Life or Honor?

[littlemanpoet]

In LotR, is Life valued above Honor, or Honor above Life?

How do Hobbits deal with this? Eorlingas? Gondorians? Others?

What did Tolkien think about this (can we plumb his works to get an answer?)?

[MatthewM]

This is a great topic. The first character that comes to my mind is Boromir, and in his situation I would definitely say it was honor above life. Obviously the reason for this is because he gave his life defending Merry and Pippin after trying to take the Ring from Frodo.

For other characters or races as a whole like you mentioned, it might be more complex. I believe Gandalf would value life over honor. His main purpose in life was to make sure good was always there to counteract evil and to suppress it. I would think that Gandalf cared little for honor. I believe Gandalf fought the Balrog not to save his own life, but to save the lives and safety of The Fellowship.

I believe that as a whole, both Gondorians and Eorlingas would choose honor over life.

Hobbits? This could be good. It's late, so I need to think this one out before saying much. I think you can say a great deal about Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin individually. Bilbo as well.

[Anguirel]

Perhaps it should be noted that valuing honour over live is not considered the highest heroism; rather valuing fellowship and love over life. Boromir displayed the former attribute when he tried to seize the Ring for Gondor, and the latter when he died to protect Merry and Pippin. We all consider the latter deed the redemption of the former one.

Sir Gawain of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight briefly puts his life above his honour, and castigates himself severely for it; yet he is considered to have succeeded in his Quest as nearly as a human being could have done, and admired by Arthur's court. This is quite close to a subversive attack on the very notion of honour.

Honour in history caused terrible as well as great enterprises. The heroism and quixotic glory of Richard Coeur-de-Lion in the Third Crusade was counterbalanced by the brutality and avarice of the Crusaders against the Cathar heretics only a couple of decades later.

In Tolkien, also, I would argue that the greatest deeds are ultimately dictated not by the Homeric heroic code, which put honour above everything, but by the Christian ethic of heroism-"Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friend." Honour leads to the Oath of Feanor, love to the Fellowship of the Ring.

((Notice that I, personally, am far more interested in the doomed honour-driven enterprises. But that's just a quirk of my character. Don't try this at home...))

[Boromir88]

Matthew took all my material , nice post.

I guess I'll just expand a little more with some examples...

Boromir is obviously the most noticeable when it comes to favoring honor over life.

'I can well believe that Boromir, the proud and fearless, often rash, ever anxious for the victory of Minas Tirith (and his glory therein), might desired such a thing and be allured by it.'~The Window on the West

Boromir not always thinks things through, he likes to throw himself into situations that maybe he shouldn't. I think Faramir describes him well with 'anxious' and 'rash.'

Also, I think we see some more when he tells us why he's there at the Council:

'Therefore my brother, seeing how desperate was our need, was eage to heed the dream and seek for Imladris; but since the way was full of doubt and danger; I took the journey upon myself.'~The Council of Elrond

Not only does Boromir's pride show through here, but also, he's plunging himself into a situation that is full of 'doubt' and 'danger,' because that's the guy he is. He's always the one to throw himself into dangerous situations in order to make a name for himself.

And with Gandalf it's all about life. But, not is it his own life, I think he will risk his own life if it is necessary for the good of Middle-earth...as we see him sacrifice himself in taking on Durin's Bane, he risked everything so the Fellowship would still be able to continue on. So, it's not his own life that he's worried about, but it's the life of others that he favors. He will trade in his 'glory' or 'honor of others' to save people's lives

The first instance that comes to mind is his choice to save Faramir. He could have gone off and followed the Witch-King, which is what he at first wanted to do. He wanted to deal with the thread of the Witch-King, but instead of going after and being the 'saviour' he chooses to save Faramir's life.

And this is something Gandalf consistantly does, always caring about the life of others before his own personal accomplishments:

'Nay I came rather to guard the hurt men that can yet be healed; for the Rammas is breached far and wide, and soon the hose of Morgul will enter in at many points.'~The Siege of Gondor

This is when Denethor asks was Gandalf overmatched by the Witch-King. And Gandalf simply says no, he came back to guard the hurt.

Now, I don't necessarily think 'honor' is a bad thing. I think there is a difference between seeking honor for yourself and giving honor to others. In Boromir's case he was seeking his own honor, which I think is a definite fault...it works along with pride. But, I don't say it's bad to give honor to those who deserve honor...for instance the Hobbits, who were praised.

