Quote:
Originally Posted by Zigūr
Hello all,
I thought I would mention some other interesting notions I've come across in my studies, particularly which arose during my PhD emendations (by the way, I'm pleased to say that everything is done now, I've got my completion letter and there should be nothing left to do but wait for graduation in September so I can become Dr Zigūr [Don't worry, I'm not actually going to start calling myself that]).
In Chapter 24, "Modernity", of A Companion to J.R.R. Tolkien, edited by Stuart D. Lee and published by John Wiley & Sons in 2014, Dr. Anna Vaninskaya discusses how Sauron's empire evokes a twentieth-century "Theyocracy" in which power is held by a distant, unapproachable cabal of bureaucrats. Dr Vaninskaya analyses Gorbag and Shagrat's conversation, noting that they are aware of "official propaganda", as when Shagrat tells him that the "Big Bosses" hold that the war is going well; Gorbag grunts "They would". Their orders, to quote Dr Vaninskaya, are "in the clipped language of army dispatches."
Dr Vaninskaya argues that there is "definite sense of a hierarchical party structure" in Mordor, with things like "giving your name and number to the Nazgūl."
Dr Vaninskaya observes that "The idea of soldiers, like prisoners, having numbers, no less than the concept of reporting insubordination to superiors whose own situation is precariously dependent on the favor of the Big Bosses, is completely alien to the world of Middle-earth as originally conceived (and as eventually elaborated in the final writings). The glimpses of Orc life in Mordor are also at odds with the rest of the narrative, and the tone and atmosphere of these scenes remind us that the twentieth century sometimes obtruded rather roughly into the secondary world." Dr Vaninskaya also argues of Shagrat and Gorbag that "theirs is distinctly the speech of twentieth-century soldiers, but also of government or party functionaries, minor officials in a murderous bureaucracy."
I'm in two minds about this idea. It's curious to imagine the dread Nazgūl being concerned with things like "names and numbers" of Orcs and the like, but apparently it was something that could happen (unless the Orc who made that threat was exaggerating).
I suppose the Mouth of Sauron and the other members of his dubious "embassy" from Barad-dūr also suggest the idea of high-ranking bureaucrats in Sauron's regime, presumably Black Nśmenóreans like the Mouth or other Men who, through cunning and sycophancy, had proved themselves useful to Sauron.
Yet I wonder how much of a "party" there really is when the entire organisation of the regime seems to serve no will or purpose but that of Sauron alone. It is not clear that there is an "ideology" in Mordor beyond doing that which fulfils Sauron's will. On the other hand, perhaps Professor Tolkien is trying to argue that under such regimes the ideology is just the tyrant's will pretending to be some totalising/universalising truth. Sauron (who can no longer hide his evil intentions from others) has simply stripped this conceit away. Possibly the closest thing we hear to an ideology, I think, is in Morgoth's Ring, in which it is stated that Sauron ultimately united all the disparate, petty realms of Orcs in "unreasoning hatred of the Elves and of Men who associated with them".
I'm interested to hear what others think. If you're interested in discussing it, do you think Mordor really has the equivalent of a "party" or "bureaucracy"? Do you, like me, struggle to imagine Khamūl whipping out a notepad to write down an Orc's number (surely there's someone of lower rank who would be reported to first)? Do you see much in the way of modern ideology at work in Middle-earth?
|
I have seen this argument as well.
And I can both see it, and not see it.
Tolkien seemed to be terrifically opposed to Modernity, and the idea that any form of Bureaucratic/Hierarchical organization could amount to any good.
Especially when "Machines" were concerned (And he seemed to have a broad definition of "Machine" that included more than the physical mechanisms, but could also be applied to "Mechanistic Thinking").
So that he would associate this with the demonic element in Middle-earth is not very surprising.
I can also see an ideology forming out of this, but one which is segregated between those who are "merely tools" and the "True Believers."
The Nazgūl, the Mouth-of-Sauron, and other such higher-ups would seem to be in the Second Category, and the former mostly the Orcs or the minions of his enslaved lands (either ideologically enslaved, or enslaved via brute force).
But that would require a greater deal of exploration into the different regions themselves, and takes up the issues of motivations and psychology beyond simply "Hatred of Elves" (which seems to have been enough for the Orcs).
As for calling it a "Party" (as in Political), that is a different form of Ideology than is a Religious Ideology.
Both hope to create a narrative, but the former is generally more flexible, in trying to attend to purely secular needs (questions of "How?" - to govern), whereas the latter (Religious Ideology), deals more with Spiritual and Moral Beliefs and Narratives (explanations for "Why?" - are we here).
And I think that Sauron provided both of these to a great extent, even if they were lies.
There does seem to be some suggestion that the Easterlings and Haradrim had been led into either Morgothism, or Sauronism (The worship of one or the other), and that the Black Nśmenóreans remained committed to the Morgothism with which he misled them during the latter
2nd Age.
And this does seem to indicate a Hierarchy, where you have different tiers of "believers" or different types, who are granted different rights, privileges, or... probably most important:
Power within Mordor and its Tributaries (Those who pay Tribute to Mordor).
There is a freaking LOT here to explore.
MB