Saruman and betrayal

[Animalmother]

Hickory, the Straw Man in L. Frank Baum's allegory, "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz," is crying "ouch" as Animalmother's respondent's beat him.

When quoting the Master's Foreword to LOTR on allegory, it's best to quote him in complete sentences:

"But I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done so since I grew wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers. I think many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."

So, you have your freedom to read and to apply LOTR to your thought and experience, and I have mine. I have never argued that LOTR is allegory. I simply noticed that there are some striking similarities between Saruman's mind and the minds of modern leftists, viz.: pride, conceit, arrogance, fondnesses for moral relativism, for intellectual complexity, for political mediation, and for bamboozling the boobish masses with rhetoric; a dislike of moral absolutes, an itch to change long conserved social and biological groups such as nations and races, an itch to take political power from traditional nations and communities and to consolidate it in the hands of technocrats and experts, and a fascination with the kinds of mass production and heavy industry which can be easily controlled by government.

Since LOTR is fantasy history, not allegory, most experiences and characters (e.g., Tom Bombadil and Goldberry) will not resonate with contemporary political experiences and characters. But neither can one dogmatically assert that, in such a vast fantasy history as LOTR, no experience or character will ever resonate with our own political contemporaries. For this reader, the parallels between Saruman and modern multiculty Western European leftists and American liberals are too striking and too numerous to overlook.

A few minor notes:

1) Saruman's rejection of white for refracted colored light symbolizes his adoption of a new aggressive philosophy and his rejection of the ways of the gentle conservative, Gandalf. I could not resist observing that the rainbow, a kind of refracted light, is also the symbol of American leftist movements (gays; Rainbow/Push Coalition) which now attack our own, traditional Western ways.

2) The National Socialists and Fascists were leftists and also owned most of Saruman's characteristics listed above. That the Marxist left (the great majority of leftists) denounced them as "right wing" means nothing. Leftists usually denounce all opponents as "right wing." What else can they do?

3) Finally, the Left does not approve of baby eating, because babies are non-vegan, but at least in my country (Texas) the Left stoutly defends fetus killing.

[Animalmother]

Correction to above post: "Hunk," not Hickory, was the name of the hand on little Dorothy's farm. He is transformed in her dream into the Scarecrow in "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz."

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Animalmother

But neither can one dogmatically assert that, in such a vast fantasy history as LOTR, no experience or character will ever resonate with our own political contemporaries.

Did anyone say it wouldn't? One must be careful, in accusing others of "straw man" tactics, that one is not using them oneself.

I'm afraid that to me, you do seem to be going far beyond questions of resonance and claiming a detailed level of "applicability" which I maintain would have required the author to be be literally prescient, that is, psychic.

As for your "minor notes"– I refer you to my previous comments about leftists, which you have completely ignored. You are lumping everyone and everything together. Frankly, it's offensive.

Can I ask you to be more moderate in your future remarks, Animalmother? Please remember that there are many people on this forum who don't share the same politics as you.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Animalmother

When quoting the Master's Foreword to LOTR on allegory, it's best to quote him in complete sentences...

The particular tidbit I offered about Saruman went beyond Tolkien's statement regarding allegory; in fact, Tolkien is much more explicit, in that he referred to Saruman as being without any 'contemporary political reference whatsoever'; therefore, it seemed apparent to me that there was no need to expound on allegory or symbology (and the encumbent need to type great swathes of text). In future, I will include a pdf file for your edification.

Originally Posted by Animalmother

So, you have your freedom to read and to apply LOTR to your thought and experience, and I have mine.

*shrugs*

You may call the Lord of the Rings an allusive meditation on Mein Kampf, or Saruman's activity as a prescient precursor to Mao's Great Leap Forward if you'd like. It does not make it applicable.

Originally Posted by Animalmother

I have never argued that LOTR is allegory. I simply noticed that there are some striking similarities between Saruman's mind and the minds of modern leftists, viz.: pride, conceit, arrogance, fondnesses for moral relativism, for intellectual complexity, for political mediation, and for bamboozling the boobish masses with rhetoric; a dislike of moral absolutes, an itch to change long conserved social and biological groups such as nations and races, an itch to take political power from traditional nations and communities and to consolidate it in the hands of technocrats and experts, and a fascination with the kinds of mass production and heavy industry which can be easily controlled by government.

Actually, you could be well describing Napoleon, or Stalin and Hitler moreso. Your conglomeration of various attributes does not fit those whom you label 'modern leftists'; in fact, you've got smatterings of a wide range of political agendas that you are trying to force into your own agenda, as well as stretching Saruman's character in a manner which the author did not intend, nor does the text support.

Again, particularly with your view that Saruman was a political mediator, the text does not bear that at all. He was not making accommodations between both sides (as if any entente or rapprochment could ever be gained), he was playing one off against the other, he was delaying, he was lying in order to get the One Ring. This multiplicity was not known, and the consequences of his actions damaged his credibility with both sides (Had Sauron won the war, it was clear that Saruman would not be sharing in the prize -- not after Saruman lied to the Nazgul).

Originally Posted by Animalmother

Since LOTR is fantasy history, not allegory, most experiences and characters (e.g., Tom Bombadil and Goldberry) will not resonate with contemporary political experiences and characters. But neither can one dogmatically assert that, in such a vast fantasy history as LOTR, no experience or character will ever resonate with our own political contemporaries. For this reader, the parallels between Saruman and modern multiculty Western European leftists and American liberals are too striking and too numerous to overlook.

There are parallels in LotR that resonate throughout history, and there are absolutes in Middle-earth that preclude comparison to real history. It seems to me you are reading far too much of your own personal agenda into Saruman, and the text does not warrant such overt comparison (like Saruman's many-colored cloak as a very trivial, wholly ludicrous example).