|
Presenting Saruman as merely a servant of Sauron works against one of Tolkien's central themes - evil is 'fragmentary': it is a consequence of the fracturing/fragmenting of the Good. Light is the ultimate symbol of Good in
Tolkien's world. The single light/Secret Fire is One in the beginning, but breaks up over time due to the actions of those who, wittingly or unwittingly serve evil: Morgoth throws down the Lamps of the Valar which shine out with a single, unbroken Light over Middle-earth. This 'broken' Light then takes the form of the Two Trees - a 'dual' light, Golden & Silver, which fluctuates. After the death of the Trees the Light is further fragmentered ('Splintered' in Flieger's words) into the Silmarils & the Sun & Moon. So, the Light not only diminishes towards darkness it also becomes broken up - indeed it is this very breaking up of the Light which causes it to diminish. So, Evil is broken or shattered Good. As Tolkien stated: 'Evil is fissiparous, but it cannot create.' (ie it can multply by breaking itself up into smaller bits, but not create more of itself)
This means that (in Tolkien's world at least) evil is not, cannot be, a unified force opposing Good. Gandalf talks about a traitor betraying himself, etc. We have Saruman's justification of his actions to Gandalf in the book: 'The White Light may be broken' & Gandalf's response: 'He that breaks a thing to find out what it is made of has left the path of wisdom'.
Where Jackson goes against Tolkien in his desire to simplify the story is in showing Saruman & Sauron working as one. In Tolkien's world/philosophy this is impossible, due to the way evil works - if Saruman & Sauron were allied in that way they would be less evil (ie they would be displaying loyalty & providing a mutual support system). We do see the Orcs in Cirith Ungol fighting amongst themselves, but I'm not sure the movie makers got why they did so - in one of the commentary tracks someone says its 'convenient' for Sam that they did. Far from being 'convenient' its actually inevitable that they turn on each other. Sauron has slaves, but clearly the very fact of their being slaves makes them desire to be free - hence more (potential, at least) fragmentation.
Presenting evil as a unified force opposing the Good makes it appear 'equal & opposite' the Good - something Tolkien was at pains to deny. Good is the only thing that truly exists - evil is not its opposite but its breaking up. The conflict is between wholeness & fragmentation, not between one form of wholeness (good) & another form of wholeness (evil).
Oh, and while we're talking about Saruman's voice - try listening to Peter Howell's portrayal of the character in the BBC radio version: amazing!
|