|
Since I have already joined this discussion... I feel obliged to write something concerning Tolkien and the view of good and evil and things that have been mentioned here.
The comparison with Eddings (never read anything by him, but anyway) makes me think whether the evil really is not in Tolkien spread according to the selfish disunity. Well, the Orcs and such have really no other reason to be together than because they are forced to it: and they cannot build any own reason for it, because they are forced to be so, and have no freedom. That of course could bring some ideas already, but I will go even a bit further. The Free Peoples are far from united - and they represent good - but what is the greatest warning we are given? That some Boromir, Gandalf, or Galadriel will take the Ring and unite the Free Peoples by force. So, I ask - does it not go again towards the freedom? So, is in Tolkien's work goodness in freedom to choose - and in the subsequent choice of goodness? It seems to me so, because if there is anything so recurring in LotR, it is the rejection of power - even if used for "good" ends. But it seems to me, by what I have outlined here now, are the ends still good after this? I think not.
__________________
"Should the story say 'he ate bread,' the dramatic producer can only show 'a piece of bread' according to his taste or fancy, but the hearer of the story will think of bread in general and picture it in some form of his own." -On Fairy-Stories
|