The Scourge of The Dark Side...Tolkien and Modernism

[Lush]

Fate plays heavily in the outcome of the novel, not enlightened self-interest.

I think you're right to bring up fate, Morthoron, though I would also remind you that what we are looking at is a world that has been marred, and those who are in it are marred as well. I also didn't say that it was necessarily enlightened self-interest (I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that, so perhaps if you'd like to explain, I would be interested) - just the idea of "do unto others... etc." It is a noble way of thinking, to be sure, but it is also not entirely selfless. Which is alright, really, because that's what human nature (or hobbit nature, if you will) is all about.

[Hot, crispy nice hobbit]

Guns don't kill people, spinning bullets discharged at high velocity do.

It sounds more like a figure of speech to describe Frodo as having "no will left in the matter". A drug addict who did bloody murder to feed his addiction would be just as responsible.

"My Precccioousss." - Bilbo, on tobacco rehab.

It is an accident which saved Middle Earth, just as it was a boating accident which killed Frodo's parents. (Unless, the gossips are true) One flinches at the prospect of pronouncing moral judgement at the death of Frodo's parents, but ascribes divine intervention at the other. Doesn't that seem like moral values are different from ideals?

"I did all that for my Children. It's not right to deprive my cute li' goblins of a land of milk and honey..." - Melkor, on Trial during the First Chaining.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Hot, crispy nice hobbit

Guns don't kill people, spinning bullets discharged at high velocity do.

This is off-topic, but here's a good one: if guns kill people, then silverware makes Michael Moore fat (assuming he doesn't eat with his fingers...which may be assuming too much). Ha!

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Lush

- just the idea of "do unto others... etc." It is a noble way of thinking, to be sure, but it is also not entirely selfless.

This is not strictly true. Frodo's sacrifice of his own enjoyment of the Shire for the sake of his fellow hobbits was entirely selfless. In the end, he had the opportunity to visit Aman as a result, but only retrospect could have shown him that chain of events. Though virtue sometimes does lead to a good end, that end is rarely foreseeable, which is why virtue is always best practiced for its own sake: for the sake of one's soul, as well as for the sake of others.

Perhaps looking after the condition of one's soul could be considered true self-interest, in which case virtue really isn't selfless at all... Though, the condition of one's soul is hardly what most people would term one's highest interest these days, so maybe we only agree because we define our terms differently.