[littlemanpoet]

So between the three of your responses (thank you very much!), it would seem that Honor, by virtue of its link to Pride, is only something to be strived for by those characters who cannot attain sacrificial heroism.

Only after Boromir's failure did he attain to the latter; Faramir did so through the entirety of LotR (not just while he was "in" the story); Gandalf consistently attained to it.

Perhaps it would be safe to say that Hobbits, by and large, are deeply concerned with Reputation (rather than Honor), which they construe in slightly different terms than the Eorlingas or Gondorians. A good reputation consists of, for example, in wealth, not having adventures, and having a large family (and hairy toes).

Two follow-up questions:

1. Is Honor always, necessarily linked to Pride?

2. Tolkien has said in his Letters that Faramir and Gandalf speak most clearly for his own view. What do they say and do that gives us an indication as to what he thought (granted this question has already been answered to a large degree in terms of Gandalf)?

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Two follow-up questions:

1. Is Honor always, necessarily linked to Pride?

2. Tolkien has said in his Letters that Faramir and Gandalf speak most clearly for his own view. What do they say and do that gives us an indication as to what he thought (granted this question has already been answered to a large degree in terms of Gandalf)?

To answer #1, I don't think so. Although I don't think that pride is always a bad thing, you can have honor without it. It is honorable to save someone's life. As Boromir lay dying, Aragorn tells him that he has "kept his honour". In a way, Boromir sacrificed his pride to keep his honor. So no, I do not think honor is always linked to pride.

I would like to bring up Aragorn- there are many times within the story where I find Aragorn's words full of pride. As I said, I don't think it is a bad thing. Aragorn may be an example where pride and honor work together. I think Aragorn's character is very close to Faramir's. Both are lords of men, great power lies within them and they are wise. I think the quote "Speak softly but carry a big stick" (Teddy Roosevelt) applies well with both Aragorn and Faramir.

I think that somewhat answers for me question #2, although some may like to elaborate more.

[littlemanpoet]

So to be conscious of one's own honor is, perhaps, to be on the road to wrongful pride. Whereas to be conscious to do what is best and right, is to have a good balance of pride and humility, and honor is gained thereby. Sound reasonable?

[Gurthang]

That's exactly what I would say, LMP. In my mind, this all depends on what "honor" means. I can easily see different types of honor. I would say that one type is the attitude towards you from other people. If they hold you in honor, then they admire you and respect you for you accomplishments. This is the type of honor that can be gained by deeds of valour and heroism.

On the other hand, I would say that there is an honor of self. Basically, in my mind, this would be synonomous to virtue and character. This can be seen and admired by others, but more often goes unnoticed. It's the kind of honor that keeps from being dishonest, holds you to your responsibilities, and, in many cases, keeps you from wanting others to make special notice of your honor.

I guess the basic difference is the motivation, as the 'two' honors are quite similar now that I look at them. It seems that if you are doing things to "gain honor" then you would be, as LMP's question states, valuing "honor over life". If you are doing honorable things because they are the right or noble things to do, then it would make sense to say that you hold "life over honor".

So maybe the question shouldn't be Life or Honor, but something more along the lines of "Life of Honor or Honor of Life"?

But back to the question.

I like the contrasting images MatthewM has brought up. Aragorn displays the Honor of Life characteristics and Boromir portrays the Life of Honor attitude. More later.

[littlemanpoet]

Now to throw in a wrinkle. It has been said that humility is 'knowing oneself, both flaws and strengths'. But that definition seems insufficient. Perhaps it would be best to add the following qualifier: '... and valuing them appropriately.'

Why bring that into the discussion? Because the same definition could just as easily be attributed to "good pride". Do they then mean the same thing? Maybe it would help to include some LotR examples.

Gandalf has this humility. Does Aragorn? Or does he not have good pride? ... which seems synonymous with Gurthang's honor of self. I think your distinction is useful, Gurthang.

But the way we're using the concepts seems a little bit like we're inventing ideas as we go (no bad thing except we separate ourselves from general understandings); I hope we can remain understandable to other BD'rs regarding LotR, not to mention RPrs (like me), because in the subcreation of new Middle Earth stories, RPrs are constantly running headlong into this stuff, and it's no easy thing to find our way, especially if we desire to write in the spirit of Tolkien.

That's a round-about way of getting us back to the main question:

Does your typical Gondorian value honor above life, or vice versa? In other words, is it more important to your average dweller in Minas Tirith, or Pelargir, or Dol Amroth, to:

1. be considered to be upright?
2. be upright regardless of what others think?
3. stay alive?

