Are Orcs That Bad?

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Also, almost all depicted orcs are not that good fighters or otherwise fearsome opponents as the main characters seem to be able to kill them by tens if not by hundreds. One gets afraid of them most when they threathen hobbits without a human, elf or dwarf to help them out as to hobbits they stand as real threats (but even here Tolkien gives the hobbits the strengtht and guts to beat them when it counts).

That's a good point and one I never liked as an adult. As a kid though I always felt comforted by always knowing that the good guys in the end had the strenght to fend off the Orcs. But yeah, it's silly that Orcs always seem to be weaker, more cowardly and less skilled then the heroes when there's no coherent reason for it being so.

Presumably, Orcs train at warfare and fighting all of their life and would therefore be better warriors than most free men with other interests. Also, Morgoth and Sauron would have an interest in breeding big Orcs, yet they are much smaller than the Men and Elves they spring from. Perhaps Eru's prank that?

[Tuor in Gondolin]

I think portraying orcs as poor fighters can be
exagerated. Remember, in LOTR orcs are
gewnerally seen going against the best of the best
of the good guys, Gondor and Rohan in the Third
Age were increasingly militarized societies with highly
trained warriors and systems of warfare, and Sauron
seems to have deliberately bred orcs of various sizes
and capabilities (for example, the tracker orc and his
companion patrolling in Mordor after Frodo and the
"great elf warrior" escaped into Mordor).

[Morthoron]

As Lalwende, skip spence and others have inferred, I believe Orcs presented as much of a problem to Tolkien as it does to we, the readers. There is, of course, the original statement that the wise 'believed' Orcs to be descended from imprisoned, twisted Elves; however, that goes against Tolkien's references to Elves dying of sadness (a sort of emotional suicide), and rape being a cause of such death:

Originally Posted by "Laws and Customs of the Eldar," Morgoth's Ring, History of Middle-Earth.

"Among all these evils there is no record of any among the Elves that took another's spouse by force; for this was wholly against their nature, and one so forced would have rejected bodily life and passed to Mandos. Guile or trickery in this matter was scarcely possible, for the Eldar can read at once in the eyes and voice of another whether they be wed or unwed."

Would an elf submit to such abomination as procreating at the behest of Morgoth? It seems unlikely.

Then we pass to the odd mention of Bolg being the son of Azog, which I believe is the only reference to familial relations of orcs anywhere in Tolkien's work. With whom was Azog doing his begetting? I bet Mrs. Azog was a real looker.

We then pass on the the squint-eyed Southerner, half-orcs and Uruk-hai of Lord of the Rings (as well as Tolkiens later assessment that orcs rose from men and not elves). Granted, Saruman was not the first to breed Uruk-hai (that was Sauron's genetic breakthrough, as well as the Olog-hai), but I always thought it comical the way Peter Jackson presented the Uruk's birthing in mud hatcheries. But really, Tolkien gives such an incomplete view of Orkish domesticity and breeding, that it's really all up to conjecture. One wonders what really was going on in the subterranean vaults of Orthanc or Barad-dur. It's certain that it wasn't pleasant.

P.S. Sorry, I didn't complete my thought (my resident eight year-old Elf princess demanded an audience).

It would seem that Tolkien chose a Jekyll and Hyde approach to Orcs, wherein the overall genetic pattern of Orcs was totally given over to the Hyde aspect of humanity: cruelty, mercilessness, bestiality, thievery and profanity. But I believe somewhere in Tolkien's letters (can't recall where and am too busy to look it up) he speaks of Orkish redeemability and questions whether or not Orcs have souls (I believe I read that somewhere, but not conclusively). When I have time I'll look it up (or perhaps some other enterprising soul can find it).

It seems that Orcs were indeed cannon fodder for Tolkien to handily pile before the bright swords of the righteous, and they are indeed not up to snuff as far as bravery and skill in comparison to their elf, dwarf and mannish enemies; in fact, when Barad-dur collapses the Orcs retreat in chaos, whereas there remain bold groups of Easterlings who bravely fight on to the last man against Aragorn's army. It was perhaps a strategic mistake on the part of both Sauron and Morgoth to rely on Orcs to fill the bulk of their legions.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

It was perhaps a strategic mistake on the part of both Sauron and Morgoth to rely on Orcs to fill the bulk of their legions.

