Just wanted to say that I'm in full agreement with Saucepan Man - very well done, O Corpus Cacophonous! The only thing I wanted to add is that it seems to me that it's precisely *because* we're seeing it from the hobbits' point of view that certain other issues might seem overly simplified.
We're seeing about 95% of the story from the perspective of creatures who have been oblivious to everything that led up to it and had no idea there was a crisis going on until being shoved right into the eye of the storm. This, I think, was quite clever of Tolkien, as anybody picking up LOTR for the first time was in exactly the same position as the hobbits as they began reading the book - Oh, how nice, how amusing, that's fun, and WHAT??? The reader, along with the hobbits, experiences Gandalf's (rather stripped-down) explanation of the Ring's history, and along with the hobbits we have no idea what the he** the Nazgul are when we first see them, and so forth. The hobbits, knowing as little about ME's and Sauron's history as a first-time reader does, are not going to spend a great deal of time analyzing what it is they're facing, and trying to figure out its motivations. To portray Sauron as a one-dimensional evil and unstoppable force is just right for the way this book is written, because the hobbits don't have the benefit of either previous historical study or sufficient distance to see him as anything else. Similarly for the Orcs. Their first encounter with the Orcs is in Mazarbul, and after an introduction like that - and their subsequent encounters - it's not surprising that they can't see the Orcs as anything except slavering ghouls who enjoy the prospect of tearing them to pieces - in what other capacity have they ever seen them?
The hobbits are living both in great ignorance and the daily, highly realistic expectation that they running a huge risk of dying horribly for reasons largely beyond their control. They're not going to waste time painting Sauron with shades of grey and trying to figure out whether it's possible for an Orc to be redeemed. Furthermore, they don't see the lands of the Southrons et al, or even much of Rohan and Gondor (and of course Frodo and Sam don't see these things at all). Doubtless there was massive rape/bloodshed/pillaging etc, they just were aware of it only as a distant fact, not something happening right in front of their faces - and in a situation like that, you're just too busy staying alive to spend a lot of time on other people whom you can't save and don't know. Not saying it's the most compassionate way, but it's true.
If the book were written from Aragorn or Gandalf's perspective (now there would be something) I'm pretty sure that Sauron and the Orcs would be seen very differently. Not necessarily seen as any *better* - but with the leavening perspective of knowledge of their history, not to mention a more realistic weighing of the odds. While the hobbits realize that they're in danger, I don't think it really sinks to anyone except Frodo, towards the end, that their odds of failure are about 99.99%. It's for that reason that I think that while LOTR from the perspective of a more knowledgeable character would be interesting, it also be very difficult to read, both for complexity and the sheer weight of its pessimism for most of the story.
__________________
Father, dear Father, if you see fit, We'll send my love to college for one year yet
Tie blue ribbons all about his head, To let the ladies know that he's married.
|