Tolkien, Technology, and... War

[The Saucepan Man]

I take your point, Child, but Tolkien also wrote:

Of course, I suppose that, subject to the permission of God, the whole human race (as each individual) is free not to rise again but to go on to perdition and carry out the Fall to its bitter bottom (as each individual can singulariter). And at certain periods, the present is notably one, that seems not only a likely event but imminent. Still I think that there will be a 'millenium', the prophesised thousand-year rule of Saints, i.e. those who have for all their imperfections never bowed heart and will to the world or the evil spirit (in modern but not universal terms: mechanism, 'scientific' materialism, Socialism in either of its factions now at war). (Letter 96)

and (to expand on a quote given earlier by Son of Númenor):

There is the tragedy and despair of all machinery laid bare. Unlike art which is content to create a new secondary world in the mind, it attempts to actualize desire, and so create power in this World; and that cannot really be done with any real satisfaction. Labour-saving machinery only creates endless and worse labour. And in addition to this fundamental disbility of a creature, is added the Fall, which makes our devices not only fail of their desire but turn to new and horrible evil. (Letter 75)

There does seem to a slight inconsistency between these quotes. The first suggests that he regarded mechanism as a manifestation of 'the evil spirit' in itself. The second suggests that, while not evil in itself, machinery would, as an inevitable consequence of the Fall of Man, be turned to evil (because it actualises the desire for power, which is itself an evil purpose). Either way, even though he might have acknowledged that mechanism did have its beneficial side, he appears to have thought that it would inevitably be turned to evil and that this, in itself, was a reason to regard it negatively.

The paradox I see here is that Ted Sandyman's mill (before 'corrupted' by Saruman) is a mechanism of sorts. As are the bow which Legolas uses and the cart in which Gandalf arrives in Hobbiton. They are all products of a certain level of technology, and yet Tolkien is happy to accept them as having the potential to be used both for good and for evil, without the latter being an inevitable consequence. It seems that it is only once technology develops beyond that stage that he sees the evil use as being inevitable. That, to me, is illogical. 'Fallen Man' is no less (and no more) capable of using the 'infernal combustion engine' for good than he is the horse and cart.

It seems to me that the 'embalming' nature of the Elves has its roots in Tolkien's dislike of technological advancement. Just as Tolkien himself was, the Elves are resisting change in Middle-earth, viewing the status quo as preferable by far. Yet I see this quality of Elvishness as extremely unnatural, as it seeks to work against the cycle of nature, which welcomes change and development by clearing away the old to make way for the new. Indeed, Tolkien himself states on a number of occasions that this desire to 'preserve' was one of the Elves' great failings. And, as you point out Child, the Elves' use of 'technology', in the form of the Rings of Power, to further this preservation of Middle-earth in their preferred state has dire consequences. Does this perhaps represent a recognition by Tolkien that his own resistance to change and development (in technological terms), however instinctively right it seemed to him, was in fact a flawed aspect of his own beliefs?

[Bombadil]

Great points and discussion by all, and in particular the latter: Sauce and Child. My interpretation of "Good technology," though, is one of the technology itself naught but a mere response to original, and ultimately evil technology.

It was presumably from these caves that the mithril came to rebuild the gates of Gondor, yet another positive use of technology.

You are correct Child, but if you were to go back to the roots of that situation - The door of Mithril was made to replace the one previously breached by the battering ram of Sauron's Army (for the first and only time, mind you). Grond was the evil technology that brought about the need for a mithril door. Such is the theory of militarization, and a more modern example being the cold war. With this type of rise in technology, all that can result form it is mass death and eventual self-destruction.

And to expand on this point:

But he seems to take no account of the benefits that advancements in technology can bring, particularly in terms of medical advancements, standards of living and information availability.

This was stated by the saucepan man. And to connect my point with that - There would be no need for medical advances if it weren't for the advance of the diseases.

BUt then there's the case for technology being able to do things like heal a bullet wound in a leg rather than have to amputate it, or cure legal blindess. These situations contradict my point somewhat (unless you want to bring up the fact that amputation from bullet wounds is caused by the technology of bullets, and modern factors can lead to loss of vision - an example being mass consumption of meat products leading to macular degeneration) Ahhh! im straying off point a little.

Anyways, To go back to some of the very first wars of Arda, you see that an enormous war- a war to mark an age- involves and was instigated by mere jewels. (And let me say i state "mere" lightly - they were the silmarils after all) But without the silmarils, there would be no war with Melkor. It was inevitable that a confrontation would elapse, but it was started due to the crafts of Feanor.

