Good and evil

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I'm not sure what I think. Galadriel sees herself as 'beautiful and terrible.' Sam imagines a garden swollen to a realm. But is this accurate, or the Ring's deceit? Sauron could once appear beautiful.

I suspect that for Tolkien Beauty was in large part dependent on natural harmony (and allowing the Music to take its course). The exercise of forceful interference introduces disharmony- the discord of Melkor, if you like. Sauron's inability after the Fall of Numenor to take on a fair form indicates that with the diminishment of his power he was unable to maintain a *disguise*- that his outward form reflected his true nature. Note also Saruman in death- rags of flesh over a hideous skull. There is something about the Will to Power which brings inherent ugliness along with it. Since temporal power of the sort the Ring promises involves coercion and enslavement, the process almost ineveitably involves the evocation of Fear- and terror involves using the ugly and the hideous. I believe Galadriel+ Ring would ultimately, like Saruman, have recruited Orcs.

For an Augustinian Catholic beauty on Earth is a distant echo of Divine perfection, and so I think for Tolkien the rejection of Eru's purpose (embodied in the moral law) means abandoning that echo- this can be seen even in the case of Aule and the Dwarves, who are not evil, but are indeed unlovely.

[davem]

It is part of the essential malady of such days— producing the desire to escape, not indeed from life, but from our present time and self-made misery— that we are acutely conscious both of the ugliness of our works, and of their evil. So that to us evil and ugliness seem indissolubly allied. We find it difficult to conceive of evil and beauty together. The fear of the beautiful fay that ran through the elder ages almost eludes our grasp. Even more alarming: goodness is itself bereft of its proper beauty. In Faerie one can indeed conceive of an ogre who possesses a castle hideous as a nightmare (for the evil of the ogre wills it so), but one cannot conceive of a house built with a good purpose—an inn, a hostel for travellers, the hall of a virtuous and noble king—that is yet sickeningly ugly. At the present day it would be rash to hope to see one that was not—unless it was built before our time. On Fairy Stories

So Tolkien lectures us. And yet, doesn't he fall into the same trap himself - allying ugliness almost solely with evil & beauty with goodness. Yes, there are examples of evil having a beautiful face (Annatar), & good having an ugly one (the Woses), yet in reality these are exceptions that prove the rule. In M-e not only do "evil and ugliness seem indissolubly allied" they are so. If we do find it "difficult to conceive of evil and beauty together" Tolkien himself could be said to have exacerbated that problem.

Or perhaps its simply because LotR, indeed the Legendarium as a whoie, is not actually a 'Fairy Story' at all?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by davem

My feeling is that while the Ring may contain some of Sauron's Will, it doesn't contain so much of his 'taste' that it will make a possessor of it ever want to live in a big tower in a blasted landscape - unless that desire was there in the first place. I think a 'megaLorien' is at the same 'extreme' of evil as Mordor - both are 'effects' of the utilisation of absolute power.

Surely. But what I want to say is that when we speak especially of the Ring in particular, and not any other form of corruption by power, the Ring's effects are two: first, boosting the original lust for power, second, leaking Sauron's thoughts through. As I said, it would have to take millenia for Galadriel to start breeding Orcs, but ultimately, I believe it would come. That would happen at the moment, when the Ring would have destroyed the wielder's prior identity. Technically, the person would become a Nazgul himself.
(Please note - and I hope it was clear even from what I posted earlier, just want to make it sure - that I do not speak of profiling the evil in general, I speak only of the one particular case of the Ring, which had a little bit of Sauron's personality in it.)

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

For an Augustinian Catholic beauty on Earth is a distant echo of Divine perfection, and so I think for Tolkien the rejection of Eru's purpose (embodied in the moral law) means abandoning that echo- this can be seen even in the case of Aule and the Dwarves, who are not evil, but are indeed unlovely.

Originally Posted by davem

So Tolkien lectures us. And yet, doesn't he fall into the same trap himself - allying ugliness almost solely with evil & beauty with goodness. Yes, there are examples of evil having a beautiful face (Annatar), & good having an ugly one (the Woses), yet in reality these are exceptions that prove the rule. In M-e not only do "evil and ugliness seem indissolubly allied" they are so. If we do find it "difficult to conceive of evil and beauty together" Tolkien himself could be said to have exacerbated that problem.

Or perhaps its simply because LotR, indeed the Legendarium as a whoie, is not actually a 'Fairy Story' at all?

The question is, what did Tolkien himself think - what did leak into his image of Middle-Earth, was it more like, as William said, the Augustinian Catholic point of view, or did he see it as a "Fairy story"? I believe he was not himself sure at certain points, or subconsciously, some things just pushed him to portray the evil as ugly (exactly as in the quote davem provided - a brilliant example!). Yet, I think at certain moments, like that in the "Mirror of Galadriel", he managed to get past this and show that even beautiful can be "evil".

