Life or Honor?

[Gurthang]

That's exactly what I would say, LMP. In my mind, this all depends on what "honor" means. I can easily see different types of honor. I would say that one type is the attitude towards you from other people. If they hold you in honor, then they admire you and respect you for you accomplishments. This is the type of honor that can be gained by deeds of valour and heroism.

On the other hand, I would say that there is an honor of self. Basically, in my mind, this would be synonomous to virtue and character. This can be seen and admired by others, but more often goes unnoticed. It's the kind of honor that keeps from being dishonest, holds you to your responsibilities, and, in many cases, keeps you from wanting others to make special notice of your honor.

I guess the basic difference is the motivation, as the 'two' honors are quite similar now that I look at them. It seems that if you are doing things to "gain honor" then you would be, as LMP's question states, valuing "honor over life". If you are doing honorable things because they are the right or noble things to do, then it would make sense to say that you hold "life over honor".

So maybe the question shouldn't be Life or Honor, but something more along the lines of "Life of Honor or Honor of Life"?

But back to the question.

I like the contrasting images MatthewM has brought up. Aragorn displays the Honor of Life characteristics and Boromir portrays the Life of Honor attitude. More later.

[littlemanpoet]

Now to throw in a wrinkle. It has been said that humility is 'knowing oneself, both flaws and strengths'. But that definition seems insufficient. Perhaps it would be best to add the following qualifier: '... and valuing them appropriately.'

Why bring that into the discussion? Because the same definition could just as easily be attributed to "good pride". Do they then mean the same thing? Maybe it would help to include some LotR examples.

Gandalf has this humility. Does Aragorn? Or does he not have good pride? ... which seems synonymous with Gurthang's honor of self. I think your distinction is useful, Gurthang.

But the way we're using the concepts seems a little bit like we're inventing ideas as we go (no bad thing except we separate ourselves from general understandings); I hope we can remain understandable to other BD'rs regarding LotR, not to mention RPrs (like me), because in the subcreation of new Middle Earth stories, RPrs are constantly running headlong into this stuff, and it's no easy thing to find our way, especially if we desire to write in the spirit of Tolkien.

That's a round-about way of getting us back to the main question:

Does your typical Gondorian value honor above life, or vice versa? In other words, is it more important to your average dweller in Minas Tirith, or Pelargir, or Dol Amroth, to:

1. be considered to be upright?
2. be upright regardless of what others think?
3. stay alive?

Obviously, I'm partly asking for a stretch of imagination, but I would hope that Tolkien provided some clues. I for one intend to see what I can discover in the books; maybe you can help?

[Gurthang]

Well, one thing that I can think of really quickly is the mustering of the Gondorian forces to Minas Tirith. Everyone knew that the city was going to be attacked the hardest, yet all those troops came to it's aid. I think this shows that most of them cared more about honor than their own lives, for surely it would have been safer to stay at home or flee westward. Although, this may only indicate the minds of the military, who I think usually hold honor over self. I think most soldiers would, or they wouldn't be soldiers.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Now to throw in a wrinkle. It has been said that humility is 'knowing oneself, both flaws and strengths'. But that definition seems insufficient. Perhaps it would be best to add the following qualifier: '... and valuing them appropriately.'

Interesting definition of humility-- not the one I'm used to, which is this: Having an accurate view of God and having an accurate view of yourself in light of that. What the equivalent ME definition would be, I'm not certain. Perhaps Gandalf's 'humility' is clearer, because he has a more accurate view or Eru than most?

For Aragorn to take the attitude that he wasn't the most doughty warrior and the most capable tactician around, would, in most cases, have been inaccurate-- therefore false humility. I think much of Aragorn's attitudes that we percieve as pride, I would view as practical honesty. 'Shall we argue about whether I am the best candidate here, or shall we proceed to something worth arguing about?" Is that arrogance, or practicality? Since Aragorn is the ME equivalent of a Navy Seal or an Army Ranger-- or a Force Reconnaissance Marine-- arguing about his capabilities usually IS a waste of time. He's usually the best.

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Does your typical Gondorian value honor above life, or vice versa? In other words, is it more important to your average dweller in Minas Tirith, or Pelargir, or Dol Amroth, to:

1. be considered to be upright?
2. be upright regardless of what others think?
3. stay alive?

Obviously, I'm partly asking for a stretch of imagination, but I would hope that Tolkien provided some clues. I for one intend to see what I can discover in the books; maybe you can help?

I think it depends on the Gondorian. I expect mature soldiers would have attitude (2)-- Be upright regardless of what others think; while some of the younger soldiers, or recruits or wannabes, might still be learning about what is upright, and so need the guidance of older folks, and so be much more dependant on what others considered to be upright, hence attitude (1), be considered to be upright and figure then they might be on the right track they hope. And then there are those who just plain want to survive; but why would they live in Minas Tirith? Seems to me that such folk woiuld have departed for calmer territory already.

Originally Posted by Gurthang

Well, one thing that I can think of really quickly is the mustering of the Gondorian forces to Minas Tirith. Everyone knew that the city was going to be attacked the hardest, yet all those troops came to it's aid. I think this shows that most of them cared more about honor than their own lives, for surely it would have been safer to stay at home or flee westward. Although, this may only indicate the minds of the military, who I think usually hold honor over self. I think most soldiers would, or they wouldn't be soldiers.