Obviously, I'm partly asking for a stretch of imagination, but I would hope that Tolkien provided some clues. I for one intend to see what I can discover in the books; maybe you can help?

[Gurthang]

Well, one thing that I can think of really quickly is the mustering of the Gondorian forces to Minas Tirith. Everyone knew that the city was going to be attacked the hardest, yet all those troops came to it's aid. I think this shows that most of them cared more about honor than their own lives, for surely it would have been safer to stay at home or flee westward. Although, this may only indicate the minds of the military, who I think usually hold honor over self. I think most soldiers would, or they wouldn't be soldiers.

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Now to throw in a wrinkle. It has been said that humility is 'knowing oneself, both flaws and strengths'. But that definition seems insufficient. Perhaps it would be best to add the following qualifier: '... and valuing them appropriately.'

Interesting definition of humility-- not the one I'm used to, which is this: Having an accurate view of God and having an accurate view of yourself in light of that. What the equivalent ME definition would be, I'm not certain. Perhaps Gandalf's 'humility' is clearer, because he has a more accurate view or Eru than most?

For Aragorn to take the attitude that he wasn't the most doughty warrior and the most capable tactician around, would, in most cases, have been inaccurate-- therefore false humility. I think much of Aragorn's attitudes that we percieve as pride, I would view as practical honesty. 'Shall we argue about whether I am the best candidate here, or shall we proceed to something worth arguing about?" Is that arrogance, or practicality? Since Aragorn is the ME equivalent of a Navy Seal or an Army Ranger-- or a Force Reconnaissance Marine-- arguing about his capabilities usually IS a waste of time. He's usually the best.

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Does your typical Gondorian value honor above life, or vice versa? In other words, is it more important to your average dweller in Minas Tirith, or Pelargir, or Dol Amroth, to:

1. be considered to be upright?
2. be upright regardless of what others think?
3. stay alive?

Obviously, I'm partly asking for a stretch of imagination, but I would hope that Tolkien provided some clues. I for one intend to see what I can discover in the books; maybe you can help?

I think it depends on the Gondorian. I expect mature soldiers would have attitude (2)-- Be upright regardless of what others think; while some of the younger soldiers, or recruits or wannabes, might still be learning about what is upright, and so need the guidance of older folks, and so be much more dependant on what others considered to be upright, hence attitude (1), be considered to be upright and figure then they might be on the right track they hope. And then there are those who just plain want to survive; but why would they live in Minas Tirith? Seems to me that such folk woiuld have departed for calmer territory already.

Originally Posted by Gurthang

Well, one thing that I can think of really quickly is the mustering of the Gondorian forces to Minas Tirith. Everyone knew that the city was going to be attacked the hardest, yet all those troops came to it's aid. I think this shows that most of them cared more about honor than their own lives, for surely it would have been safer to stay at home or flee westward. Although, this may only indicate the minds of the military, who I think usually hold honor over self. I think most soldiers would, or they wouldn't be soldiers.

A hearty amen to that. I think those who wanted safety first, weren't in Minas Tirith anymore.

[Elu Ancalime]

These Themes are also presented in the Homeric Epics of The Illiad and The Odessey.

In the Iliad, the Peloponnesian city-states are attacking Troy, and Honor is valued over life. Since many characters on both sides are killed, honor for fighting for you country is the theme.

In the Odyssey, Odysseus goes through many trials and hardships including the death of all his crew, being close to returning home then driven away, and being stranded on an island for a decade. He even visits the underworld, where all of the characters killed in the Iliad tell him it is better to live than to die, changing the theme. At the end of the epic, he takes revenge on the suitors who were wooing his wife while everyone thought him dead. The theme at the end is to live gloriously and long.
________
Silver surfer vaporizer

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Interesting definition of humility-- not the one I'm used to, which is this: Having an accurate view of God and having an accurate view of yourself in light of that. What the equivalent ME definition would be, I'm not certain.

Perhaps it would be best to say 'having an accurate review of reality and therefore yourself, both strengths and weaknesses'. Those for whom God is part of (or the source of) reality, it fits just as well.

Perhaps Gandalf's 'humility' is clearer, because he has a more accurate view or Eru than most?

But Faramir's is too. And he seems to be at least as humble as Gandalf, maybe more so. Which begs the question: did Faramir have an accurate view of Eru? Or of reality? Or is the definition flawed?

