Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Anguirel
Two points:
Rhod, you criticise Tolkien for defending "elitism" and "feudalism".
First, it should be remembered that these are very different things. "Elitism" means the preeminence of a meritocratic oligarchy; people chosen to oversee the fields they're best at. It's actually a pretty sensible and crucial principle, despite being bad-mouthed by socialists who haven't succeeded in achieving anything better. But I digress.
And of course, we all know about feudalism, cap-doffing, God bless you your honour, vassalage type of stuff. In my view, things can get a lot worse than feudalism run under just rulers. And you have to remember that it was essentially a choice for Middle-earth between just feudalism under Aragorn and arbitrary despotism under Sauron. There wasn't, thank goodness, a "democratic" alternative, though I'm sure Sauron was on the point of devising one...
My second point-you're forgetting, in terms of commoner heroes, the soldier Beregond. Remember that moment when Pippin assumes he's a captain and Beregond laughs?
|
Elitism: The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.(dictionary.com)
I didn't say he defended elitism, but pointed out the story features it.
Those two choices left out the anarchist societes of The Shire and Bree! So you're not being truthfull.