All those "Good" Guys

[Bekah]

You're absolutely right. And it was still killing, something that was still "bad". Maybe a "lesser sin," but a sin nonetheless, and it speaks to the elves being less than perfectly good. (That's really all I was trying to say.)

Oh yes. It was still killing. And the murder of their kinsfolk was a scandal, and a terrible deed. But they did not have the deep bitterness and malice of the orcs.

Orcs, I think, could be redeemed. But because hardly anyone would be willing to actually stay long enough in their company to inform them about goodness, I do not think that they would have much chance. Moreover, even if someone did manage to tell them about Eru and the Valar who were loyal to him, the orc in question would still have to choose that way over their current life, knowing that in mutineering against Melkor and Sauron, they would be tortured to teach them a lesson. After choosing the right thing, Sauron would probably capture the orc(s) and tortue them for the aforesaid reason. They would now be back to square one. Or rather, worse than square one, as they would now distrust Eru and his hosts.

I think I can see how an orc could rebell against Sauron but not against Melkor. For instance, a king gets a noble to swear allegience to him. The noble gets a knight to swear allegience to him. The king, in fear that the noble would forswear himself, gets the knight to swear allegiance directly to him. The knight (or orc) can then rebell against the noble (or Sauron), and yet not rebell against Melkor (or the king).

Does that make sense? Or am I completely off my rocker?

But the Elves are not wholly good or in the right. Not so much because they had flirted with Sauron; as because with or without his assistance they were 'embalmers'. They wanted to have their cake and eat it: to live in the mortal historical Middle-earth because they had become fond of it (and perhaps because they there had the advantages of a superior caste), and so tried to stop its change and history, stop its growth, keep it as a pleasaunce, even largely a desert, where they could be 'artists' – and they were overburdened with sadness and nostalgic regret.

Yes, I can see that. But then, there are some perfectly well-behaving, law-abiding atheists, who also want to have their cake and eat it. Do you want me to elaborate, or shall I just leave this allegory of my own as it is?

The Enemy in successive forms is always 'naturally' concerned with sheer Domination, and so the Lord of magic and machines; but the problem: that this frightful evil can and does arise from an apparently good root, the desire to benefit the world and others - speedily and according to the benefactor's own plans - is a recurrent motive.

I'm sure we're all familiar with the saying: "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

I can give plenty of examples in both earth and Middle-earth.

Cheers,

~ Elentari II

[Legolas]

The last quote was given to show the idea of bad starting from good intentions, but attempting to follow one's own plans as opposed to the plans of the creator.

[Bekah]

That happens. For instance, Galadriel and Gandalf would have both taken the ring (if they did) with good intentions, but they would later follow their own desires and ruin their own good work.

~ Elentari II

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

"But then, there are some
perfectly well-behaving,
law-abiding atheists, who
also want to have their
cake and eat it."

Please elaborate Bekah. I'm quite curious.

~Fea

[DaughterofVana]

Great way to handle it, Bekah. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] Any more and we might get Iarwain's thread closed down, and we wouldn't want that.

So Legolas' findings in Letters speaks towards the "evil is perversion" viewpoint. Thank you, mighty Mod. I curtsey in your general direction. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

So, back to the meaning of the thread, an entirely "good" being will have no corruption within it. And, with the realizations of the elves not being entirely "good," I say that it is safe to assume that there are no entirely bad creatures as well. Now to determine if Iarwain's examples qualify as "good" and to what degree.

Glamdring
Sauron
Elendil
Barliman Butterbur
Saruman
Samwise
The Gaffer's advice on Gardening
Bilbo
Pippin
Elrond
Gandalf
Theoden
Merry
Farmer Cotton

I think that is the next step...

-'Vana

[Iarwain]

A new idea: rather than going through all the trouble of thinking the whole problem through, we could take each definition and apply to it the wort character that fits. By doing such we will end up with points scattered all across the field, some good, some bad. The bad can be eliminated as qualifications for the good which remain.

Iarwain

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

"skilled

\Skilled\, a. Having familiar
knowledge united with readiness
and dexterity in its application;
familiarly acquainted with;
expert; skillful; -- often
followed by in; as, a person
skilled in drawing or geometry."

Feanor was skilled (especially at jewelry making), but we all know he wasn't a very nice/good guy.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Ooh ooh- I brought this thread back to life. Again.

Fea

[Finwe]

I think that the entire matter just comes down to pride. Just as the heroes of ancient Greek plays usually were defeated due to their hubris, all these Elves' downfalls were through their excessive pride.

For example, Fëanor was a proud man. Deep down inside, he wanted to believe that he was perfect, that he was the greatest of the Eldar. He may have been such in his skill, but otherwise, he was not. That realization simmered bitterly in his heart. I think that also helped Morgoth "get to him" in the end. One of both Morgoth's and Sauron's weapons is playing on resentment. Fëanor kept driving himself to perfection, without listening to anyone, not even Nerdanel or his sons. And poor Fingolfin could only stand there and watch his brother destroy his own life and the lives of all those around him.

