Is THIS how you imagined the vampires?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Well, it was only a tiny fraction of the elves that fell for his disguise; plus, he didn't rely on simply good looks, he used all he had in his arsenal to achieve his ends. Concerning the hassle, the creation of the ring made it possible to incapacitate him for a good while in the Third Age and to finally reduce Sauron to impotence.

Yes.... but

It was his beauty that seduced them. One assumes that if he'd appeared in monstrous form they would have suspected him. Because he appeared to them in a form of great beauty they let him in. He then seduced them with his wisdom.

It would seem to me that Morgoth & Sauron were smart enough to realise that their foes judged too much on looks (& the Elvish obsession with physical beauty generally). Perhaps this is a direct result of their own eternal physical beauty & the fact that they are impervious to illness which might ravage their looks. To Elves 'Beauty is truth, truth beauty'. Sauron seems to have ued this Elvish weakness to get close enough to do damage.

As to the creation of the Ring making it possible to incapacitate & reduce Sauron to impotence, yes, but that of course was unforseen & unintended by him & so not part of his motivation & plays no part in his choice of means or, most importantly, in the intentions/motivations of the Elves.

[Lalwendë]

Just to lay something to rest if I may here. davem is correct that Tolkien does not broadly equate white with good, black with evil. Nor does he equate good looking with good, ugly with evil. One of the commonest criticisms levelled at Tolkien is that he is simplistic in his uses of black/white and good/evil and is a racist for doing so. Now though, that argument has been trashed by Tolkien readers the world over who see that his work is NOT so simplistic! Delve into the books however and it turns out that Tolkien did indeed take great care that white did not equal good and black did not equal evil. What more do you need than the obvious examples that Saruman was the White wizard and Aragorn's banner was black? On the fair/ugly line, what more proof do you need than Strider's off-putting appearance and Sauron's fair visage in Eregion?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by davem

It was his beauty that seduced them.

I would call this a second-rate factor at best, an excuse,rather than a motive. What we see in the Eregion elves is a motive present all throughout the work: highly endowed persons, who are seduced by the product of their craft, which leads them astray. Sauron offered them more than good looks, of which their kindred had no lack . He offered them knowledge and the promise of fulfillment of their dreams, dreams which already conquered the minds and hearts of those elves. Also, commenting on the issue of Tom and the matter of control, Tolkien said (emphasis added):

Originally Posted by Letter #144

The story is cast in terms of a good side, and a bad side, beauty against ruthless ugliness, tyranny against kingship, moderated freedom with consent against compulsion that has long lost any object save mere power, and so on

As to the creation of the Ring making it possible to incapacitate & reduce Sauron to impotence, yes, but that of course was unforseen & unintended by him & so not part of his motivation & plays no part in his choice of means or, most importantly, in the intentions/motivations of the Elves.

Well, the issue was that their choice caused a hassle, which I believe I showed is partially true. As far as their motivations, they actually intended to ward off evil and corruption.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Just to lay something to rest if I may here. davem is correct that Tolkien does not broadly equate white with good, black with evil.

Oh, but I do believe he does. He does so on a very consistent basis as a method of contrast.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Nor does he equate good looking with good, ugly with evil.

That is a fair statement. But my impetus is not so much on good and ugly but on the contrast of dark and light.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

One of the commonest criticisms levelled at Tolkien is that he is simplistic in his uses of black/white and good/evil and is a racist for doing so.

I've never considered Tolkien a racist, in fact his letters bear the point that he was in fact quite the opposite; however, that does not obviate the fact that, even as Davem implied, there is light and there is darkness; there is the light of the two trees and there is the void in which Morgoth walked alone nursing his dark thoughts. There is Morgoth's destruction of the light with the aid of Ungoliant's impenetrable shadow.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Now though, that argument has been trashed by Tolkien readers the world over who see that his work is NOT so simplistic! Delve into the books however and it turns out that Tolkien did indeed take great care that white did not equal good and black did not equal evil. What more do you need than the obvious examples that Saruman was the White wizard and Aragorn's banner was black? On the fair/ugly line, what more proof do you need than Strider's off-putting appearance and Sauron's fair visage in Eregion?

I don't believe anything Tolkien did was simplistic, nor was it so in his use of dark/black and light/white; that would be like saying Rembrandt's use of chiaroscuro was simplistic. As far as Aragorn's banner being black, I would suggest a white tree would not show up very well on a white background. In regards to Saruman, we are already aware that he has fallen from 'white' and the mantle would be taken up by Gandalf (a point Gandalf makes clear in Fangorn -- 'I am Gandalf the White'). As a matter of fact, Gandalf's challenge to the Balrog on the Bridge of Khazad-dum contains the contrast of dark and light most vividly:

I am a servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. You cannot pass. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udun. Go back to the shadow!

