The Lord of the Rings

Use this forum to have philosophical discussions about aesthetics and art. What is art? What is beauty? What makes art good? You can also use this forum to discuss philosophy in the arts, namely to discuss the philosophical points in any particular movie, TV show, book or story.
Post Reply
A Poster He or I
Posts: 1104
Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by A Poster He or I »

I have not read The Silmarilion for years and found it heavy when I read it, but I will try to look at it again.
The Silmarillion, quite unlike LOTR, is only myth, in accordance with the criteria you have been discussing, and which I agree with. Everyone is super-human, even the humans. Everyone works from a black-and-white view of the world, centered completely around their own selfish agenda. Ironically, the only characters who work from a center of humility are the gods (the Valar) who interact directly with events, and save everybody's butt more than once, so that the Elvish and human characters seem to learn very little from all their troubles. There are people of goodness in the story with pure hearts, but their goodness is innate, so its source and relation to the horrific events of the world is ambiguous and provides little usable lesson. Many of their most noble actions are directed by the gods or by visions and portents. What wisdom they learn is only the wisdom of sorrow and loss.

Still, as backstory, The Silmarillion makes the experience of LOTR three, four, five times richer and deeper.
User avatar
Kingkool
Posts: 306
Joined: February 1st, 2012, 11:22 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Alexander the Great

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Kingkool »

Maybe the answer to this questio is obvious, but do you think it would be more pleasant to live in Middle Earth, or here, now? I've always fantasized about settling down in the forests of Fangorn. Neither disturbing, or being disturbed. And Deep in the woods of Middle Earth seems the best place to do so.

However now that I think about it, some of the most unlikely creatures, The Ents, we're disturbed by the war. Which could be a message about WWII left no one unnaffected.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”- Douglas Adams A Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

I just started today re-reading The Silmarillion. I read the first chapter and I agreed with Tolkien's theology in parts and disagreed in other parts. The images are lovely of course, as are some of the images in Genesis. The idea of the demiurge is one of the ideas I disagree with. This is because I think that evil is a category made by humans not by the Creator. The reification, or the personification in mythology, of evil is useful insofar as it inspires us to combat evil, but metaphysically evil has no essence because it is the absence of good. I wondered where to post this because it is getting away from aesthetics and into theology and ethics, even psychology. ***************************

Kingcool wrote:
I've always fantasized about settling down in the forests of Fangorn. Neither disturbing, or being disturbed. And Deep in the woods of Middle Earth seems the best place to do so.
Me too. My imaginings concern the Old Stone Age which sounds to me rather like Fangorn. Slow to change and harmonising with seasons and the seasonal bounty of a world with few humans in it.
Socialist
A Poster He or I
Posts: 1104
Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by A Poster He or I »

I am not certain that I agree that evil, metaphysically, is the absence of good. More precisely, I think I believe that the absence of good is not a sufficient condition for evil, nor does it say anything about the genesis of evil (or its essence if one believes in essences). For example, a hypothetical person of very poor social skills and no apparent aptitude for any type of useful work may be capable of nothing but destruction as he engages the world, but have no evil intent. He is just clumsiness incarnate.

To answer Kingcool, there was a period of almost 400 years early in the Third Age of Middle Earth known as the "Watchful Peace." It may have been right after the Witch King of Agmar was overthrown, I can't remember now. I would love to have lived my life in a hamlet of the Shire during that time.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

A Poster He Or I wrote regarding the nature of evil:
For example, a hypothetical person of very poor social skills and no apparent aptitude for any type of useful work may be capable of nothing but destruction as he engages the world, but have no evil intent. He is just clumsiness incarnate.
But does anyone ever intend to do evil purely and simply, or are evil intentions evil with reference to the effects of certain actions, most notably those actions which are caused not at all by positively good intentions ? I mean clumsiness such as you describe is only evil insofar as the clumsy person is manacled by those disabilities. The morphing of Smeagol into Gollum was absolute except for very small reappearances of Gollum's human feeling of remorse.But in real life we are each and all struggling with good and evil. The more energetic strugglers are the more free of us. The forces of entropy are the real evil are they not?