But orcs come cheap (or in fact, for free). It takes much more effort (and gold or force) to get allies if you are a Dark Lord.

Also, in addition to they end of my previous post, about orcs enjoying murdering and torturing, I found just one of many examples:

Originally Posted by UT, The Drúedain

[The Drúedain's] losses were heavy in their feud with the Orcs, who returned their hatred and delighted to capture them and torture them.

The only reason I used that was because I was just reading it, as there are doubtless an almost infinite quotes of this nature.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

It seems that Orcs were indeed cannon fodder for Tolkien to handily pile before the bright swords of the righteous, and they are indeed not up to snuff as far as bravery and skill in comparison to their elf, dwarf and mannish enemies; in fact, when Barad-dur collapses the Orcs retreat in chaos, whereas there remain bold groups of Easterlings who bravely fight on to the last man against Aragorn's army. It was perhaps a strategic mistake on the part of both Sauron and Morgoth to rely on Orcs to fill the bulk of their legions.

That's what I feel. Orcs are just meat for the killing. Obviously there must be some enemy to be slaughtered in a fantasy novel (or must there? Hmmm...), but the Orcs are just too anonymous, too weak and almost pathetic. Again comparing them with Daleks (it was the frightening superiority of Daleks over humans that brought this into my mind - sorry if you don't know what they are......yet ), Orcs also seem a little bit thick. And this all stacks up to a bit of an unsatisfying enemy.

I have to note though, that the Orcs we see in LotR are very different to those in the Hobbit and again very different to those in the Sil/UT etc. There's very little to show us how 'evil' these Orcs actually are in LotR. On the contrary, they don't seem all that bad, really, talking of retirement and not just killing Merry and Pippin.

Originally Posted by Eonwe

And orcs are brought up to kill and torture for fun, in the same way as people nowadays are brought up to play sports/other games for fun. This is just another sport for them. And some people say that sport is just the body's natural instinct to make people feel superior to others (the ones they beat) and to keep the body fit and ready to fight/kill. And what better way to establish your superiority than to kill someone.

My reservation here is that would it be actually possible to have a functioning society, one with a breeding population, women/females and Orc babies if there was a culture where slaughtering one another proved 'worth'?

Must run, as Shrek 3 has just started and I've been dying to see it!

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

That's what I feel. Orcs are just meat for the killing. Obviously there must be some enemy to be slaughtered in a fantasy novel (or must there? Hmmm...), but the Orcs are just too anonymous, too weak and almost pathetic. Again comparing them with Daleks (it was the frightening superiority of Daleks over humans that brought this into my mind - sorry if you don't know what they are......yet ), Orcs also seem a little bit thick. And this all stacks up to a bit of an unsatisfying enemy.

But Daleks and cyberman are actually (well, at least partly, but then there is the brain) machines. They have no emotion. They are all part of a whole killing machine. They are the ultimate robotic, patterned movement. There is no variation, no difference. They are effective killing machines, but only as effective as their leader. An orc would run away if about to be killed, a robot would not. Maybe Morgoth liked that idea- that they could fend for themselves when not in use. Orcs are living, breathing beings. Not immortal metal bodis. They are both scary, but in different ways. Daleks and Cybermen are the pinnacle of organistaion, whereas orcs are more like a rabble. But often the come up with their own, horrible solutions.

What I am saying is that they are different types of evil. One works as a whole (Daleks and Cybermen), one works in different ways, but in the same direction.

And anyway, would the Daleks be so interesting if there weren't those "special" ones? There are quite a few episodes devoted to them, just like in LOTR when you get to find out what the orcs really think.

