Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
The reason the Akallabeth seems like an 'attrocity' is that what happens is essentially unfair because Eru is too powerful & its not a fair fight. He shouldn't have done what he did. The Numenoreans basically didn't want to die (who does?) & that's what drove them. If the Fall of Numenor had been a natural disaster it would have been awe-inspiring & humbling - man brought down by impersonal nature. As it is an overwhelmingly powerful being obliterates them with malice aforethought & in the end it seems vindictive because for all their 'power' they are weak mortals with no chance. One cannot rationalise the behaviour of Eru & make it equal 'good'. Once more we come back to Eru as a two dimensional 'Old Nobodaddy'.
|
Derogations aside, the essential complaint here is that Eru should not have punished the Numenoreans for disobeying his viceroys because it wasn't a fair fight.
Clarity first: Tolkien is the one who describes Eru's action as punishment for disobedience, which is rebellion.
Second: to accuse Eru of 'not being fair' because he is too powerful is like saying that police are not being fair when they arrest someone who has committed a crime because they have guns and the criminal only has a knife.
Further, to assert that it would have been better if impersonal nature had taken out the Numenoreans instead of Eru, is like saying that it would be better if the knife wielding criminal would take a wrong turn in his escape such that he winds up in a prison cell, than that police should arrest him and bring him in.
The point: those in authority have the right to use power to enforce laws. This is true regardless of whether one is talking about local police, or about a transcendant deity.
The issue of Eru's so-called "boring" role in Tolkien's legendarium has already been addressed.