• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is "The Lord of the Rings" Harmful for promoting a Good vs Pure Evil Narrative?

The only difference between that and the bible is that Tolkien admitted his work was fiction.

I agree, orcs born in slavery and raised that way is a pity, and should be mourned. But if they build an army to destroy the worlds of man, you gotta you know, **** or get off the pot. Black and white is a common theme resulting from competition...with us, or against us. It's also a great tool of those in power, or who seek power. It's why democratic styled governments came to be, to blunt the "all or nothing/scorched earth" of unbridled winner-takes all. But attacking this via LOTR seems misguided at best.

The Bible has far more influence around the world, and in politics, by some orders of magnitude...start there if you want to lead that crusade..but with freedom of religion, it won't end well.

I agree with most of what you said (i.e. the first half, that is). However, analyzing literature is hardly "misguided...leading of a crusade". Also, why would you presume that I haven't applied the same critical lens to the Bible and other religious texts?
 
@spud_meister

You made a number of strong, insightful points in your post, however I have a few bones to pick.

Although you are correct in your analysis of Tolkien's moral framework (as he perceived it), there is much more going on here as well.

First, the Orcs (and such) who are newly created were born into sin, had no direct hand in the matter, and are being punished (severely) for the crime of being born. This moral structure is viewed as completely non-problematic by Tolkien's "good" characters to such an extent that genocide is deemed the obviously just course of action.

Second, I would encourage you to read the article I posted from "Salon" discussing the book "The Last Ringbearer" (if you have not read the book already) as it gives a very unique perspective on the dynamics at work in Middle-Earth (which is an entirely separate (though connected) point that we could discuss)

Edit: I just tried the link and noticed it was not working. Here:

A. https://www.salon.com/2011/02/15/last_ringbearer/
B. https://www.salon.com/2011/02/23/last_ringbearer_explanation/
C. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10329770-the-last-ringbearer

The orcs aren't killed merely for being orcs. They're literally an invading army bent on exterminating the human race. Whether or not they had a choice in the matter isn't relevant to the defenders of Helm's Deep. They're trapped and have to fight to live. Bacteria don't have free will but when they're overwhelming your immune system you don't debate the morality of exterminating them. They're going to kill you unless you stop them. You take the antiobiotics.

Recall the end of the Return of the King. Once the all-powerful will ennslaving them (Sauron) was destroyed, the orcs fled. The humans let them go. This disproves your premise.
 
They (largely) are being punished for the crime of being born with no remorse ever shown by the "good guys". The Orcs and such are born into slavery, conditioned, and are forced to do the bidding of Sauron/Sauramon.

I'm not talking like that actually, that is your perception of the situation due to my questions challenging your sacrosanct beliefs. Really, I have been raising relatively basic observations

So, you're saying that if an orc were swinging an axe at your head, you'd let him? Would you sit there and ponder the poor orc's fate of enslavement to an evil demigod?

Or would you stab him and ponder the morality of it when your world wasn't on fire anymore?

You seem to be treating self defense as inherently immoral, which is absurd.
 
The orcs aren't killed merely for being orcs. They're literally an invading army bent on exterminating the human race.

I know, that is the whole point. The orcs (and such) are creatures from Hell, they are absolutely in the wrong, it is just to destroy them as they have left us with essentially no other choice, and they do not require our sympathy because they are collectively an abomination (I have discussed this in previous posts).

Now, after considering that, then there are more complex potential ethical concerns that can be raised in the storyline. Analyzing the ethical framework is essentially the point of the thread
 
So, you're saying that if an orc were swinging an axe at your head, you'd let him? Would you sit there and ponder the poor orc's fate of enslavement to an evil demigod?

Or would you stab him and ponder the morality of it when your world wasn't on fire anymore?

You seem to be treating self defense as inherently immoral, which is absurd.

I never said that individual acts of self-defense are inherently immoral--quite the contrary, the dynamic makes it so the orcs (and such) have essentially given men/elves/dwarves/ect. no other option but to engage them in war or die)
 
I never said that individual acts of self-defense are inherently immoral--quite the contrary, the dynamic makes it so the orcs (and such) have essentially given men/elves/dwarves/ect. no other option but to engage them in war or die)

You said they were killed for the supposed crime of being an orc, and now admit that they were actually being killed in an act of self-defense. I'm glad we've resolved the issue.
 
You said they were killed for the supposed crime of being an orc, and now admit that they were actually being killed in an act of self-defense. I'm glad we've resolved the issue.

I haven't changed my position--you've just never understood it. Both are true; The men/elves/dwarves/ect. are acting in self-defense as they have essentially no choice given they are facing murderous creatures from Hell who's lives' purpose is to carry out the evil deeds of the Devil (Sauron--and puppet Sauromon). It is also true that the orcs (and such) were born into slavery (somewhat like the First Order in Star Wars), they clearly are conscious, are brainwashed, largely terrified of their masters who control them like disposable pawns, have some redeeming qualities as is displayed toward each other--and are met with complete disgust/revulsion by the good guys rather than having some level of pity/compassion for their horrible situation (as is shown toward Gollum for instance).

That is, my main points are:

(A) The good guys undoubtedly have the moral high ground and are in the right since they are left with essentially absolutely no other option as they were up against the physical manifestation of Evil (which does not happen in real life--it is always more complex then that)

(B) If you look a bit deeper, it is in fact more complicated than that as one would think the good guys should have some real pity/compassion toward many of these sad creatures who were born to be enslaved, brainwashed, controlled/conditioned to murder, do the bidding of the Devil, and are bound to a Hellish life (even though they show many humanoid characteristics--some of which are redeeming qualities). That is, there is a second tragedy at work in the novel (as is always the case in real life--however, is not the mainstream view of the story in LOTR)

(C) (There are potentially many other areas that could be explored as well)
 
I haven't changed my position--you've just never understood it. Both are true; The men/elves/dwarves/ect. are acting in self-defense as they have essentially no choice given they are facing murderous creatures from Hell who's lives' purpose is to carry out the evil deeds of the Devil (Sauron--and puppet Sauromon). It is also true that the orcs (and such) were born into slavery (somewhat like the First Order in Star Wars), they clearly are conscious, are brainwashed, largely terrified of their masters who control them like disposable pawns, have some redeeming qualities as is displayed toward each other--and are met with complete disgust/revulsion by the good guys rather than having some level of pity/compassion for their horrible situation (as is shown toward Gollum for instance).

That is, my main points are:

(A) The good guys undoubtedly have the moral high ground and are in the right since they are left with essentially absolutely no other option as they were up against the physical manifestation of Evil (which does not happen in real life--it is always more complex then that)

(B) If you look a bit deeper, it is in fact more complicated than that as one would think the good guys should have some real pity/compassion toward many of these sad creatures who were born to be enslaved, brainwashed, controlled/conditioned to murder, do the bidding of the Devil, and are bound to a Hellish life (even though they show many humanoid characteristics--some of which are redeeming qualities). That is, there is a second tragedy at work in the novel (as is always the case in real life--however, is not the mainstream view of the story in LOTR)

(C) (There are potentially many other areas that could be explored as well)

Yes, those are interesting areas of discussion but at no point was an orc killed merely for being an orc. In fact, in 100% of the cases where orcs did not engage, or chose to disengage, they were left unharmed. Immediate physical threat was the only scenario in which a non-orc killed an orc.
 
Back
Top Bottom