[Boromir88]

What is fascinating to me about Tolkien's orcs is Tolkien asks the question that Sociologists (and Psychologists) are still trying to answer today. It is a question Tolkien throws out there, but doesn't answer, and one that we will probably never have an "answer" to. Is the person to blame for their own choices, or do we blame the system? Do we blame the individual orcs for their cruelty, or the evil purpose (and environment) that Morgoth had for them. I mean the purpose of the Orcs are to really be cruel agents of destruction. Afterall the Mouth of Sauron was said to have been "more" cruel than any orc, and that thought just sends down my spine.

I am not too familiar with The Silmarillion, because honestly I don't like it as a story, and I really was only able to finish it (from cover-to-cover) once. But, I do get a different impression about the Orcs in LOTR than from the Orcs in the Silmarillion. Maybe that is because Sauron made improvements to his Orcs, and we also get more into Sauron's Orcs' minds.

Morgoth's Orcs certainly seemed pathetic and much like Canon Fodder. Wave after wave would come, and they would be slaughtered by our heroes (yet more would keep coming!) I never got the impression that Sauron's Orcs were canon fodder. Afterall, unlike what the movies show (gotta love Hollywood) Sauron didn't seem to have an unlimitted supply of Orcs he could keep throwing out there. He had amassed a lot of forces, but the army he sent to Erebor was made up of Easterlings, arguably the majority of the army the Witch-King commanded (when sieging Gondor) was made up of Men (or in the very least the Orcs wouldn't have outnumbered them by much).

I think Sauron also had a much different approach to "conquest" than Morgoth did. Morgoth eventually just wanted to destroy everything, Sauron on the other hand seemed to avoid war, if he could or if it suited his interests. He sends an emissary to offer peace to the dwarves. The message was pretty much, tell me where the Ring is, stay out of my way, and I'll leave you alone. He does send the MoS out to talk terms with Aragorn et. all. We all knew the "talks" weren't going to be productive, but afterall this was an army that just defeated him and now marched right to his gate. This offers a reason to believe, that first Sauron had a wiser policy than Morgoth, but also Sauron really didn't have the unlimited resources (and Orcs) to spend on constant fighting.

I think his alliance with Saruman shows Sauron's policy the best. He doesn't trust Saruman, but he could use Saruman and when Saruman is useless, he'll deal with the little brat later. I'm sure if the Dwarves had agreed to Sauron's offer, Sauron would have dealt with them eventually. We see Sauron did have superior numbers, but he just didn't have the power to constantly be at war, thus any temporary peace he could make, he probably would.

So, where am I trying to go with all this, ahh Sauron's Orcs never appeared to be canon fodder to me. He couldn't tap into an unlimitted amount and keep throwing them at his enemy. Also, we see our heroes don't actually keep cutting down wave after wave of Orcs.

The fight in Moria, I wouldn't really even call a skirmish. The Fellowship didn't have the endurance to beat back the Orcs, and fight them for 10 minutes as the movies portrayed. The Fellowship high-tailed their butts out of the chamber as soon as they could. The Orc Leader was also one tough cookie:

With a thrus of his huge hide shield he turned Boromir's sword and bore him backwards, throwing him to the ground. Diving under Aragorn's blow with the speed of a striking snake he charged into the Company and thrus with his spear straight at Frodo.~The Bridge of Khazad-dum

Eventhough he was the titled the "orc-cheiftain" this is pretty darn impressive for something that is supposed to be canon fodder. He manhandles the strongest member of the Fellowship, and he has the agility to quickly duck below Aragorn's blow and strike Frodo. That is impressive.

Then at Helm's Deep, I can see an argument being made that Legolas and Gimli did slay over 80 baddies combined, that seems like Tolkien drawing from "classic" heroism. However, we do know that not all of Saruman's army were Uruk-hai (or Orcs), and this was a battle that lasted through the night. I have not the slightest idea the length of the battle, and there were breaks in between (a moment of "parley" too!) But, even a battle that lasts 3-4 hours, killing 40 baddies for one person definitely isn't like Hurin's last stand.

The only moment (to me) that seemed like the Orcs got mowed down easily was Boromir's last stand. Pippin does say all the arrows were aimed at Boromir and he does kill many of them. But, also consider Boromir kind of drove off the first attack, scared away the 2nd with a horn blow, and on the 3rd wave he was killed.

