Is "The Lord of the Rings" Harmful for promoting a Good vs Pure Evil Narrative?
"J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a genuine masterpiece. The most widely read and influential fantasy epic of all time, it is also quite simply one of the most memorable and beloved tales ever told. Originally published in 1954, The Lord of the Rings set the framework upon which all epic/quest fantasy since has been built. Through the urgings of the enigmatic wizard Gandalf, young hobbit Frodo Baggins embarks on an urgent, incredibly treacherous journey to destroy the One Ring. This ring -- created and then lost by the Dark Lord, Sauron, centuries earlier -- is a weapon of evil, one that Sauron desperately wants returned to him. With the power of the ring once again his own, the Dark Lord will unleash his wrath upon all of Middle-earth. The only way to prevent this horrible fate from becoming reality is to return the Ring to Mordor, the only place it can be destroyed. Unfortunately for our heroes, Mordor is also Sauron's lair. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is essential reading not only for fans of fantasy but for lovers of classic literature as well." -Goodreads.com
Can you post a link and perhaps your own answer to the question ? The OP doesn't give us much to chew on.
Yes, point taken.
I originally posted this topic in a separate debate site. Here is a relevant argument posted from a member there (who I will keep anonymous) and then my response to them:
Yes. In fact it is important to note that Orcs are an extremely noble race throughout mythology, they live to truly allow every single being (Orc or not) thrive in its own way. They were possessed and misled by corrupt warlocks and somehow we think it's ok they get stomped on and slaughtered in the masses...
Meanwhile we think elves, the literal Illuminati of the LOTR world, are somehow the 'good guys' because they enforce order by brutalising any species that dares question their authority... Then again, the Bible was exactly the same story as was the Qur'an so this trend doesn't shock me.
People like to mistake anarchy for evil and tyranny for heroism so let them.
Is "The Lord of the Rings" Harmful for promoting a Good vs Pure Evil Narrative?
"J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a genuine masterpiece. The most widely read and influential fantasy epic of all time, it is also quite simply one of the most memorable and beloved tales ever told. Originally published in 1954, The Lord of the Rings set the framework upon which all epic/quest fantasy since has been built. Through the urgings of the enigmatic wizard Gandalf, young hobbit Frodo Baggins embarks on an urgent, incredibly treacherous journey to destroy the One Ring. This ring -- created and then lost by the Dark Lord, Sauron, centuries earlier -- is a weapon of evil, one that Sauron desperately wants returned to him. With the power of the ring once again his own, the Dark Lord will unleash his wrath upon all of Middle-earth. The only way to prevent this horrible fate from becoming reality is to return the Ring to Mordor, the only place it can be destroyed. Unfortunately for our heroes, Mordor is also Sauron's lair. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is essential reading not only for fans of fantasy but for lovers of classic literature as well." -Goodreads.com
Was Gollum pure evil? Where was Feanor on the morality scale, or Hurin, or Thorin, or Denethor, or Boromir? There's plenty of moral complexity in the LoTR universe that adds texture to the ultimate good v evil tale.
I chuckled. If you want to protect a pseudo, don't quote their text. I found the guys profile on CreateDebate in under 1 second.
Was Gollum pure evil? Where was Feanor on the morality scale, or Hurin, or Thorin, or Denethor, or Boromir? There's plenty of moral complexity in the LoTR universe that adds texture to the ultimate good v evil tale.
The fundamental point is that there is (presented to be) no moral ambiguity when it comes to who is right and who is wrong in the Battle for Middle Earth (Mordor and Isangaurd are most definitely wrong) and essentially any tactics used by the "good" side against the "bad" are deemed appropriate without question (the Orcs and such are viewed as sub-humanoid creatures--demons, creatures of Hell essentially).
However, Sauron was pure evil. The ultimate nemesis in fantasy tales must be pure evil. It makes them quite charming.
You're oversimplifying things. The orcs were bad because they were elves who'd had their spirits corrupted by Morgoth, they were literally "sub-elvish" and couldn't be good if they wanted to. The crux of Tolkien's work is the choices individuals make, orcs, like Balrogs and dragons, were creations of Morgoth and had that choice taken away from them. Those with choice, like Morgoth, Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, Aragorn and the Elves, were divided into morality camps by whether they chose to harm or help. Morgoth sought power for himself, for his own ends, as did Sauron when he chose to join Morgoth. Saruman was morally good, until corrupted by the lure of the power of the One Ring. Gandalf could have made the same choice as Saruman, but chose not to. Aragorn lived most of his life chosing to not claim power, and instead protect the Shire, and only chose power to stand against Sauron. The Elves were granted power by Eru himself, and in general chose to use it to make Middle Earth grow, those that abused their power, like Feanor, were shunned.