But perhaps in the end, mother nature towers over technology. This being the case in the Ent rebellion on Saruman, but perhaps to relate this to modern living one could see nature fighting back. As we pollute the air, she (Mother nature of course ) slowly fuses her polar ice caps. As we over-populate, and spread through this earth, so does her disease. Not disease brought upon by humans, but spread. I.E. the HIV virus, believed to have started in monkeys, is spread due to our ability to travel quickly and efficiently. And as we grow to depend on this technology, she turns her back on us - to the point where human survival is critically dependent to technology.

As we persist to go against laws of nature, and lead to ideas like cloning, and continue to add to the world's population, perhaps technology will ultimately balance things out. The more this planet is inhabited by human beings, the more deadly weaponry will become, the more deadly diseases will become, and in time ttechnology may possibly balance itself out. I apologize for straying off topic form Tolkien's views to my own, but I'm done.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Saucepan Man says:

'Fallen Man' is no less (and no more) capable of using the 'infernal combustion engine' for good than he is the horse and cart.

While that is true, I would like to add a negative aspect that Tolkien also mentions in connection with Middle-earth technological advance - environmental pollution. The end products left over from a horse and cart are biodegradable, to use a modern word. Though it is of course possible to use modern technology for good purposes, the pollution remains. The exhaust of an ambulance (fired by an internal combustion engine) is no less harmful than that of a robber's getaway car...

[mark12_30]

Philip Gibbs was a WW1 correspondent who wrote several books after the war containing material that had been censored during the war. He wrote extensively about the Somme which is of course where Tolkien fought.

During the Somme (indeed during much of the war) the tactics were appallingly simple: (1) Extensive artillery shelling first (during which time the men sat huddled in their trenches dreading the next explosion; some went insane-- "shell shock" ) and then (2) bravely charging "over the top"-- squadron after squadron of men crossing no-mans-land (armed with a rifle each) running boldly into machine-gun fire.

The artillery shelling turned everything to mud. Body parts were everywhere. It wasn't safe to leave your trench to bury them.

Charging "over the top" and into machine gun fire was essentially suicide. Wave after wave of good, honest men were sent "over the top". For years. For little or no gain. Just death.

One of Gibb's main points was that the commanders simply kept sending men "over the top" in the name of "courage" without grappling with the fact that the casualty rate averaged 80% to 90% and sometimes 100%. These are completely unacceptable casualty rates yet the commanders kept sending the men "over the top", month after bloody month, year after bloody year.

So what Tolkien saw during his wartime was apallingly simple: Men sitting in muddy, body-parts-filled trenches waiting to be shelled to bits and slowly (or quickly) going insane; and men climbing out of their muddy, body-parts-filled trenches to run across the body-parts-filled mud of no-mans-land straight into machine gun fire and get mowed down.

What was the name of the certain death that the men faced when they went "over the top"? The "Machine"-gun.

If he hadn't hated "Machines" before the war already, I see why he hated them afterward.

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

A very interesting and pertinent thread symestreem.

I think that the current discussion about “good and bad” technology is perhaps a bit misleading, insofar as it is trying to approach a subtle and complex aspect of Tolkien’s world (the status, use, view, role of technology) through the simplicity of binary terms (good vs. bad, right vs. wrong). I have no doubt that there are in LotR “good and bad” uses of technology, but I think that there might be another way to approach this. To quote (now for the third time in this thread – first by Son of Númenor and then by Saucepan Man) an important passage from the Letters:

There is the tragedy and despair of all machinery laid bare. Unlike art which is content to create a new secondary world in the mind, it attempts to actualize desire, and so create power in this World; and that cannot really be done with any real satisfaction. Labour-saving machinery only creates endless and worse labour. And in addition to this fundamental disability of a creature, is added the Fall, which makes our devices not only fail of their desire but turn to new and horrible evil. (Letter 75)

I am quite conscious that Tolkien himself is approaching technology here in terms of its “evil” so I’m not trying to eject that idea from the discussion. What I do want to point out is that he opposes to technology not “good” technology, but art. As has been pointed out in this thread, the forces of good in Middle-Earth depend upon technological advance as much as do the forces of evil, and yet somehow these instances of engineering or fabrication are somehow OK. I think that this is because the “good” instances of technology are undertaken not in the spirit of domination and manipulation, but for creation and co-operation.

The best three examples I can think of for this form of art, and their technological counterparts are: Caras Galadhon and Barad Dûr; the Old Mill and the New Mill; the Three Rings and the One Ring.