I guess a quick summary if you want to skip all that, the Orcs in LOTR seem different in several ways than Morgoth's Orcs. I wanted to toss out some more things about Orcs and their possible redemption, but I must be off. I guess I will throw this out there, for when I do get a chance, but I was thinking about Orc women. Tolkien confirms in Letters (and it is consistant with the Silmarillion) that Orcs reproduce like the Children of Iluvatar, and thus there had to have been Orc women. But, alas, he doesn't entertain us with how orc childhood was like (under Sauron's regime). Did the Orc women stay at home and nurse their younglings...complete with a pleasant tomato garden and a white picket fence? (Eeh, that seems a little difficult to believe, and also tomatoes had no place in Middle-earth...hmm maybe cabbage).

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I guess a quick summary if you want to skip all that, the Orcs in LOTR seem different in several ways than Morgoth's Orcs.

First of all, welcome back to posting (haven't seen you around for a bit).

Second, I don't really think Morgoth's Orcs and Sauron's Orcs differed at all; what is definitely different was the caliber of enemy they faced. The Eldar and Edain were certainly greater warriors than the fading Dunedain in Gondor (and many Gondorions probably could only claim limited Dunedain bloodlines), and the Rohirrim. Even the Dwarves of the 1st Age were greater than their 3rd Age counterparts -- at least weapon and armor-wise -- after all, Azaghâl and his dwarves didn't back down from dragons; whereas the Dwarves of Erebor were soundly thrashed by Smaug. Plus, Morgoth didn't rely as much on Orcs as Sauron. After all, Morgoth's heavy hitters were Balrogs, dragons, trolls and then the Orcs coming...ummm...up the rear. And Morgoth was absolutely victorious against greater foes (until the Valar cavalry had to be called); whereas Sauron won many battles, but lost nearly every war he conducted.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I wanted to toss out some more things about Orcs and their possible redemption, but I must be off. I guess I will throw this out there, for when I do get a chance, but I was thinking about Orc women. Tolkien confirms in Letters (and it is consistant with the Silmarillion) that Orcs reproduce like the Children of Iluvatar, and thus there had to have been Orc women. But, alas, he doesn't entertain us with how orc childhood was like (under Sauron's regime). Did the Orc women stay at home and nurse their younglings...complete with a pleasant tomato garden and a white picket fence? (Eeh, that seems a little difficult to believe, and also tomatoes had no place in Middle-earth...hmm maybe cabbage).

Tolkien didn't mention tomato-tending Orc matrons who not-so-tenderly breast-fed their bawling brats (OWWW! those fangs!) because it's obvious Tolkien did not want to evince sympathy for Orcs. Tolkien was not one to offer multi-layered villains in his stories. If you were evil, you get no sympathetic rendering. Evil in Middle-earth always gets punished, doesn't it? Only if you atone, like Boromir, do you get the sympathetic touch (but then, of course, you must die anyway, sorry). Morgoth, Eol, Maeglin, Saeros, Feanor (he paid, precious, yes he did), Caranthir, Celegorm, Curufin (throw in Maglor and Maedhros as well), Mim, Turin (Tolkien's one great anti-hero), Sauron, Ar-Pharazon, Castimir the Usurper, the WiKi, Mouth of Sauron, Saruman (unrepentant up to the end), Denethor (he lost whatever sympathy he could have mustered), Gollum, etc., no one pays off the judge or has a get-out-of-jail free card (except perhaps Lobelia Sackville-Baggins, who gains sympathy in spite of herself).

No one gets to amass riches, kill wantonly and then retire to a seaside resort on the beaches of Umbar (like in real life).

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

But Daleks and cyberman are actually (well, at least partly, but then there is the brain) machines. They have no emotion. They are all part of a whole killing machine. They are the ultimate robotic, patterned movement. There is no variation, no difference. They are effective killing machines, but only as effective as their leader. An orc would run away if about to be killed, a robot would not. Maybe Morgoth liked that idea- that they could fend for themselves when not in use. Orcs are living, breathing beings. Not immortal metal bodis. They are both scary, but in different ways. Daleks and Cybermen are the pinnacle of organistaion, whereas orcs are more like a rabble. But often the come up with their own, horrible solutions.