The best demonstration of this was when Galadriel was tempted by the ring in Lothlorien, but chose not to take up the power. For making this choice, and rejecting great power over others, she was exempt from the Doom of Mandos.
Just to recap, because I'm clearly a ****ing nerd, the moral complexity of LoTR isn't in the depiction of races, but rather the choices of individuals. Orcs, and other creations of Morgoth, lack the free will to choose good, and so can't be considered evil in the same way those who chose to be evil are.
Just to recap, because I'm clearly a ****ing nerd, the moral complexity of LoTR isn't in the depiction of races, but rather the choices of individuals. Orcs, and other creations of Morgoth, lack the free will to choose good, and so can't be considered evil in the same way those who chose to be evil are.
spud_meister: You made a number of strong, insightful points in your post, however I have a few bones to pick.
Although you are correct in your analysis of Tolkien's moral framework (as he perceived it), there is much more going on here as well.
First, the Orcs (and such) who are newly created were born into sin, had no direct hand in the matter, and are being punished (severely) for the crime of being born. This moral structure is viewed as completely non-problematic by Tolkien's "good" characters to such an extent that genocide is deemed the obviously just course of action.
Second, I would encourage you to read the article I posted from "Salon" discussing the book "The Last Ringbearer" (if you have not read the book already) as it gives a very unique perspective on the dynamics at work in Middle-Earth (which is an entirely separate (though connected) point that we could discuss)
Which characters advocated genocide, or even attacking orcs that had not attacked others? Even after the defeat of Morgoth, but prior to ascendancy of Sauron, the Orcs were driven back to their strongholds, but never rooted out or slaughtered. The "good" characters were content to leave them in peace if they did likewise.
I've downloaded it, and I'll give it a read in the next few days, however, from the article, it creates dynamics that don't exist.
Yes, point taken.
I originally posted this topic in a separate debate site. Here is a relevant argument posted from a member there (who I will keep anonymous) and then my response to them:
Anonymous: Yes. In fact it is important to note that Orcs are an extremely noble race throughout mythology, they live to truly allow every single being (Orc or not) thrive in its own way. They were possessed and misled by corrupt warlocks and somehow we think it's ok they get stomped on and slaughtered in the masses...
Meanwhile we think elves, the literal Illuminati of the LOTR world, are somehow the 'good guys' because they enforce order by brutalising any species that dares question their authority... Then again, the Bible was exactly the same story as was the Qur'an so this trend doesn't shock me.
People like to mistake anarchy for evil and tyranny for heroism so let them.
xMathFanx (in response to Anonymous): "Anonymous (Quoting): In fact it is important to note that Orcs are an extremely noble race throughout mythology, they live to truly allow every single being (Orc or not) thrive in its own way. They were possessed and misled by corrupt warlocks and somehow we think it's ok they get stomped on and slaughtered in the masses..."
The fundamental point is that there is (presented to be) no moral ambiguity when it comes to who is right and who is wrong in the Battle for Middle Earth (Mordor and Isangaurd are most definitely wrong) and essentially any tactics used by the "good" side against the "bad" are deemed appropriate without question (the Orcs and such are viewed as sub-humanoid creatures--demons, creatures of Hell essentially).
First, the Orcs (and such) who are newly created were born into sin, had no direct hand in the matter, and are being punished (severely) for the crime of being born. This moral structure is viewed as completely non-problematic by Tolkien's "good" characters to such an extent that genocide is deemed the obviously just course of action.
@spud_mister
A. On Orcs and Cultural Genocide - New APPS: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science
Okay, I look forward to discussing it with you (if you wish to discuss it)
You seem to be insinuating are some kind of atrocity that is being wrongfully excused. But that never happened. And generally, when someone tries to take over the world, the people who don't want to be taken over fight back. That's not some kind of moral dilemma, it's self-defense.
No, they are not "being punished (severely) for the crime of being born". The orcs and Morgoth's, then Sauron's, other servants kept trying to conquer the world. So, the world fought back.
You're talking about this as if the people of Gondor sailed over to another continent, found orcs, and slaughtered them all for kicks.
That link specifically discusses the Ents attack on Isengard, however, the Ents were attacked first, with the Orcs chopping down trees in Fangorn Forest, which was the Ents home, and they regarded the trees killed by the Orcs as kin.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?