Very interesting indeed!
There would have been the tradition for Tolkien to follow...
I remember reading from somewhere a long time ago that Caesar (in his
De Bello Gallico) used to overexaggerate not only the numbers of the Gauls he fought but also their fiercness and bravery in battle to make his own victories look better.
If one looks at the medieval hero-stories like
the Song of Roland or the stories of the crusades (
Salahadin especially!), there also seems to be this opponent worth of opposing who really tests the hero's bravery and makes his glory ever greater. And in the case of Salahadin the enemy is even given some due renown of actually beating the heroes.
So what is different with Tolkien then?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Davem
But the question remains what effect does the absence of a noble enemy have on Tolkien's heroes? Why did Tolkien omit the noble foe, the 'fellow brave', & if such figures had existed would we have had a different, more complex tale?
-----
Its ok to kill the enemy en masse, because the enemy is not noble or courageous. The hero never has to question the morality of what he is doing. Does this prevent his moral growth?
|
The most straightforward answer - and thence probably not the best or most fruitful - might allude to his experiences in WW1. Sir Kohran had a few really good points on this. But as I said I'm not quite happy with that even if killing of unknown "units of the faceless enemy" would have been the great shock of that war for those who were forced to participate in it.
Somehow it looks like numbness in front of violence, a denial for any dignity given to those on the "other side". Getting numb is possibly the only way to survive terrible enough experiences. But such a romantic and not giving any gallant enemies for our heroes to beat? It would have been the tradition, it would have made the heroes more valiant and their cause & morals somehow more intricate and still he did not go for it.
The nameless and numerous pawns of evil (corrupted or forced) it then is that the prof saw the last heroes fighting their ungallant battle until the great times ended and the time of men began - with no valour or virtues but just numbers and non-identity. So the WW1 is still lurking here?
And if it is, it sounds pretty sad and depressing world that was the one he was looking at.