Caras Galadhon is a marvel of engineering – to construct an entire city in the treetops is beyond even our own 21st century technology. And yet is stands in stark contrast to the tower of steel and stone that is Barad Dûr, which is something very much in the realm of possibility now. The difference is that the city of Galadriel is built in cooperation with the natural surrounding – even in homage to it. The city creates a place or space for the people to live in and amongst their natural setting without asserting dominance or control of that setting.

The Old Mill, we are told, was entirely sufficient to the needs of the hobbits. It ground enough wheat to meet the requirements of the Halflings and existed in harmony with the natural surrounding. It added to the lives of those who used it and allowed the basic function of life to go forward. Like the flet building technology of the Elves, it allowed the hobbits to live and thrive, to make a space for themselves, in their natural surroundings. All of the arts of the hobbits do so: agrarian, brewing, etc. The hobbit hole is another great example of this: a house that is literally in the earth, not towering over and dominating it.

And the Rings. The Three were made to preserve and enhance what already was there; like art, they were an attempt at creation and co-operation with the natural world. The One, as we all know, is about domination and control.

To paraphrase Hamlet, the purpose of art is to hold a mirror up to nature; the purpose of technology, according to Tolkien, is to dominate nature.

[Esgallhugwen]

Wow Fordim Hedgethistle and Child. Excellent points I couldn't agree with you more. We're all products of our environment. Its a shame we take so many things for granted today that never exsisted when Tolkien was around. Especially all the environmental groups one could join today, they do a lot when greedy coniving companies don't hinder them.

Thats all I really have to say.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Thanks, Esgallhugwen!

Fordim -

We double posted. Your examples of art and their technological counterparts are intriguing. I think you are onto something. The terminology may be getting in our way. Some of what we now call machines may actually fall into Tolkien's category of Art (admittedly the smaller share), while other fabrications are examples of "The Machine" that he detested.

I would add that a legitimate work of art may be captured by someone seeking power and coopted to less honorable purposes. This was the case with the Palantiri crafted by the Elves. Given to the Elf-friends as they departed Numenor, the Kings of Gondor and Arnor relied upon these wonderful objects, until they were stolen and abused by Sauruman and Sauron. The nature of these objects did not change but the use to which they were put certainly did.

As you rightfully suggest, each of the fabrications that merit the designation of "art" respect their natural setting without asserting dominance or control over it. But this mistrust of The Machine clearly stems back to Tolkien's beliefs as a Christian. Your own quote concerning the complications from the Fall also allude to that. It was not only the impact on the environment that concerned JRRT, but the impact that the machine had on the soul of those who wielded them.

Tolkien's views on "The Machine" were conditioned by his perspective that history was nothing more than a long defeat, punctuated by temporary victories. In the author's eyes, perhaps, an Elven city in the trees or the Shire's Old Mill were small and temporary victories of Art. Sadly however, both of these examples of goodness were swept away from our own world, since the Elves departed for the West and the Hobbits now hide from Big Folk. Similarly, at the end of the story, only one working Palantir remains in Middle-earth; the others have been taken to the West, lost, or rendered useless.

Tolkien believed that created beings, fallen as they were, are prone to abuse even the good things in life, and that includes Art. Within Arda, most evil begins with good intentions. This is certainly the case with many scientific advancements. In JRRT's view, the act of turning away from true Art to "The Machine" was just one more instance of people refusing to submit to the limitations that Nature or the will of the Creator imposed on them. In this sense, the damage to the soul of the person wielding the Machine was just as pertinent as damage to the outward environment.

Tolkien used the term "Machine" in an extended sense to signify the attempt to 'actualize' our desires by coercing the world and other's wills into satisfying them. The Ring, of course, was the ultimate coercion machine. "Coercion" was intrinsic to The Machine, yet totally absent from Art.

There is a related discussion of magia and goeteia (magic performed by the invocation of spirits) in Letter 155 that pertains to this. Here, it is magia that is equated with Art or Machine; it is neutral in itself, but capable of going in either direction according to the use to which it is put:

Neither is ( i.e., magia or goeteia) good or bad per se, but only by motive or purpose or use. The Enemy's operations are by no means all goetic deceits, but 'magic' that produces real effects in the physical world. But his magia he uses to bulldoze both people and things, and his goeteia to terrify and subjegate. Their magia the Elves and Gandalf use (sparingly): a magia producing real results (like fire in a wet faggot) for specific beneficient purposes. Their goetic effects are entirely artistic and not intended to deceive....The Enemy, or those who have become like him, go in for "machinery"--with destructive and evil effects--because "magicians" who have become chiefly concerned to use magia for their own power, would do so (do do so).

