I've always found Tolkien to have confused messages about animals and the environment in his work. But really, he has the same attitudes as most people do (or did, in regard to the environment, not sure we are so kind to that right now). He has creatures he likes or admires and in his creation he accords them with the corresponding status. Other creatures, he's clearly not so fond of - cats and spiders for example.
The Catholic Catechism states:
Quote:
|
“Animals are God’s creatures. By their mere existence they bless Him and give Him glory. Thus men owe them kindness.”
|
There's an expectation that Catholics treat animal life with respect. But there's also no requirement to become vegetarian or anything similar. So I don't think we could have expected Tolkien to have a more modern, green attitude. He maybe even saw too much focus on animals over humans as slightly indulgent - I know that a huge character failing that British culture has is that we so often privilege animals over children (I doubt a secret film of a woman putting a child into a wheelie bin would have generated as much outrage as the one of a woman putting a cat into a wheelie bin did), and often to fatal ends when the family dog ("He was as daft as a brush" is the usual cry) attacks them.
Perhaps Tolkien, having been through war and seeing at first hand what human suffering looked like, took a more practical stance and really did think humans merited higher preference?