Quote:
|
Sorry for labouring the point, Mr Fordim sir
|
That’s
Professor Fordim, if you please.
It seems to me that we’re not going to get very far if we keep focusing our discussion on the extremely problematic figures of the Nazgûl and the orcs. As
H-I’s rather impressive list of threads shows, there’s been plenty of back-and-forth on these points already, and we’re no closer to really understanding these issues. That, I would humbly suggest, is a good thing, in a way, insofar as Tolkien is not oversimplifying a complex issue in his presentation of evil.
That having been said… In reading through the posts to this thread, I’ve begun to think that of all the ‘monsters’ we can look at, the most illuminating might well be the Mouth of Sauron: not, strictly speaking, a monster, I know, but he certainly is monstrous. The reason I think we should single out this character is that the one thing we don’t know about the Nazgûl or the orcs –
how did they become Sauron’s servants? – is the one thing that we are told about the Mouth:
Quote:
|
The rider was robed all in black, and black was his lofty helm; yet this was no Ringwraith but a living man. The Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr he was, and his name is remembered in no tale: for he himself had forgotten it, and he said: “I am the Mouth of Sauron.” But it is told that he was a renegade, who came of the race of those that are named the Black Númenóreans; for they established their dwellings in Middle-earth during the years of Sauron's domination, and they worshipped him, being enamoured of evil knowledge. And he entered into the service of the Dark Tower when it first rose again, and because of his cunning he grew ever higher in the Lord's favour; and he learned great sorcery, and knew much of the mind of Sauron; and he was more cruel than any orc.
|
His motivation for joining with Sauron is pretty clearly laid out here: he was “enamoured of evil knowledge.” It is this desire to be evil that makes him the ally of Sauron willingly. The other thing we learn about him is that he is a “renegade,” but a renegade from what or whom is interestingly left unclear. I suppose at the most literal level he is a renegade Númenórean, but perhaps there is the sense also that he is a renegade from Good? (Dare I say, Eru?) In this respect I think we can pretty clearly put him ‘beside’ the Balrog. Interestingly, however, he is not like Shelob (the book’s other ‘renegade’ maiar), who doesn’t care a jot for “knowledge” be it evil or not: she just wants to devour. In this sense, I guess, she provides a useful foil to the Mouth, for he is Man whose own identity has been devoured by Sauron.
It’s in this respect that he is like the Nazgûl. Like them, he has no identity anymore. Even he doesn’t remember it and all he can say about himself is that he is “the Mouth of Sauron.” He is, however (I think) ‘worse’ than the Nazgûl (perhaps even, more evil?) in that he didn’t even need the power or excuse of a Ring to enter into the service of Sauron. He’s apparently of higher ‘rank’ in Mordor than even the Witch-King, since he is the “Lieutenant of the Tower of Barad-dûr”.
Where things really start to get interesting is, I think, the final line of this description when we learn that “he was more cruel than any orc.” His cruelty is here being presented not as the ‘source’ of his evil (that is, he does cruel things, therefore he is evil) but as the result of his evil (he knows “much of the mind of Sauron” and
therefore is “more cruel than any orc”).
I would therefore like to float a tentative suggestion about monsters and how they develop the nature of evil in
The Lord of the Rings *takes a deep breath*
The root of evil is not Sauron or any other positivist ‘presence’ but the desire for “evil knowledge” (this is still a bit ambiguous: what makes certain knowledge “evil”?). The
most evil thing one can do, then, is willingly to seek after that “evil knowledge". The consequence of this evil choice is two-fold. First, one becomes like a Ringwraith insofar as the desire for evil overcomes one’s identity and reduces one to a small part (the Mouth) of the ‘chief’ evildoer. Second, one becomes cruel and bestial.
And from this, I think I can develop a ‘hierarchy’ of sorts of the monsters (bear with me):
“The
most evil thing one can do, then, is willingly to seek after that “evil knowledge”" – The most evil monsters in the book, then, would be Sauron, the Balrog, and Shelob(?).
“one becomes like a Ringwraith insofar as the desire for evil overcomes one’s identity and reduces one to a small part (the Mouth) of the ‘chief’ evildoer.” – The next ‘order’ of evil monsters would be, according to this, the Nazgûl, Gollum(?), the Mouth of Sauron and perhaps Saruman.
“one becomes cruel and bestial” – The ‘least’ evil characters are the cruel “beasts”: orcs, the Watcher in the Water, wargs, etc.
Of course, I still don’t know what this “evil knowledge” might be that starts off the whole process! I think if we can figure that out, we’ll get a lot further than arguing about the potential for repentance upon the part of orcs…