "related to so and so" bit...

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Amandil
I'm not sure what MM is talking about with the "related to so and so" bit...

A poorly executed pun. Nothing more.

[IronParrot]

Thanks, Amandil - that's the kind of thing I was thinking I'd write about: the difference between being created as evil for no purpose other than to be evil and eradicate good, and a matter of corruption.

It seems that the most immediate flaw I must fix in my essay right away is to make a more concise definition of what I mean by pure, absolute good and evil...

[arynetrek]

here's some thoughts, not all meant to be used together, don't know if this will help or not...

Ungoliant
(my copy of Sil has been lent so i can't look this up) "pure evil" exists, always has, it's unavoidable. she's an evil being from outside the world (i think Tolkien uses similar phrasing) - which also brings up: where did she come from? tolkien gives the impression that she just appeared outside the world, so has pure evil (assuming she is) always been around but brought into the world by a lesser evil (aka morgoth)? or is morgoth too pure evil, and uses creatures who are like-minded but not necessarily worse than he to aid his nefarious deeds? Every mention of Ungoliant shows that she's the most "purely evil" of anyone in LotR or Sil (including Morgoth) - her greed, mercenary behavior, spreading evils (AKA her children) over ME, & even her destruction (eating herself to death, the glutton). morgoth is clearly a Bad Guy, but his greed comes from being naturally great (the most powerful Valar) & wanting to be greater - which is a very human-like trait.

or...

Morgoth?
maybe "pure evil" is not born, it's attained. he gets more & more desparate, causing greater & greater evils as he progresses. tolkien would HATE this comparison, but morgoth has almost Hitler-like traits. it seems that the majority here are already arguing Morgoth as an example of evil; the idea of "pure evil has to be gained" also works for sauron, gollum (i don't believe that he's PURE evil, but it could be supported), the Ring, & a handful of minor characters.

or...

there is no "pure good" or "pure evil," every action is a mix of the two. feanor & his descendants had every right to seek vengeance against the thief of the Silmarils, because their priceless heirlooms have been stolen & especially because of the timing of the theft are irreplaceable & unbelievably valuable. their actions cause a lot of grief for all of ME, but not every encounter with a Silmaril causes pain (would Beren & Luthien wed if they hadn't been able to rescue one to please her father & get his consent? would their relationship, without that test they both went through, be as strong & memorable? & if they didn't meet & marry, how many important figures in ME would never have been born?).

these are NOT well-thought-out examples, just ideas.

are you going to post your paper when it's finished?

aryne *

[Ñólendil]

Actually (Amandil: ) Morgoth did want to obliterate it. That was his prime objective. See my post in this thread.

I know what you mean about Blackheart. He does have a habit to assume things about Tolkien's magic based upon his own studies in magic of the kind seen in our 'Primary Reality'. But actually I find he's right in the money in terms of a lot of his grand-scale magic theories. They're really not theories, all that about the Unseen World in Tolkien's 'Ean' writings ought to be regarded as fact.

[Amandil]

Hey all, you can see I don't pop by very regularly.

Iron Parrot, may I suggest St. Augustine's Confessions as the classic text surrounding "substantial" vs. "deprivation" evil. You needn't read the whole Confessions, only Book VII. (You can trust me: I'm from Medicine Hat. )

And that's about all I can chat about now...later to you all!

Love,

[Blackheart]

I'll turn you into a newt.

I'll have you know I wasn't reading Golden Dawn practices into Tolkien metaphysics, merely comparing subtractive aura magic to certain aspects of Tolkiens early metaphysical (BOLT) cosmologies.

And damnit, everytime you guys mention my name, you know you take a risk...

One day I might actually appear.

[Wulažg]

Even assuming that absolute good or evil exists, that would only be in the perception of Tolkien. For instance, in my opinion the most evil thing that can be done is to twist the minds/spirits/bodies of entities, things like creating the Orcs. That form of corruption is horrible and the closest thing to absolute evil one could find. Also the definition of good is merely the opposite of absolute evil, and the same for absolute evil. Which makes the entire thing pretty subjective and overused, kind of like "'nature", "pristine" and "manmade".

[Blackheart]

<For instance, in my opinion the most evil thing that can be done is to twist the minds/spirits/bodies of entities, things like creating the Orcs. That form of corruption is horrible and the closest thing to absolute evil one could find.>

Oh?

So what if you were able to take an orc and "re-educate" him?

Isn't that exactly the same process?

If it is, then certainly what the Valar did to those poor wee elves was horribly evil. They certainly "corrupted" them out of their natural development....

How can you define corruption as evil, if you are promoting a relativistic ethical system?

And I'll gnaw your limbs off! Ska!