As far as 'appearing fair' that is a tactic, and does not preclude the dark underpinnings apparent in the protrayal of evil. In any case, both Sauron and Morgoth eventually lost the ability to appear as anything but the dark reflection of their sinister inner machinations.

Morgoth, Moria, Morannon, Mirkwood, Mordor, Black Numenoreans, Morgul, Anglachel/Gurthang (the sword is black), Daedeloth, Delduwath, Ered Wethrin, Ephel Duath, Ulfang the Black, Ancalagon the Black -- by definition there is never an implication of 'white' or 'light' in anything evil or corrupted in Middle-earth.

[sallkid]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Morgoth, Moria, Morannon, Mirkwood, Mordor, Black Numenoreans, Morgul, Anglachel/Gurthang (the sword is black), Daedeloth, Delduwath, Ered Wethrin, Ephel Duath, Ulfang the Black, Ancalagon the Black -- by definition there is never an implication of 'white' or 'light' in anything evil or corrupted in Middle-earth.

What about Smaug the Golden? Or the "Black Arrow" of Bard the Bowman?
Saruman the white has already been mentioned as has Sauron the Fair.

I believe aragorn's black banner was described as having no device, or if there were it was dark enough that no image could be seen. (i'll have to check up on that)

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by sallkid

What about Smaug the Golden? Or the "Black Arrow" of Bard the Bowman?
Saruman the white has already been mentioned as has Sauron the Fair.

There is a reminiscence from Tolkien's childhood regarding 'green great dragon' as opposed to the more proper 'great green dragon'. I suppose dragons, being a lifelong favorite of Tolkien, are exempt and come in a plethora of colors. And again, Saruman was no longer 'white' or 'fair' as portrayed in LotR; he lost that designation to Gandalf. Bard's arrow? Yes, it was black, so was Turin's sword. That's not really part of the point I was trying to convey. *shrugs*

Originally Posted by sallkid

I believe aragorn's black banner was described as having no device, or if there were it was dark enough that no image could be seen. (i'll have to check up on that)

It would not take much sewing on Arwen's part to make a deviceless black banner. Yes, please do check.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Concerning Aragorn's black banner: (as a Telcontar and a needlewoman, this is my area of expertise! )

The banner was furled at first, so that only the black could be seen when it was brought to Aragorn. But when it was unfurled upon the coming of the Corsair ships, this is what it looked like:

...behold! upon the foremost ship a great standard broke, and the wind displayed it as she turned towards the Harlond. There flowered a White Tree, and that was for Gondor; but Seven Stars were about it, and a high crown above it, the signs of Elendil that no lord had borne for years beyond count. And the stars flamed in the sunlight, for they were wrought of gems by Arwen daughter of Elrond; and the crown was bright in the morning, for it was wrought of mithril and gold.

I quite agree that the reason for the black standard was primarily artistic - the gems and gold and mithril showed up best against that dark background. I have no idea if there was also an historical reason for the black standard. But it seems to me to be a wonderful symbol for Aragorn - seemingly dark (foul) but then bright when fully seen (fair). Gandalf's greatness too was at first cloaked in grey, before it was revealed in its brightness.

[Lalwendë]

Morthoron, there's enough examples on here now to show that Tolkien equating light with good, dark with evil was anything but consistently shown! And to add that the Gondorians built Orthanc out of black stone and the walls of Minas Tirith too. I believe that white flowers grow in Morgul Vale, and Saruman's symbol is the White Hand. Far from setting up a simplistic white/black symbolism Tolkien plays with the perceived cultural notions of white/back = good/evil - not all shades of black are bad, not all shades of white are good. It's been brought up many a time to counter the accusation that Tolkien is simplistic and uses traditionally racist symbolism.

Course if you want to just win an argument or make a point you may disregard all these examples which show Tolkien was not being so straightforwards. Yes there are contrasts, but they are by no means fixed - Tolkien also turns traditional contrasts upside down.

Rather than comparing white and black or light and darkness, and equating these with good and bad, what Tolkien does is set up the contrast of Light and Unlight, neither of which require either brightness or darkness, black or white. A very different thing altogether. In his world darkness can be very beautiful - Varda's stars against the night sky for example, or Arwen's hair, and brightness can be horrific - the bright flames at the heart of Mount Doom or the awesome Balrog.