Originally Posted by mark

Is that arrogance, or practicality? Since Aragorn is the ME equivalent of a Navy Seal or an Army Ranger-- or a Force Reconnaissance Marine-- arguing about his capabilities usually IS a waste of time. He's usually the best.

This is why I include 'an accurate accounting of one's strengths and weaknesses', because someone who has many talents may seem arrogant to someone who has few whilst the talented individual is merely stating and/or exhibiting the reality.

Elu, thanks for the connections to The Odyssey. Are you suggesting that there was a development from a limited view (honor valued over life) to a broader one (life valued over honor)?

I wonder if we're giving "Life" too broad a meaning in some of our examples? The long and short of it is that to value Life over Honor is to say "I'd rather stay alive than be known for ___-heroism, loyalty, fill in the blank-____".

So when we say that Gandalf values Life above Honor, is this what we mean?

[Child of the 7th Age]

But isn't the key to all this how we define the concept of "honor".

Here are all the definitions of honor I could find in dictionary.com:

1. High respect, as that shown for special merit; esteem: the honor shown to a Nobel laureate.

Good name; reputation.
A source or cause of credit: was an honor to the profession.

2. Glory or recognition; distinction.
a.A mark, token, or gesture of respect or distinction: the place of honor at the table.
b. A military decoration.

c. A title conferred for achievement.

3. High rank.

4.The dignity accorded to position: awed by the honor of his office.

5. Great privilege: I have the honor to present the governor.

6. Honor Used with His, Her, or Your as a title and form of address for certain officials, such as judges and mayors: Her Honor the Mayor.

7. Principled uprightness of character; personal integrity.

a. A code of integrity, dignity, and pride, chiefly among men, that was maintained in some societies, as in feudal Europe, by force of arms.

b. A woman's chastity or reputation for chastity.

c. Social courtesies offered to guests: did the honors at tea.
honors
Special recognition for unusual academic achievement: graduated with honors.

8. A program of individual advanced study for exceptional students: planned to take honors in history.

9.Sports. The right of being first at the tee in golf.

10. Games.
Any of the four or five highest cards, especially the ace, king, queen, jack, and ten of the trump suit, in card games such as bridge or whist.
The points allotted to these cards. Often used in the plural.

Ok, personally, I wouldn't give a fig about most of these "honors". According to these definitions, honor mainly has to do how you are perceived by others, or how you are given "rewards" because you are perceived well. The only exception seems to be #7, which talks about uprghtness of character and personal integrity. That does have enormous meaning. Life without that kind of honor is no life at all. Yet, even here there is mention of a special code of male conduct, which certainly does not apply to me.

There is one episode concerning honor that no one has mentioned from the LotR. When Frodo comes home, one of the things that the author brings out is that he, unlike Merry, Pippin, and Sam, is accorded absolutely no honor by others in the Shire. The ironic thing is that he will shortly lose his life--if we equate sailing to the West with a permanent withdrawal from the activities of life. So is honor necessary for life to continue? Is Frodo's loss of honor an inevitable harbinger for his unavoidable sailing to the West? Or has Frodo surmounted "honor", and gotten to a point in his own life where the accolades of others truly aren't needed? Hence his need to leave the mundane life of the Shire and go where others of his kind have not previously gone.....

[littlemanpoet]

Thanks for a most excellent post, Child. I think that the sub-text under point #1 is also part of our discussion here.

Do we not find that the specificities of points a. & b. under #7 are removed from LotR, whereas the generality (or dare I say unity?) of #7 is evoked? What I'm suggesting is that Tolkien avoids getting bogged down in a. & b. while holding fast to #7 main point.

As for Frodo, my sense is that he neither wanted nor needed honor of any kind, and was happy (if we may call it that) to stay at Bag End in peace and quiet, and would have done so if not for his grievous wounds. Sam may have been pained by the lack of honor, but we can't really infer that Frodo was pained (by that).

[ninja91]

As to us plumbing his works, I say yes. Many instances occur where beings are troubled by the loss or impending loss of life, and they are pressed with a decision to either attempt to thwart it or sit back and do nothing. For example, when the ents attack Isengard after they find that part of their forest was destroyed. This was not a matter of honor, because the ents considered not doing anything, but a matter of life because the ents felt sorrow for their lost friends and environment.