A hearty amen to that. I think those who wanted safety first, weren't in Minas Tirith anymore.

[Elu Ancalime]

These Themes are also presented in the Homeric Epics of The Illiad and The Odessey.

In the Iliad, the Peloponnesian city-states are attacking Troy, and Honor is valued over life. Since many characters on both sides are killed, honor for fighting for you country is the theme.

In the Odyssey, Odysseus goes through many trials and hardships including the death of all his crew, being close to returning home then driven away, and being stranded on an island for a decade. He even visits the underworld, where all of the characters killed in the Iliad tell him it is better to live than to die, changing the theme. At the end of the epic, he takes revenge on the suitors who were wooing his wife while everyone thought him dead. The theme at the end is to live gloriously and long.
________
Silver surfer vaporizer

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Interesting definition of humility-- not the one I'm used to, which is this: Having an accurate view of God and having an accurate view of yourself in light of that. What the equivalent ME definition would be, I'm not certain.

Perhaps it would be best to say 'having an accurate review of reality and therefore yourself, both strengths and weaknesses'. Those for whom God is part of (or the source of) reality, it fits just as well.

Perhaps Gandalf's 'humility' is clearer, because he has a more accurate view or Eru than most?

But Faramir's is too. And he seems to be at least as humble as Gandalf, maybe more so. Which begs the question: did Faramir have an accurate view of Eru? Or of reality? Or is the definition flawed?

Originally Posted by mark

Is that arrogance, or practicality? Since Aragorn is the ME equivalent of a Navy Seal or an Army Ranger-- or a Force Reconnaissance Marine-- arguing about his capabilities usually IS a waste of time. He's usually the best.

This is why I include 'an accurate accounting of one's strengths and weaknesses', because someone who has many talents may seem arrogant to someone who has few whilst the talented individual is merely stating and/or exhibiting the reality.

Elu, thanks for the connections to The Odyssey. Are you suggesting that there was a development from a limited view (honor valued over life) to a broader one (life valued over honor)?

I wonder if we're giving "Life" too broad a meaning in some of our examples? The long and short of it is that to value Life over Honor is to say "I'd rather stay alive than be known for ___-heroism, loyalty, fill in the blank-____".

So when we say that Gandalf values Life above Honor, is this what we mean?

[Child of the 7th Age]

But isn't the key to all this how we define the concept of "honor".

Here are all the definitions of honor I could find in dictionary.com:

1. High respect, as that shown for special merit; esteem: the honor shown to a Nobel laureate.

Good name; reputation.
A source or cause of credit: was an honor to the profession.

2. Glory or recognition; distinction.
a.A mark, token, or gesture of respect or distinction: the place of honor at the table.
b. A military decoration.

c. A title conferred for achievement.

3. High rank.

4.The dignity accorded to position: awed by the honor of his office.

5. Great privilege: I have the honor to present the governor.

6. Honor Used with His, Her, or Your as a title and form of address for certain officials, such as judges and mayors: Her Honor the Mayor.

7. Principled uprightness of character; personal integrity.

a. A code of integrity, dignity, and pride, chiefly among men, that was maintained in some societies, as in feudal Europe, by force of arms.

b. A woman's chastity or reputation for chastity.

c. Social courtesies offered to guests: did the honors at tea.
honors
Special recognition for unusual academic achievement: graduated with honors.

8. A program of individual advanced study for exceptional students: planned to take honors in history.

9.Sports. The right of being first at the tee in golf.

10. Games.
Any of the four or five highest cards, especially the ace, king, queen, jack, and ten of the trump suit, in card games such as bridge or whist.
The points allotted to these cards. Often used in the plural.

Ok, personally, I wouldn't give a fig about most of these "honors". According to these definitions, honor mainly has to do how you are perceived by others, or how you are given "rewards" because you are perceived well. The only exception seems to be #7, which talks about uprghtness of character and personal integrity. That does have enormous meaning. Life without that kind of honor is no life at all. Yet, even here there is mention of a special code of male conduct, which certainly does not apply to me.

There is one episode concerning honor that no one has mentioned from the LotR. When Frodo comes home, one of the things that the author brings out is that he, unlike Merry, Pippin, and Sam, is accorded absolutely no honor by others in the Shire. The ironic thing is that he will shortly lose his life--if we equate sailing to the West with a permanent withdrawal from the activities of life. So is honor necessary for life to continue? Is Frodo's loss of honor an inevitable harbinger for his unavoidable sailing to the West? Or has Frodo surmounted "honor", and gotten to a point in his own life where the accolades of others truly aren't needed? Hence his need to leave the mundane life of the Shire and go where others of his kind have not previously gone.....

[littlemanpoet]

Thanks for a most excellent post, Child. I think that the sub-text under point #1 is also part of our discussion here.

Do we not find that the specificities of points a. & b. under #7 are removed from LotR, whereas the generality (or dare I say unity?) of #7 is evoked? What I'm suggesting is that Tolkien avoids getting bogged down in a. & b. while holding fast to #7 main point.

As for Frodo, my sense is that he neither wanted nor needed honor of any kind, and was happy (if we may call it that) to stay at Bag End in peace and quiet, and would have done so if not for his grievous wounds. Sam may have been pained by the lack of honor, but we can't really infer that Frodo was pained (by that).