It is the forces of entropy that will in the end finish Iluvatar's temporal creation. But does Iluvatar not 'want' us to try and keep the creation going? Spinoza called this universal want for integrity 'conatus'.
Socialist
A Poster He or I
Posts: 1104
Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by A Poster He or I »

But does anyone ever intend to do evil purely and simply, or are evil intentions evil with reference to the effects of certain actions, most notably those actions which are caused not at all by positively good intentions ? I mean clumsiness such as you describe is only evil insofar as the clumsy person is manacled by those disabilities. The morphing of Smeagol into Gollum was absolute except for very small reappearances of Gollum's human feeling of remorse.But in real life we are each and all struggling with good and evil. The more energetic strugglers are the more free of us. The forces of entropy are the real evil are they not?

It is the forces of entropy that will in the end finish Iluvatar's temporal creation. But does Iluvatar not 'want' us to try and keep the creation going? Spinoza called this universal want for integrity 'conatus'.
Couched in the manner you have presented here, I think I would have to say that the real evil is not the forces of entropy but to deny the reality of the forces of entropy. Having said that, I am going to defer from further comments on Evil until you read the story Akallabeth (The Downfall of Numenor) which is the 3rd story in The Silmarillion. Akallabeth is my favorite story in The Silmarillion, and by far the most valuable for any discussion of evil since the entire story is driven by possibly the most fundamental consequence of being human: the fear of death, and what we do to try to overcome that fear.

In fact, let me challenge you if I may. Once you read Akallabeth, tell me here in this thread who do you find more evil: Ar-Pharazon in his hubris with all of its disastrous consequences, or Sauron who manipulated him into it? I think argument can go either way, but which way says much about one's view of evil.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

I look forward to reading Akallabeth.

Meantime, someone said to me yesterday that when Frodo and Gollum were finally fighting for possession of The Ring , Frodo was inspired more by his desire to possess the Ring than by his duty to destroy it. Therefore the evil of Gollum the fallen human plus Frodo's fallible humanity were both necessary for the accomplishment of The Ring's destruction. There was not an absolute difference between Frodo and Gollum, but only a difference of degree.

Perhaps The Ring's destruction is the fight itself. And the quest itself.
Socialist
User avatar
Alarion
New Trial Member
Posts: 1
Joined: April 10th, 2012, 2:37 pm

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Alarion »

Belinda wrote:I look forward to reading Akallabeth.

Meantime, someone said to me yesterday that when Frodo and Gollum were finally fighting for possession of The Ring , Frodo was inspired more by his desire to possess the Ring than by his duty to destroy it. Therefore the evil of Gollum the fallen human plus Frodo's fallible humanity were both necessary for the accomplishment of The Ring's destruction. There was not an absolute difference between Frodo and Gollum, but only a difference of degree.

Perhaps The Ring's destruction is the fight itself. And the quest itself.
I think that there is a more profound sense, and totally intended by Tolkien, beneath that. The dialectic involve in how to achieve the ring destruction will be precisely that sort of tension between the interaction of two subjects, whom represent both opposite goals. This is to say, that without Gollum in every stage of the trip, perhaps the ring destruction couldn't be achieve. That without an evil agent who triggered bad situations, a goal apparently unachievable could turn out, only then, possible. Gandalf himself says, while they were in Moria, a few words concerning the importance of Gollum for the achievement of that goal. Thus, the final struggle between Frodo and Gollum represent the peak (and culmination) of that dialectic. A plain way of expressing this, is to explain that phenomena by appealing to chance (I planned to quot a few words of Gandalf related to this in this part, though, i couldn't find the quotes)
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

Is it possible that the traditional problem of evil for theists is being dealt with by Tolkien? Evil is necessary, not simplistically so that we can exert Free Will, but so that we can engage to the extent of our capabilities in good.Rather like the Darwinian necessity of the struggle for survival which is a part cause of natural selection. I don't suggest that struggle against huge and discouraging evil is enacted by a caring God (in whom I don't believe)but is a necessity of nature, and evil's perception is the measure of man's capabilities through historical change. 'Dialectic' and 'dynamic tension' are the key to both artificial dramatic narrative and real life drama. So, are there no best parts to play, no heroes and no villains in the view from eternity?