This at least implies that the purpose to which magia is put determines whether the fabrication is Art or Machine, as well as the degree to which it respects the natural setting, and stands in accord with Eru's plan. These three are irrevocably linked.

[Child of the 7th Age]

I think Mark 12_30 is on the right trail. The only way to understand Tolkien's feelings about the machine is to look at him in the context of his own historical time.

Helen's comments on WWI are very apt. I would add just one other point. There was also the element of propaganda, which was rampant on both sides during the Great War. As the young men signed up for duty, they were barraged with a host of patriotic posters and newspaper stories. These were blissful representations of a war that did not exist: posters that showed sports clubs enlisting en masse as if the war was just a continuation of their usual Sunday afternoon soccer matches and comradrie; pictures of pretty maidens in fancy frocks serving tea to the young men as they departed on the train; cigarette commercials where the soldiers blissfully relax in the trenches and even stand up in the middle of the battle field to take a smoke.

The problem is that none of this bore any relation to reality. In Tolkien's mind, the machine and its use became linked with deception. For he and his friends had surely been deceived when they went off to fight the War of the Machine. This is the same connection we see in the Lord of the Rings where those with power over machines were inherently duplicitous, smooth talkers who loved machines, people who could not be trusted. Saruman clearly falls into this category.

Secondly, I think you have to see Tolkien's environmental yearnings in the context of his time. I am not saying today is perfect. Far from it ! We can still see evidence of greed and indifference and their sad impact on our world. In some parts of the globe, the bleak necessity to survive channells folk into the destruction and neglect of the environment. Yet there is one critical difference between now and then. There are many environmental groups around who do speak out and companies must make some attempt to comply with government regulations or else they run the risk of lawsuits. It's even possible to go to college and study ecology or environmental sciences.

Very little of that existed at the time Tolkien was writing. I'm sure he felt like a lonely voice crying in the wilderness. This probably accounted for some of his natural stridency in this area. Frankly, I felt the same way in the 60s (and that was long after JRRT's writing), and part of that is still with me. For example, I can remember when Rachel Carson's Silent Spring first came out in 1961-- people were absolutely shocked to hear what she had to say about pesticides and how they ran inside our very bones and the lands and waters of the Earth. In fact, the main theme in Tolkien that the sixties college students responded to was his championship of the environment. Students felt that he was one of a very few authors who understood how they felt. (The religious themes, on the other hand, were not regarded as so central as they are today.)

My guess is that, given this lack of ecological awareness in the general society, an awareness that we take for granted today , Tolkien did not regard his opposition to the machine as "looking backward" or the sin that the Elves were prone to. He regarded it as taking a strong and rebellious stand against the forces of evil, the forces of indifference that surrounded him everywhere. I understand why he could make a reference to "bombing" factories and power plants (not in seriousness, of course). When you believe something is right yet no one pays the slightest attention, and it seems as if there is no hope to change things by acting through the system, you begin to take on an increasingly belligerent stance! I am sure this accounts for a good deal of his impatience. Intellectually, he was aware that not all "machines" are evil, but he had seen too much abuse and it affected how he felt.

Just take a look at what actually happened in the time that Tolkien lived. In the first fifty years of the 20th century, there was more land in England stripped of trees than had occurred in the previous four centuries. By the time Tolkien died, just a little more than 10% of the countryside was still forested, and most of that was with non-native conifers. (You'll notice that JRRT never mentions conifers among his favorite trees!) With the advent of the motor car, he saw habitat after habitat destroyed by the advent of 'super' roads. Yes, there was certainly economic reasons why all this happened, but it was a tremendous price to pay.

We all know about hobbits and mushrooms. Yet the sad truth is that ,during Tolkien's life, wild mushrooms were dying out all across Europe, a process that has continued after his death. Seventy species of fungi are now extinct in Europe and another 600 have become "uncommon", including the wood blewitts, giant chanterelle, and penny-buns or cep. Cep once grew all over England; now they can only be found in very remote places. Why is this happening? The cause is habitat loss, combined with acidification from increased levels of nitrogen and sulphur in the air, and heavy metals in the soil. No wonder the "machine" sometimes made Tolkien angry, and he displayed an ambivalent attitude in his writing.

(Child gets down from her soapbox.... )