|
Something about the idea that evil is 'merely' a perversion of Good strikes me - doesn't that make evil more dangerous than if it was an opposing force in its own right? Surely evil is more likely to seduce the unwary individual because of the 'Good' it originally was?
How can you tell the difference - at least at first sight? Isn't this why Eomer, for instance, had such a struggle over what his response to Aragorn & the others should be. If evil still contains the seeds of Good in it - which it must if those who have chosen it still retain the capacity to repent, then it is likely to attract some to it out of their own ignorance, or simplicity.
This idea of evil actaully makes things more difficult for the individual, as its not a matter of simply choosing the Good side & rejecting the evil one, because Good can be perverted into evil so easily. Boromir committed an evil act, but he wasn't deliberately choosing evil over Good - he was motivated by the desire to do Good.
So, the Orcs, & their capacity for repentance - do they actually think of themselves as 'evil'? Haven't they simply been seduced into evil without fully realising? Perhaps, like Boromir, they believe they are the 'good' guys.
It seems that the whole issue of Good & evil is not one of choosing a clearly defined option & simply sticking to it - one can 'fall' into evil at any time, by the making of an apparently simple, 'innocent' choice - & perhaps not even realise that one has 'switched' sides.
Perhaps we come back to Tolkien's Christian belief here - creatures cannot save themselves. Only an external force of ultimate Good can offer the chance of 'salvation'. Within the creation things can be so confusing that it may be impossible to know even where the line is, let alone when on has crossed it.
|