I have begun another try at reading The Silmarillion, and it seems that Eru did not create Melkor qua evil. I'd contest this with Tolkien and would rather that the substance of Eru contains the creation of the essence of Melkor.At which point in the creation did Melkor appear as evil? Not a God to worship ! I'd rather worship Yavanna and sometimes do so. Have not read Akallabeth yet but I will.

By the way, is the origin (or Origin)of the Universe free or is it random? Existence itself is necessity after all.
Socialist
A Poster He or I
Posts: 1104
Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by A Poster He or I »

Is it possible that the traditional problem of evil for theists is being dealt with by Tolkien?
I think it very possible, even likely. Forum member Memnon wrote in post #26 "I believe the maring of Arda was in fact a plan of Eru the supreme being, thus Melkor's role was to put his taint into it." (I responded in post # 27 that Tolkien had run straight in the age-old Problem of Evil that plagues Western thought). If Memnon is right, then Tolkien may be suggesting to us between the lines that Eru created the capacity for evil in his creations as a means for his own created universe to be non-deterministic, that is, free to evolve in unforeseen ways. And if the consequences of Evil's intervention truly are unforeseen by Eru, then Melkor does indeed have a power that Eru does not. If this is what Tolkien meant to imply, then the creation of Melkor by Eru can be construed as an incredible gamble on the part of Eru, and testament to just how much Eru values free will in the world. Since the Eru-Melkor situation is analagous to Judeo-Christianity's God-Lucifer situation, one can then construe that Tolkien may be sharing his own actual theory on the ontology of free will.

It is also notable that Eru declares at least twice (that I remember) in the Silmarillion that the destruction wreaked by Melkor will, in the end, be seen to serve only toward the greater glory of Arda, Eru's creation. In effect, whether in Ainulindalë or in Genesis, the Fall from Grace was an absolute necessity if sentience is to reach its greatest potential for richness, nuance, depth and wisdom.

To paraphrase a quote from Ayn Rand: "I don't know what Adam and Eve were before they ate the apple, but it sure wasn't human."
By the way, is the origin (or Origin)of the Universe free or is it random? Existence itself is necessity after all.
I don't know if we can know. But I find it amusing to ponder that God in his eternity might have needed a good chunk of eternity to figure out how to create Evil just so that He would never have to be bored again, watching all the consequences of free will unfold.
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

A Poster He Or I wrote:
If Memnon is right, then Tolkien may be suggesting to us between the lines that Eru created the capacity for evil in his creations as a means for his own created universe to be non-deterministic, that is, free to evolve in unforeseen ways. And if the consequences of Evil's intervention truly are unforeseen by Eru, then Melkor does indeed have a power that Eru does not. If this is what Tolkien meant to imply, then the creation of Melkor by Eru can be construed as an incredible gamble on the part of Eru, and testament to just how much Eru values free will in the world. Since the Eru-Melkor situation is analagous to Judeo-Christianity's God-Lucifer situation, one can then construe that Tolkien may be sharing his own actual theory on the ontology of free will.
As I understand the Abrahamists's myth, Free Will is intrinsic to the Abrahamic narrative. I want to argue with Tolkien that the Abrahamic myth is not only not the only myth but is pragmatically a bad one. I want Eru to be beyond( I cannot think of a more neutral preposition) such a consideration as Eru's loving the world so much that he wanted us to be as free as he is. I prefer to think of Eru as no more or less than necessity, so that what freedom man has is what he makes from his talents for doing the causes of freedom. So I agree with Ayn Rand, as Poster quoted and would add that Adam and Eve are impossible, unless they were construed as mathematical or logical propositions.
Socialist
A Poster He or I
Posts: 1104
Joined: March 18th, 2011, 4:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by A Poster He or I »

Belinda says,
I want Eru to be beyond( I cannot think of a more neutral preposition) such a consideration as Eru's loving the world so much that he wanted us to be as free as he is. I prefer to think of Eru as no more or less than necessity, so that what freedom man has is what he makes from his talents for doing the causes of freedom.
I am not at all certain that your view of freedom (which I personally agree with) is actually at odds with Tolkien, at least not in any practical way. One of my favorite quotes of all time is the closing sentence of U.S. President John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address: "With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own."

