Were Dragons inherently "evil"?

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

Coming into this thread late. Other than perhaps Morgoth himself, Tolkien did not believe that anything with a mind was "irredeemably evil" (his phrase, not mine and not the same as "inherent"). This led him to struggle with the nature of Orcs, Trolls, and to a lesser extent dragons. I seem to recall that he reasoned that these corrupted or constructed beings could not solely be tools of the will of Morgoth and Sauron or else they would be inanimate when their masters' attention was elsewhere and would not have even the slight self-interest shown by Gorbag and Shagrat. So while he toyed with the idea that Orcs might simply be animals, perhaps apes, that were corrupted, he settled upon them being one of the sentient races in the end (though he wavered between Men and Elves as the source of Orcs and never explained the origin of Trolls).

Dragons appear to fall into a different category. The earliest conception of dragons is in Lost Tales, where they are stated as being "made" by Morgoth and having "great cunning and wisdom." However, Tolkien later reached the conclusion that Morgoth was incapable of creating any thinking entity. I suggest that dragons were bred from lesser reptiles in a fashion similar to how Carcharoth was bred and "inhabited" by "spirits" that animated them. In Morgoth's Ring, Tolkien discusses certain great Orc captains such as Boldog and states that they were inhabited by spirits of some power.

If we accept this premise, dragons are evil from the beginning because the spirits that inhabited them were evil. However, Tolkien would likely not say they were "irredeemably evil." In Letters JRRT says that even Sauron was not irredeemably evil in that he at one time served another, Aule. This creates at least the possibility of a "reformed" dragon, though public reaction might be the same as the Troll mentioned in the last post by Faramir Jones.

I love your materials Mith, they're always really strong, but there's always something thoughtful in them. For this one, I had not seen Tolkien's actual 'real life' position on sentience, evil--that anything sentient was not 'irredeemably' evil.

I was wondering if you had at the fore of your memory, where this is said by the prof, as I would like to research this area further (nature of evil/Tolkien's).

About Dragons, I recently found and excerpt in the book Master of Middle Earth by Paul Kocher. He speaks for some time about Tolkien's 'quasi-reality' placement of FA/SA/TA and the mythology as part of -- Earth's -- history. In that, Paul refers to pterodactyls and some measure of that reptile as a forebear or 'part' or 'half' fact/fiction (faction) basis of Dragons. There is a section on Tolkien's evil in the book as well, but no 'whole section' for Dragons and Evil, specifically.

[Mithadan]

There is a letter on the subject in Letters of JRRT. I do not have that volume with me. I have referred to the letter in other posts before. I'll run a search.

In Morgoth's Ring, p. 409, one of Tolkien's later writings (discussing the nature and origin of Orcs) states that only Eru can "make creatures with independent wills, and with reasoning powers."

[Mithadan]

Letter 153 quoted in the following post (in a thread called Inherent Evil): http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpos...2&postcount=39

Interestingly, the letter speaks of a "ban" upon creating thinking beings as opposed to an inability to do so.

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

Letter 153 quoted in the following post (in a thread called Inherent Evil): http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpos...2&postcount=39

Interestingly, the letter speaks of a "ban" upon creating thinking beings as opposed to an inability to do so.

from the Post citing Letters

...even Orcs would become part of the World, which is God's and ultimately good.) " (Letter 153)

Yes, it's interesting that he went more towards 'a ban' position rather than 'incapacity' to create 'new' sentient creatures. (I'm thinking of Dwarves here and Illuvatar doing a little fixing up of them. I seem to remember they were automatons or some such before a correction).

I have a fondness for Orcs some lately though I don't want to attend an Orc function as I'm sure I'd end up either a main course, or else sport of some sort (being a bit like mutton at my age). Um, perhaps if Elrond fostered Azog? we might have had a boorish variation on Boromir? as the outcome. I do remember reading up and discovering that Orcs have some capacity for creating art as well, though a more menacing variety.

Thank you for the materials

[Faramir Jones]

Ivriniel, I would strongly suggest you get a copy of Morgoth's Ring. As someone with all 13 volumes (13 being the index) of The History of Middle-earth, I've suggested to people that if they wanted to just get a few volumes, the best ones would be The Lays of Beleriand, which you already have, and Morgoth's Ring.

[Ivriniel]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

There is a letter on the subject in Letters of JRRT. I do not have that volume with me. I have referred to the letter in other posts before. I'll run a search.

In Morgoth's Ring, p. 409, one of Tolkien's later writings (discussing the nature and origin of Orcs) states that only Eru can "make creatures with independent wills, and with reasoning powers."

Ta Muchly. I just reviewed Letters and I missed it. I have not yet bought or read Morgoth's Ring, though I see a lot of citations here referring to it. It looks like a really interesting Tome.

I've got those five really (hard) volumes at hand as well, (The Lays of Beleriand, etc) where it's 'Gnomes', Thu, and MaeDRos, The Quenta and some other really odd phonetics in variations of names. I always baulked at Noldoli being -- gnomes -- and I'm glad Chris (or whoever it was) fixed it .

Cheers