Male and Female Orcs

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

Actually, I personally prefer the theory of them being corrupted elves. However, I can't see how Morgoth (or Sauron) could have got so many.

I also like the "corrupted elf" theory. And if orcs are based on elves, they have to multiply the same way. Makes any sense?

I highly dislike the "mud pit theory" that is shown in the movies. Neither Sauron nor Morgoth could create, so how could they give life to a chunk of mud? Even Aule - who wasn't evil - couldn't do that without the helf of Eru.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I also like the "corrupted elf" theory. And if orcs are based on elves, they have to multiply the same way. Makes any sense?

I highly dislike the "mud pit theory" that is shown in the movies. Neither Sauron nor Morgoth could create, so how could they give life to a chunk of mud? Even Aule - who wasn't evil - couldn't do that without the helf of Eru.

True. But just imagine Orcs copulating. Ouch.

Mud-pit theory...never gave it much thought. Seems highly unscientific.

I vote either corrupted elves or cross-breeds. Maybe a bit of both?

[skip spence]

I think it's pretty clear that Orcs, Men and Elves biologically are the same species since they are interbreedable. The corruption that Morgoth achieved is mainly a moral one, he corrupted the souls of the to-be-Orcs you might say, yet, not even an Orc is born evil and they can potentially be saved, that Gandalf makes clear in LotR. I think I remember that Tolkien also makes it clear [in The Hobbit] that there are lots of Orcs around even today, and frankly, it hard to argue against that. Orcs aren't magically created monsters with long fangs and green skin. They are us, or rather, the worst examples of mankind.

I mean sure, you can see the difference between an Orc and a Man or an Elf, just as you can see the difference between say a Samoan and a Scandinavian and a West African, but those are "racial" differences and basically: Orcs are Men (and/or ex-Elves if you conscribe to that earlier theory) and they certainly have women because otherwise they simply could not multiply.

Could go further with this but no time for that now...

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

True. But just imagine Orcs copulating. Ouch.

Mud-pit theory...never gave it much thought. Seems highly unscientific.

I vote either corrupted elves or cross-breeds. Maybe a bit of both?

Well, Tolkien played with different ideas of the origin of Orcs– while corrupted Elves seem to be the most consistent version*, and the one appearing in The Silmarillion, Men were another (although this presented some problems- cf. the strained attempt in "Morgoth's Ring" to make it fit the existing chronology). He even briefly speculated that they might have been beasts given humanoid shape (Morgoth as Dr Moreau)! The common thread in all this is that Orcs were distortions of natural creatures, not magical constructs– that Evil could only twist, not create life was for Tolkien a very important point. (The Trolls in "The Hobbit" gave him a nasty metaphysical headache later on, after he had decided they were purely artificial.)

The question of cross-breeding is different, though– it's pretty much official that the Isengard Orcs were hybrids, the result of mating Orcs with humans. (I think it's quite understandable that P.J. chose not to depict that.:eek ) I don't think these Half-Orcs need have been sterile– the Peredhil weren't, after all.



*Also, technically the "latest-known", I think, although by that stage we're talking about some very muddled fragments.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by skip

I mean sure, you can see the difference between an Orc and a Man or an Elf, just as you can see the difference between say a Samoan and a Scandinavian and a West African, but those are "racial" differences and basically: Orcs are Men (and/or ex-Elves if you conscribe to that earlier theory) and they certainly have women because otherwise they simply could not multiply.

It must be more than the difference between human ethnic groups, though– there are different breeds or races or whatever you like to call them among Men, Elves and Orcs (and Hobbits). And yet an Orc (of any kind) can be easily told from an Elf. So I suppose it would be closer to say they're subspecies.

Btw,, as I mentioned in my last post, it's not quite correct to talk about the "elf-origin" as an "earlier theory", since as far as I know Tolkien never exactly abandoned it– he just started playing around with others, and went back-and-forth. In the end I don't think you can say he left a clear "last word" on the subject.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

It must be more than the difference between human ethnic groups, though– there are different breeds or races or whatever you like to call them among Men, Elves and Orcs (and Hobbits). And yet an Orc (of any kind) can be easily told from an Elf. So I suppose it would be closer to say they're subspecies.

