Quote:
Originally Posted by The Might
Interestingly enough, nobody wishes to analyse and discuss this question out of the LotR context. Perhaps because for many it is an inconvenient truth as Mr. Gore would put it that they would be ready to sacrifice lives for some goal.
I'll keep that in mind for further discussions so as to not oppose the general view too much.
|
There is a very good reason most posters don't wish to take the discussion out of the context of LotR and it has nothing to do with squimishness over an inconvenient truth.
It has to do with forum posting policy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Barrow Wight, via Estelyn Telcontar, Moderator
“This board is for Tolkien-related discussions."
|
It's a basic rule of the Barrow Downs, which does not have any non-Tolkien discussions. So discussion of war generally or philosophically or historically or contemporarily does not belong unless it clearly relates to Tolkien's work. When the war in Iraq started members were asked to remove WWI poems from their signatures because they could be construed as fomenting off topic dicussions--at least, I remember Squatter removing some beautiful poetry from his sig. Same for religion. Same for other authors. That's why, for instance, we have a thread comparing Golden Compass with LotR, but no thread alone discussing Pullman. I would say that Tolkien is our one Ring here, but that would be a poor jest.
For more info, see this post by Estelyn:
Guidelines for Forum Posting. She has some good things to say, too, about debate, discussion and accepting criticism and opposing thought.
I've really appreciated
Formendacil's posts on free will and Gandalf. I think they made the question relevant to the ethos of LotR. I could see, for instance, a more modern writer not having Wormtongue killed but having the hobbits and Wormtongue having to work out their differences. But the harsh irony of his end says something about Tolkien's ideas on fate, dramatic structure, and the sorry nature of warfare.