Failure and Punishment

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

In my earlier post, however, I was particularly interested in the actions of those characters who are not generally considered to be morally ambiguous. Bilbo and Eowyn both commit “wrongful acts” (theft and disobedience to authority), yet they do so with good intentions and, ultimately, for the greater good. Where do these acts fit within the moral framework of Tolkien’s world?

Perhaps it is helpful to consider that the moral framework of Tolkien's world partakes of Northern sensibilities every bit as much as Catholic. By that I mean that loyalty, even in secret disobedience of a positive command, is considered to be truer than the obedience of remaining at home and not with one's lord. This would be the case of Eowyn. I'm not sure that I have sufficiently described in what way this is particularly Northern, as I'm floating a conjecture, but it seems to best fit the situation.

Bilbo's case could be considered equivalent to a small army at war in which a spy or burglar is considered to be held to his contract to the side he is allied with rather than to the moral code that war sets aside by virtue of its nature.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

This is a phenomenal discussion, among the best I've seen on the Downs, which is saying a lot.

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Gollum is an interesting case in point, since his motives are mixed at one and the same time. He acts both in the cause of good (by guiding Frodo and Sam towards Mordor) and in the cause of evil (by luring them to Shelob’s lair). His intentions are both good (he willingly serves Frodo) and evil (he wants the Ring for himself). He is punished for his evil acts and intentions, but does he ultimately deserve redemption for his good acts and intentions? It was, of course, his final act which brought about the destruction of the Ring, albeit unwittingly so.

Well, Gollum does have mixed motives at times, but the evil wins out over the good, certainly in his conversation with himself, and also in Sam's roughness outside Torech Ungol. I don't think we can say he deserves to be rewarded because the good sometimes fought with the bad within him. When he leads Frodo and Sam to Mordor, he accomplishes a good deed, but he does it with the wrong motives. Same thing with the destruction of the Ring at Sammath Naur, though there obviously wasn't much of a moral conflict by that point. And as the quote above shows, Tolkien makes it abundantly clear that Gollum's being the agent of divine providence does not make him innocent.