[The X Phial]

Several points:
First of all, Tolkien vehemently denied that any of his characters were purely good or evil. The elves strayed from the will of Eru by living in a nostalgic never-never land of the past and by being far too in love with their own works. Even the valar and the maiar stray from original plans, sometimes resulting in good (Aule) sometimes not (Saruman). If there are no purely good characters then by corrollary there are no purely evil ones. In the letters Tolkien berates the public for refusing the see the enemy as human and humane with strengths as well as weaknesses. Anyone (society) can be fooled or coerced under the right circumstances (though he excluded the saints from this assessment). IIRC, he felt this was the result of living in a fallen world.

Secondly, on the position of facts versus opinions. Apples are not blue, unless you live in a place where blue means something else. Apples are absolute (being tangible objects) but language and culture are not. As for the need for things to be right and wrong, how do you ever know if it is? To answer the analogy: If one person calls what we know to be pears "apples" and another person calls what we know to be oranges "apples" neither are objectively right. You insist there is one religious truth, if this is so might not everyone be calling other fruits apples? Just because there is a standard doesn't mean anyone has hit upon it.

Edit: Typos suck

[ May 07, 2003: Message edited by: The X Phial ]