[My emphasis added. Worth noting, perhaps, that Kennedy was a Roman Catholic just like Tolkien).

With the Silmarillion as myth, Melkor is an archetype for all Evil, and it is clear that he wields no greater force than oppression (obviously Tolkien's greatest fear for the world). Certainly the struggle of the Children of Illuvatar presented by Tolkien is in the cause of freedom, despite its often vainglorious motivations. This struggle does not have its archetype, at least any that I can see, which is as it should be. One of the shortfalls of The Silmarillion is how the Valar always come to the rescue, short-circuiting the lessons of experience for Elves and Men so that they never seem to see how it is freedom that underlies all their values they have tied up in the love of the material things they kill for.
User avatar
Kingkool
Posts: 306
Joined: February 1st, 2012, 11:22 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Alexander the Great

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Kingkool »

I've noticed that the tone of contempt and annoyance is pretty much non-existant in this forum compared to others. I guess that's because people who think LOTR is a contreversial topic are not this webesite.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”- Douglas Adams A Hitchhiker's Guide To the Galaxy
Belinda
Premium Member
Posts: 13782
Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Belinda »

Teresa of Avila (1515–1582)

Christ Has No Body

Christ has no body but yours, No hands, no feet on earth but yours, Yours are the eyes with which he looks Compassion on this world, Yours are the feet with which he walks to do good, Yours are the hands, with which he blesses all the world. Yours are the hands, yours are the feet, Yours are the eyes, you are his body. Christ has no body now but yours, No hands, no feet on earth but yours, Yours are the eyes with which he looks compassion on this world. Christ has no body now on earth but yours.



A Poster He Or I wrote, similarly :
the closing sentence of U.S. President John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address: "With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own."
I have not nearly finished reading the Silmarillion. I note what Poster says about the Valars' providential help. I wonder if this is another, perhaps RC, idea, which perhaps is that natural forces are always good because they are God's creation as are humans before they become prey to Melkor.But I argue against this because I like to think of Eru/Illuvatar and its Valar as neither good nor bad, but necessary as the facts of natura naturans are necessary.

-- Updated Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:14 am to add the following --

In Chapter 8 of The Silmarillion Tolkien wrote:

So the great darkness fell upon Valinor.---------------------------------------------The Light failed: but the Darkness that followed was more than loss of light, In that hour was made a Darkness that seemed not a lack but a thing with being ofts own : for it was indeed made by malice out of Light-------

Tolkien is saying that evil is not a necessary part of creation but is a substance separate from creation. Although this point of view may inspire and encourage us to fight evil, it cannot be the case because evil is what is against life. Death is an evil, destructive natural events are evils. An evil man is evil because antisocial, he fails to harmonise with life which, practically speaking,involves man in societies.

Tolkien's use of 'malice' is interesting because it implies that Tolkien views malice as able to exist without an object of malice; except insofar as malice sets itself against the Light, i.e. the creation. Since the Valar and the rest of Eru's creation are good apart from Melkor the evil one, Melkor is against the creation and , to allow a point, the Creator . This scenario cannot come about without some narrative such as Genesis or The Silmarillion to explain it. But Genesis and The Silmarillion are fictions which explain the birth of evil. So Tolkien has made a circular argument for the independent existence of evil.
Socialist
Groktruth
Posts: 650
Joined: January 21st, 2011, 7:19 pm

Re: The Lord of the Rings

Post by Groktruth »

Kingkool wrote:I've noticed that the tone of contempt and annoyance is pretty much non-existant in this forum compared to others. I guess that's because people who think LOTR is a contreversial topic are not this webesite.
The question, in any case, is a very good one. The discussion here is priceless, all that one would hope for on a philosophy forum. As Poster confesses, one is often close to tears as the light breaks through the clouds.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of the Arts and Philosophy in the Arts”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021