The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Marwhini · 07-13-2016, 04:22 PM

Exactly.

I did not intend to imply an equality or identity between Feudalism and Monarchy, either. The two are quite distinct, as there are forms of Democratic Feudalism (where the collective Feudal Lords each vote on either individual or collective policy), as well as other forms.

And I would have exactly pointed to Bree and The Shire as examples of his Idealized "State."

It should be pointed out, though, that the rest of Middle-earth existed under some form of Feudal Structure or Monarchy where the "States" endured (as, for example, is parody of "Democracy" in the Lake-town or Long Lake, which was very much a failure as a government).

It is slightly difficult to read Middle-earth as an explicit endorsement of his views, but merely a reflection of certain biases he had (especially in the case of The Shire, and Hobbits in General).

There is a rather peculiar psychology at work as well, where we can see conflicts in Tolkien's beliefs regarding what he describes as "Quality of Life" and the "Quality of Living Things" (their moral or ethical relationship to the Divine). That is a tough topic to really discuss in a world where we have no objective access to "the Divine," as they had for much of the History of Middle-earth.

But this is exemplified in the depiction of the Hobbits, and that of the Elves.

The Elves are described as closest to the "Gods" (or, rather: The Valar - "Gods" in the Olympian sense of the word), and thus the pinnacle of Earthly wisdom, and virtue (to say nothing of physical qualities as well).

Yet the Hobbits are depicted in a way that is so idealized and attractive that it tends to illicit an almost utopian quality to them: How life SHOULD be/have been.

In terms of moral philosophy, these depictions of these two groups call into question the ethical and moral values that would be considered "best" or "most appropriate" in a values-system that Tolkien describes, which itself is heavily influenced by a specific form of Catholicism (That form of Catholicism having a singular, objective definition of moral and ethical "Good"). And this is even more complicated by the existence of a form of Manichaean Dualism within Middle-earth as well (That Good/Evil, and Light/Dark can be "thing" that exist tangibly in their own right).

But, overall.... I have not yet looked too heavily at that contradiction (between Elves and Hobbits representing an idealized "Virtue" of Life) , and if there is a means of resolving it via the internal metaphysics of Middle-earth. It could very well be something that can be explained by the differences in the Peoples themselves.

But as far as Tolkien's political views are concerned... They do tend to echo many of the Medieval Monastic Orders, which seemed to have a similar rejection of "The State." Many of them got into rather a lot of trouble because of their conflicts with "terrestrial authority."

MB

07-13-2016, 04:22 PM	#2
Marwhini Wight Join Date: Jun 2016 Posts: 144	Exactly. I did not intend to imply an equality or identity between Feudalism and Monarchy, either. The two are quite distinct, as there are forms of Democratic Feudalism (where the collective Feudal Lords each vote on either individual or collective policy), as well as other forms. And I would have exactly pointed to Bree and The Shire as examples of his Idealized "State." It should be pointed out, though, that the rest of Middle-earth existed under some form of Feudal Structure or Monarchy where the "States" endured (as, for example, is parody of "Democracy" in the Lake-town or Long Lake, which was very much a failure as a government). It is slightly difficult to read Middle-earth as an explicit endorsement of his views, but merely a reflection of certain biases he had (especially in the case of The Shire, and Hobbits in General). There is a rather peculiar psychology at work as well, where we can see conflicts in Tolkien's beliefs regarding what he describes as "Quality of Life" and the "Quality of Living Things" (their moral or ethical relationship to the Divine). That is a tough topic to really discuss in a world where we have no objective access to "the Divine," as they had for much of the History of Middle-earth. But this is exemplified in the depiction of the Hobbits, and that of the Elves. The Elves are described as closest to the "Gods" (or, rather: The Valar - "Gods" in the Olympian sense of the word), and thus the pinnacle of Earthly wisdom, and virtue (to say nothing of physical qualities as well). Yet the Hobbits are depicted in a way that is so idealized and attractive that it tends to illicit an almost utopian quality to them: How life SHOULD be/have been. In terms of moral philosophy, these depictions of these two groups call into question the ethical and moral values that would be considered "best" or "most appropriate" in a values-system that Tolkien describes, which itself is heavily influenced by a specific form of Catholicism (That form of Catholicism having a singular, objective definition of moral and ethical "Good"). And this is even more complicated by the existence of a form of Manichaean Dualism within Middle-earth as well (That Good/Evil, and Light/Dark can be "thing" that exist tangibly in their own right). But, overall.... I have not yet looked too heavily at that contradiction (between Elves and Hobbits representing an idealized "Virtue" of Life) , and if there is a means of resolving it via the internal metaphysics of Middle-earth. It could very well be something that can be explained by the differences in the Peoples themselves. But as far as Tolkien's political views are concerned... They do tend to echo many of the Medieval Monastic Orders, which seemed to have a similar rejection of "The State." Many of them got into rather a lot of trouble because of their conflicts with "terrestrial authority." MB