[Elu Ancalime]

Elu, thanks for the connections to The Odyssey. Are you suggesting that there was a development from a limited view (honor valued over life) to a broader one (life valued over honor)?

I wonder if we're giving "Life" too broad a meaning in some of our examples? The long and short of it is that to value Life over Honor is to say "I'd rather stay alive than be known for ___-heroism, loyalty, fill in the blank-____".

So when we say that Gandalf values Life above Honor, is this what we mean?

In the Homeric Epics, life means "to live long and healthful, and enjoy it with your family and friends" (as what happens at the end of the Odyseey) as opposed to the Iliad's developing theme of "die in honor fighting for something you believe in". It dosnt have to mean Life as opposed to Death, but Honor in Life as opposed to Memory in Death.(in the Greek sense)

It dosent fit in with LotR exactrly that way, like with what you said about Gandalf. I dont think we can easily argue or believe that Gandalf would want to die (as anobjective, not on impulse like in Moria) and be honored or want to live gloriously like a king.
________
Mercedes-amg

[Galadriel55]

Talking about Life vs Honour in Gondor, I think that it's helpful to analyse Beregond, since he's the only Minas-Tirithian warrior we know a bit closer. You could say that he's both.
Life above honour: risks everything, including his reputation, to save Faramir's life
Honour above life: Sticks to what his inner voice tells him is GOOD (ie the honourable thing to do) rather than keeping his life and job safe, again, by saving Faramir.
It depends on the defintion of LIFE and HONOUR.
I guess a typical inas-Tirithian (since that's what, in my opinion, Beregond is supposed to represent) will have an aproximate balance of both. Ioreth has a similar case - She risks her life to do an honourable thing by saving other lives.
That saying, Boromir, Faramir, and Denethor are NOT typical Minas-Tirithians!

[doug*platypus]

Interesting point about Beregond there, Galadriel. At the start of this thread I would have automatically responded to the question posed by saying that in Gondor at least, honour is regarded even more highly than life. But I see what you are saying about Beregond potentially putting aside his honour in order to save the life of Faramir. At the same time, however, is there not a certain, important type of honour in this? Risking everything, including his own life, for Faramir that is.

I interpret lmp's original question as asking whether individuals within the story place their own life higher than their honour, or vice versa. To which I would say that all the heroes of the story place their honour over their lives, and most of the villains prefer to hold onto their life however they may!

The various societies we encounter in the story emphasise honour to differing degrees, and to a certain extent they also define it differently, or at least practice it differently. To a soldier of Gondor or a rider of Rohan, honour is gained by risking your life in battle for your lord and your country. Faramir alludes to the fact that warriors in Minas Tirith are esteemed over all other professions, and Beregond explains that even a man of arms of the Citadel Guard is held in honour. To a hobbit, however, honour of a different form is found through fostering a large family, obeying the laws and customs of the land, or being an acknowledged authority on potatoes like the Gaffer is.

Within the confines of the different cultures our heroes spring from, there are a number of examples where honour is chosen over life. Frodo not fleeing the barrow, Gandalf confronting the Balrog, Boromir defending Merry and Pippin, the three hunters following the Uruk Hai, Faramir rejecting the Ring, Gimli entering the Paths of the Dead. Although not all of these choices led to each of these characters laying down their life, there was always a very real potential, and a good deal of uncertainty over safety at the time the decision was made.

On the flip side of the coin, we have those characters who elected to choose their life over their honour. Wormtongue is the most obvious for his weaselling out of fighting for Theoden, but Gollum also pleads for his life a number of times, which is something we do not see any of the heroes doing, and the Mouth of Sauron quails when Aragorn stares him down.

I think we can definitely see the moral code of Tolkien himself, of the time and place where the story was formed and written, and perhaps also of the literary traditions which he harks back to, in the distinction between the heroes who choose honour over life, and the villains who choose life over honour.

[Galadriel]

Interesting thread. Never really thought about it, but now that you ask, then I feel for Hobbits honour matters less. I think they value life above doing what's right (not to say that they're bad people; just saying that they are not often riddled with a choice between life or honour). They prefer food and cheer above all else, but, as Gandalf says, they're hardy folk too.
So in my opinion it's rather two-sided, though I'm leaning towards life.

I'll get to Gondorians and Eorlings later. I think I need to think a little on that Though if I had to make a quick (and rather impetuous) remark, I'd say honour for both.

[Galadriel55]

I say that generally one values others' lives above his honour that he values above his own life. Except for, of course, all these villains and traitors.