What I am saying is that they are different types of evil. One works as a whole (Daleks and Cybermen), one works in different ways, but in the same direction.

And anyway, would the Daleks be so interesting if there weren't those "special" ones? There are quite a few episodes devoted to them, just like in LOTR when you get to find out what the orcs really think.

I believe the Daleks actually turned on their creator, Davros at one point (and there is something interesting in the series just finished that I dare say no more on for those who haven't seen it yet). And they are also hyper intelligent and could easily come up with their own solutions. But my point is it's their sheer ruthlessness and them being unable to be 'redeemed' that makes them so interesting and frightening.

Originally Posted by Boro

I mean the purpose of the Orcs are to really be cruel agents of destruction. Afterall the Mouth of Sauron was said to have been "more" cruel than any orc, and that thought just sends down my spine.

I find a lot of characters and creations a LOT more frightening than the Orcs - I could make a list rating scariness (might be a fun thread) and scarier than Orcs would be: the Nazgul, Gollum, Shelob, the Balrog, the Watcher in the Water etc etc....

Now onto cannon fodder...Morgoth seems to seek nothing more than annihilation, negation, and his Orcs are far more crazed, whereas Sauron seeks domination and his Orcs are more ordered. I agree Sauron doesn't treat them as cannon fodder, but Tolkien does.

It's possible he was stuck between a rock and a hard place in that he had to have an enemy army to be put to the sword, and like has been said, he literally struggled with the moral implications of that need...maybe I am churlish in that he doesn't fully pull off either having an effectively scary, amoral enemy nor an enemy which has been corrupted to be that way and is to be pitied.

Originally Posted by Boro

I guess I will throw this out there, for when I do get a chance, but I was thinking about Orc women. Tolkien confirms in Letters (and it is consistant with the Silmarillion) that Orcs reproduce like the Children of Iluvatar, and thus there had to have been Orc women. But, alas, he doesn't entertain us with how orc childhood was like (under Sauron's regime). Did the Orc women stay at home and nurse their younglings...complete with a pleasant tomato garden and a white picket fence? (Eeh, that seems a little difficult to believe, and also tomatoes had no place in Middle-earth...hmm maybe cabbage).

Like I've said, if Orcs are breeding in the normal way, then this reduces the likelihood that their home culture is inherently violent. If you look at the most ruthless of soldiers, they must still retain some basic emotions such as caring for their comrades, for if they didn't, then who would care for them if they were injured? How would they know their comrades didn't have them in their sights instead of the enemy? Even Daleks must retain the sense of comradeship at the very least.

And to raise even a tough little Orcling there has to be a fair degree of care - do Orclings need nappy changes, feeding and amusement? I'd imagine so. It's possible there were Orc nurseries and female Orcs lived in thralldom, but it still means at least 50% of Orcs must have been capable of caring

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I believe the Daleks actually turned on their creator, Davros at one point (and there is something interesting in the series just finished that I dare say no more on for those who haven't seen it yet). And they are also hyper intelligent and could easily come up with their own solutions. But my point is it's their sheer ruthlessness and them being unable to be 'redeemed' that makes them so interesting and frightening.

But then there was that whole controversy, wasn't there? And anyway, didn't they go for the one who saved their creator? If my creator was saved by one of his/her/other created, I would also go against them.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I find a lot of characters and creations a LOT more frightening than the Orcs - I could make a list rating scariness (might be a fun thread) and scarier than Orcs would be: the Nazgul, Gollum, Shelob, the Balrog, the Watcher in the Water etc etc....

But the orcs are meant to be the weakest of Sauron's (and even more so Morgoth's troops). They are definately more cannon fodder than the others.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

It's all very well setting it up that the worst traits of human (mis)behaviour stem from Orcish blood (and quite intriguing), however he neatly skips the fact that in his tales a lot of Elves, Men and Dwarves without a single drop of Orcish blood did plenty of bad things too. It lacks coherence.