[davem]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Surely. But what I want to say is that when we speak especially of the Ring in particular, and not any other form of corruption by power, the Ring's effects are two: first, boosting the original lust for power, second, leaking Sauron's thoughts through. As I said, it would have to take millenia for Galadriel to start breeding Orcs, but ultimately, I believe it would come. That would happen at the moment, when the Ring would have destroyed the wielder's prior identity. Technically, the person would become a Nazgul himself.
(Please note - and I hope it was clear even from what I posted earlier, just want to make it sure - that I do not speak of profiling the evil in general, I speak only of the one particular case of the Ring, which had a little bit of Sauron's personality in it.)

But if evil can be beautiful then an evil Elf would be as bad (morally) as an Orc. Hence we're only dealing with outward appearance, so Galadriel could have beautiful Elves serving her who were as evil as Orcs. If she could corrupt their nature there would be no need to twist their outer appearance. In short, at that point of absolute corruption I'm not sure appearances would come into it. As I stated, it would be merely a question of aesthetics. Galadriel (or any other wielder of the Ring) would not have Sauron's appearance (she would not, for instance, be nine fingered. She would not necessarily ever develop an ugly form - those are, in Sauron's case 'accidents'). Hence, I don't see that just because Sauron lived in a tower that Galadriel necessarily would - however corrupted by the Ring she became. The choice of whether one lives in a massive tower or a great tree is not a matter of how 'evil' one is. Both are effectively 'towers' - one of stone, one of wood. If a 'beautiful' servant is as capable of evil as an ugly one, what difference does that appearance make?

The question is, what did Tolkien himself think - what did leak into his image of Middle-Earth, was it more like, as William said, the Augustinian Catholic point of view, or did he see it as a "Fairy story"? I believe he was not himself sure at certain points, or subconsciously, some things just pushed him to portray the evil as ugly (exactly as in the quote davem provided - a brilliant example!). Yet, I think at certain moments, like that in the "Mirror of Galadriel", he managed to get past this and show that even beautiful can be "evil".

He does - yet this is, to me, another case of the exception proving the rule. Lewis depicts evil as beautiful. One can see Jadis as equivalent to Galadriel with the Ring. Lewis seems far more concerned to show that physical beauty is neither here nor there in moral terms. For Tolkien outer appearance does seems to reflect inner 'grace' - in most cases. Hence, the 'spirit' reshapes the form. The more one succumbs to evil the uglier one becomes. Which is, of course, a potentially dangerous message. Beautiful people are good, ugly (dark, swarthy) people are evil. Not in every case, & the Woses are a clear warning against such a simplistic view - and yet, in M-e those who judged the Woses as evil because of their appearance could be said to be judging on general experience within M-e.

Yet, Tolkien actually goes against the 'lesson' of Fairy Stories, in that while the Rohirrim may think that the Elves of Lorien are wicked (or at least 'dangerous) that os shown to be a judgement based in ignorance. The 'fays' of Lorien are not evil at all.

Of course, this comes down to the rules of M-e - if the inner evil does ultimately manifest in outer ugliness then Galadriel would have to become ultimately foul & her realm ugly. But the question is whether this 'rule' would have to be obeyed? And if it does it leaves me, personally, with a bit of a dilemma - if ugliness = evil, then aren't we left with the conclusion that all those who are ugly in M-e are evil? And if we are to conclude that then we're very close to a bit of an unpleasant conclusion - that beautiful people are 'better' (morally) than ugly ones. It seems to me that Tolkien himself never came out clearly on this. He may have Frodo state that a servant of the Enemy would feel fouler but seem fairer, but (apart from the exception of Annatar & Morgoth in his early years) do we ever actually see a real example of this?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

(I believe to the second part of davem's last post I have nothing to add, I think I voiced all my thoughts on this matter in the previous.)

Originally Posted by davem

Hence, I don't see that just because Sauron lived in a tower that Galadriel necessarily would - however corrupted by the Ring she became. The choice of whether one lives in a massive tower or a great tree is not a matter of how 'evil' one is.

Only to this, I think you still misunderstand what I am trying to say - it is NOT a measure of how evil one is. Galadriel could live in the mallorn tree and be as "evil" as Sauron. And of course, I am not speaking literally here, it could be building the Tower, as well as making the Orcs, as well as making Ringwraith or anything else. But, 1. Sauron preferred the tower, hence, when Galadriel would become largely tainted by Sauron's will (meaning personality, not just lust for power), she would - let's say - build the tower. And 2., Tolkien shows us that, at least in Middle-Earth, one of the main traits of evil is that it is uncaring, reckless destruction - Sauron wreaks destruction just "by the way", because he does not care. His Orcs need to get past the valley, and they do not care that they destroy the flowers blossoming there. It has something to do with the image of "industrialism", as we know, and with Galadriel it would, of course, go differently. But I believe not that much differently. Galadriel, in her plans - or Sam, for example - could make great wonderful gardens (the much as Sauron or Saruman made great forges and roads), but could, for example, lay ruin to Minas Tirith (or Orthanc - make the Treegarth of Orthanc, or Treegarth of Dale, or whatever else, not caring that someone else lives there who would prefer living in a "normal" city). So, "destruction" in this case does not necessarily need to mean utter destruction (even Sauron built something when he lay waste to the original place). But, such events would take place, and it could very well end in something similar to Mordor - even if it were only in the general feeling, this would be a Mordor of wild vegetation and flooded woodlands.