Ultimately, it was Fëanor's pride that led to the Rebellion of the Noldor and the Kinslaying. Initially, he refused to surrender the Silmarils to the Valar so that Yavanna could revive the Two Trees. But Morgoth stole them first. When Fëanor found out about Finwë's death, he went completely mad. He had no reason left in him.

Another good example is Celebrimbor. It was pride and a deep-seated desire for complete independence that led him to accept Annatar's councils when he knew that the latter had been turned away by Gil-galad. Perhaps I'm giving the High King more credit than he deserves, but I'm sure that he saw straight through Annatar the second that he started talking. Celebrimbor, on the other hand, was too much like his grandfather for his own good. He wanted knowledge, and he would have it at the cost of all else. His pride made him refuse to see that there was probably a reason for Gil-galad turning away Annatar.

I think it is unfortunate that in the case of the Elves, greatness was always tempered with pride. But then again, no one can be perfect. Fëanor would have been a great King, one that would have been remembered for all of eternity if it had not been for his pride. He is still remembered forever, but for all the wrong reasons.

[Bekah]

The Screwtape Letters have some relevance to this topic. Anyone else read them?

~ Elentari II

[Iarwain]

After two tries at reading them, I regretfully have only read the first three or four of them. It's sort of ironic, when I've read so many of Lewis's other books, that I'm struggling with one of his most popular.

Back to my last post, I find it interesting that orcs cannot rise, but all others can fall so easily. It's almost an imperfection in the workings of the world itself. From their dialouge, we can tell that they are more than drones, but from their irresistable corruption, they have also set themselves as less than human(-oid).

Iarwain

[Bekah]

Likewise, his Space Trilogy is proving difficult for me.

Back on-topic: I think orcs can rise, but they have a much, much slimmer chance of arising from the slough that others have of falling into it.

~ Elentari II

[obloquy]

Your posts are just rife with inaccuracies and unsubstantiated statements, Finwe. Every post I've seen you make has this same feature.

Deep down inside, he wanted to believe that he was perfect, that he was the greatest of the Eldar.

How do you know what he felt 'deep down inside'?

He may have been such in his skill, but otherwise, he was not.

Tolkien said that Feanor was the greatest of the Eldar in Aman, with the possible exception of Galadriel. He doesn't say anything about his skill being a factor.

That realization simmered bitterly in his heart.

You've got to be kidding. Where do you get this from?

Fëanor kept driving himself to perfection, without listening to anyone, not even Nerdanel or his sons.

I see no evidence at all that Feanor ever sought perfection. Please give an example of this.

When Fëanor found out about Finwë's death, he went completely mad. He had no reason left in him.

So was it pride or madness? Make up your mind.

Feanor was a victim of Melkor who victimized others in his pursuit of vengeance. He was proud, but pride had nothing to do with refusing Yavanna's request, or with wanting what was stolen from him, and it had nothing to do with seeking vengeance for his father's murder. I also can't see the part pride would have played in the Kinslaying. Rather, I would say it was madness and desperation that drove him to that extreme.

Though the light within the silmarils was not Feanor's, they were his creation, and it was his choice to surrender them -- that is why he was given a choice instead of them being confiscated. He did not refuse out of pride, he refused because he loved them and they were a work so great that they could never be duplicated. Aule, at least, understood this.

Where Feanor did show his pride was in speaking against the Valar, but this was aroused by Melkor's lies, and it was understandable. Melkor convinced him that he and the Noldor were to be pets of the Valar, and were summoned to Aman out of jealousy. He then led Feanor to believe that the Valar would try to take the silmarils from him.

Melkor was the root of all this evil, not Feanor.

It was pride and a deep-seated desire for complete independence that led him to accept Annatar's councils when he knew that the latter had been turned away by Gil-galad.

No it wasn't. Where do you get this from? And Annatar wasn't offering council, he was sharing knowledge.

Perhaps I'm giving the High King more credit than he deserves, but I'm sure that he saw straight through Annatar the second that he started talking.

Elrond and Gil-galad doubted Annatar, that is all.

Celebrimbor, on the other hand, was too much like his grandfather for his own good. He wanted knowledge, and he would have it at the cost of all else.

I don't see this in the account, either. Sauron deceived him. It's not like Sauron was slowly twisting Celebrimbor to evil. Sauron made himself seem fair and shared a wealth of knowledge. How can you fault Celebrimbor for this?

His pride made him refuse to see that there was probably a reason for Gil-galad turning away Annatar.

I honestly don't see any issue with pride in the account of Celebrimbor's deception by Sauron. Really, read it again. Celebrimbor was innocent. Perhaps he was naive, but I wouldn't even accuse him of being that.

[ June 24, 2003: Message edited by: obloquy ]

[Bêthberry]

Naughty Barrow Downers just keep turning definitions of good into discussions of evil.

That bit about how good can be perverted by the desire to enforce one's beliefs bears more discussion I think.