Well, not really. The Orcs just do more of the bad stuff that Elves and Men (Dwarves aren't connected- or are they. Originally they were all going to be evil, according to the BoLT, at least I think) do. If elves/men were there ancestors, then I just think that Morgoth brought out their bad side, so much so that it unbalanced the good side. And what about the Evil Men? Thousands of them are killed, and they are the normal humans. I think it makes them more scary when they are enslaved by someone evil, even though they have the capacity to be good.

Originally Posted by skip spence

if we keep it simple Elves and Men share the same kind of physical body and can have children together so Orcs might have their orgins in both peoples.
It's when we start taking about the soul or fea we run into problems.

Are you suggesting Immortal Orcs?

Originally Posted by skip spence

While most characters like for example Sam do see the Orcs as bad though and through this isn't the authors voice. Some of the wiser characters like Gandalf do express views that they in fact don't hate the minions of the enemy but rather feel sorry for them. After the War of the Ring Aragorn also pardons the enemy combatants (including the Orcs) and grants them lands where they will be free to make their own destiny, something he wouldn't have done if he considered them beyond redemtion.

You would feel sorry for someone that was enslaved to do evil if they couldn't do aything else.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Also, almost all depicted orcs are not that good fighters or otherwise fearsome opponents as the main characters seem to be able to kill them by tens if not by hundreds. One gets afraid of them most when they threathen hobbits without a human, elf or dwarf to help them out as to hobbits they stand as real threats (but even here Tolkien gives the hobbits the strengtht and guts to beat them when it counts).

But during the first book, the only hobbit to kill an orc was Sam. And once in a while, an orc chieftain comes along, and then there's trouble.

Originally Posted by skip spence

That's a good point and one I never liked as an adult. As a kid though I always felt comforted by always knowing that the good guys in the end had the strenght to fend off the Orcs. But yeah, it's silly that Orcs always seem to be weaker, more cowardly and less skilled then the heroes when there's no coherent reason for it being so.

Presumably, Orcs train at warfare and fighting all of their life and would therefore be better warriors than most free men with other interests. Also, Morgoth and Sauron would have an interest in breeding big Orcs, yet they are much smaller than the Men and Elves they spring from.

But in Tolkien's work, all the really tall CoI (Children of Ilúvatar- ooh! Another abbreviation) are good. Look at the Númenoreans (and so, Tuor). And Turgon. But then Thingol could have been better. Anyway, evil characters are often portrayed as being smaller, weaker, cowering/crouching/stooping creatures. And anyway, what about Uruks? (and I'm not talking about Saruman's). Anyway, since Morgoth made so many, he probably didn't care (or were they "Spartan" in their selection of warriors?).

And then again, there is the free will and intelligence question. An intelligent slave would be more capable. Of course, there is the question of rebellion, but maybe being isolated stopped that. Like in Moria, in the Chamber of Mazarbul, once the chieftain died the others ran off (they came back with reinforcements, but that's not the point. In fact, this points even more to the fact that they are more effective). If they had been mindless "machines" then they would have just gone straight to their death. They know when they're outnumbered and get suport. In this way they are more effective, and less die that way. Being selfish just makes them more formidable, as they are less likely to die.
Anyway, it is said that those that fight because they are forced to/payed to will be worse in battle, as they don't really need to win the fight- the only thing that affects them is whether or not they die in the battle itself. The orcs don't need to fight, unlike the "good guys" who would otherwise get invaded and killed.

And orcs are brought up to kill and torture for fun, in the same way as people nowadays are brought up to play sports/other games for fun. This is just another sport for them. And some people say that sport is just the body's natural instinct to make people feel superior to others (the ones they beat) and to keep the body fit and ready to fight/kill. And what better way to establish your superiority than to kill someone. Just like when people go hunting (just so you know, I don't know anyone who does so I don't know how it feels) they establish their superiority and skill over other animals. Also, when it was still legal, being able to hunt creatures that were able to kill Man (like lions, tigers, certain bears, wolves, etc) was considered as a sign of power. Anyway, orcs did find pleasure in making people suffer, especially their most powerful enemies.