The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Lalwendë · 09-03-2012, 10:48 AM

It's as though there are degrees of evil and good - and I can't help but chuck in some Catholic terminology with my assessment here, whether it's right or wrong, given the emplasis on degrees of evil.

There are definite 'sins' that mark a character as being evil or doing an evil for which they must either perform a redemptive act or accept the chance to repent when offered. There are also those who have a purpose which they fail to achieve because of personal failings, though they do not turn to evil. And there are those who achieve their purpose, do not turn to evil and who achieve the ultimate - the state of grace and a return or removal to Valinor (if desired).

Radagast does not achieve his purpose and he unwittingly aids those with evil intent (though as already stated, he was probably obediently following the leader of his Order). I think we can say that he did not act with any bad intent as a wizard who had such a deep knowledge of the natural world could potentially wreak untold havoc. Use your imagination to consider what a Radagast with evil intent might do with spiders, wolves and eagles at his beck and call. I also do not think he was a 'bit dim', he possesses a different kind of knowledge and one which Tolkien would have respected as being of equal value to the knowledge held by Saruman, perhaps even more valuable. That to me again shows that Radagast did not have a bad intent.

So, he may well have failed to attain any state of 'grace', but I don't think he would have ultimately been denied the chance to return home should he have wished it.

Gollum is an interesting case. He obtains the Ring through an evil act, and once obtained, he will find it difficult to ever turn back from his path. It's debatable of course whether it was the Ring itself that caused him to obtain it in such a way or it was already something in his nature. Either way, he has no chance once he has possession on it. And this is why I feel that he receives pity - those who have the wisdom to see the effects of Sauron's craft on Gollum can see that he is a victim, in much the same way that we might view an addict as a victim.

To achieve redemption is going to be a very different and difficult thing for him. It will be difficult because he will have to realise what he has done wrong and atone for that. It will be different because he will always be shaded by the effects of the Ring for the rest of his life, whether he is 'cured' of his addiction, whether he is not. It's not just that Gollum has made a choice to do evil, it's that Gollum has been driven to do evil. I always say that how he meets his end is perfectly drawn as I can see no 'cure' for him, and in his own way he is redeemed by taking the Ring from Frodo (who is another special case). There may well be a special kind of redemption from Eru for innocents who are corrupted by the evils of the more powerful.

But again, more grey areas creep in...

09-03-2012, 10:48 AM	#47
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	It's as though there are degrees of evil and good - and I can't help but chuck in some Catholic terminology with my assessment here, whether it's right or wrong, given the emplasis on degrees of evil. There are definite 'sins' that mark a character as being evil or doing an evil for which they must either perform a redemptive act or accept the chance to repent when offered. There are also those who have a purpose which they fail to achieve because of personal failings, though they do not turn to evil. And there are those who achieve their purpose, do not turn to evil and who achieve the ultimate - the state of grace and a return or removal to Valinor (if desired). Radagast does not achieve his purpose and he unwittingly aids those with evil intent (though as already stated, he was probably obediently following the leader of his Order). I think we can say that he did not act with any bad intent as a wizard who had such a deep knowledge of the natural world could potentially wreak untold havoc. Use your imagination to consider what a Radagast with evil intent might do with spiders, wolves and eagles at his beck and call. I also do not think he was a 'bit dim', he possesses a different kind of knowledge and one which Tolkien would have respected as being of equal value to the knowledge held by Saruman, perhaps even more valuable. That to me again shows that Radagast did not have a bad intent. So, he may well have failed to attain any state of 'grace', but I don't think he would have ultimately been denied the chance to return home should he have wished it. Gollum is an interesting case. He obtains the Ring through an evil act, and once obtained, he will find it difficult to ever turn back from his path. It's debatable of course whether it was the Ring itself that caused him to obtain it in such a way or it was already something in his nature. Either way, he has no chance once he has possession on it. And this is why I feel that he receives pity - those who have the wisdom to see the effects of Sauron's craft on Gollum can see that he is a victim, in much the same way that we might view an addict as a victim. To achieve redemption is going to be a very different and difficult thing for him. It will be difficult because he will have to realise what he has done wrong and atone for that. It will be different because he will always be shaded by the effects of the Ring for the rest of his life, whether he is 'cured' of his addiction, whether he is not. It's not just that Gollum has made a choice to do evil, it's that Gollum has been driven to do evil. I always say that how he meets his end is perfectly drawn as I can see no 'cure' for him, and in his own way he is redeemed by taking the Ring from Frodo (who is another special case). There may well be a special kind of redemption from Eru for innocents who are corrupted by the evils of the more powerful. But again, more grey areas creep in... __________________ Gordon's alive!