Yes, but that's really the same thing, isn't it? Two subspecies may look slightly different , and may have developed different habits and abilities (think Darwin's finches), but ultimately they belong to the same stem of creatures and would interbreed and eventually converge into one group if put in one place together. It may not be politically correct to call different groups of people subspecies, nor would I encourage it, but the point remains.

Don't get me wrong though, I wasn't trying to infer any parallel between Orcs and any existing ethnic group of people. My point is that Orcs are Men/Elves really (though the fea, or soul, of an Elf is different to that of a Man), not any fairy-tale monster, and what makes an Orc has more to do with what's inside than what you can tell by visual inspection.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by skip spence

Yes, but that's really the same thing, isn't it? Two subspecies may look slightly different , and may have developed different habits and abilities (think Darwin's finches), but ultimately they belong to the same stem of creatures and would interbreed and eventually converge into one group if put in one place together. It may not be politically correct to call different groups of people subspecies, nor would I encourage it, but the point remains.

It's actually not quite the same thing– a subspecies in biology is somewhat more distinct than a race, and in fact modern humans aren't generally considered to have any subspecies. (No, this is not just me being politically correct.)

[/Don't get me wrong though, I wasn't trying to infer any parallel between Orcs and any existing ethnic group of people. My point is that Orcs are Men/Elves really (though the fea, or soul, of an Elf is different to that of a Man), not any fairy-tale monster, and what makes an Orc has more to do with what's inside than what you can tell by visual inspection.

Yes, but my point is that the purely physical differences between Elves, Orcs and Men do seem to be greater than that between real-world ethnic groups; at the same time they can all interbreed, so must be essentially the same species. "Subspecies" seems like a good compromise to me.

[Galadriel55]

It's also possible that Tolkien emphasized the physical differences to demonstrate the inner differences. For example, we see how snake-like Grima really looks (and acts).

However, I can't say that big orcs are much different than small orcs except in appearance.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

)
Yes, but my point is that the purely physical differences between Elves, Orcs and Men do seem to be greater than that between real-world ethnic groups; at the same time they can all interbreed, so must be essentially the same species. "Subspecies" seems like a good compromise to me.

Fair enough. I've never seen the term "race" being used in biology or botany and therefore thought it was solely used on human ethnic groups, but clearly I was wrong. Subspecies sounds good.

Originally Posted by Gal55

It's also possible that Tolkien emphasized the physical differences to demonstrate the inner differences. For example, we see how snake-like Grima really looks (and acts).

Yes, Tolkien does that quite a lot. Just think of Gollum, who is essentially a Hobbit. Also, if we see LotR as written by Frodo, he too is likely to have exaggerated the Orcs' beastly looks and behaviour in my opinion (though this is contentious, granted). I do think that the physical or visual differences between Orcs and Men are much smaller that what people typically believe.

When the Elves first came across the Orcs in the First Age they came to the conclusion that the Orcs must be Avari gone savage in the wilderness, or something to that effect.* This recognition of kinship suggests that the two peoples weren't all that different (at least not then). Also, isn't one of the Southerners in Bree (the squint-eyed?) suspected to be a half-orc, or having orcish blood? Yet he is a man, living among Men, and, as it can be assumed, looking like one.

Yes, I think that Tolkien's Orcs should be pictured looking much more like Men and much less like the standard image of an Orc that has been developed by popular culture long after the prof. left us (RPGs, Comp. games, the films etc etc). Not saying they look just like men, mind.

*don't remember exactly where this is written, but I do remember reading it.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

The question of cross-breeding is different, though– it's pretty much official that the Isengard Orcs were hybrids, the result of mating Orcs with humans. (I think it's quite understandable that P.J. chose not to depict that.:eek ) I don't think these Half-Orcs need have been sterile– the Peredhil weren't, after all.



*Also, technically the "latest-known", I think, although by that stage we're talking about some very muddled fragments.

Yes, but the Peredhil were of closer kin to humans than Orcs. Orcs, as far as we know, were almost entirely different to elves - aside from the fact that they might have been created from them.

Orcs seem much more 'animal-like' than elves or humans, so, at least in my opinion, a crossbreed would be sterile.

For example, if you mate a Negro with a Japanese (I'll just ignore the weird looks), the child won't be sterile. However, mating a human with a gorilla...not such a good idea.