Was Huan a traitor?

[Galadriel]

Sometimes, one needs to break vows in order to do what's right. Enough said. And I don't think Celegorm deserved him after what he did (or attempted to do).

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

The entire tale of the Simarils is, in a way, a story of the evils of blind loyalty. The sons of Fëanor swore the same oath as their father, and led themselves and their people into tragedy after tragedy, attempting to fulfill it. In the end, the right thing to do would have been to break the oath and change their ways, but none did. In all of Tolkien's work, the subject of free will is a powerful one. Oaths never absolve one of the consequences of choosing to do wrong. Huan was not an ordinary dog, unable to choose to break his training. He was intelligent enough to know right from wrong, and was able to choose to do the right thing rather than rigidly follow his training like a good little doggy. Celegorm may consider that betrayal, but a master who demands that his followers follow him into evil has betrayed them first.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Celegorm may consider that betrayal, but a master who demands that his followers follow him into evil has betrayed them first.

I like the way you put it, and I agree with you on that one. Thanx everyone for prooving me wrong on this one!

There is another question, though, and no one answered it yet. How can Huan be so impatient? It might not exactly fit under the topic of this thread, but it's still an interesting thing to discuss; I've mentioned it in my 1st post.

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

Sometimes, one needs to break vows in order to do what's right.

A agree but I think there is both truth and danger in what you say "AS WORDED" since it leaves unsaid what is "RIGHT".

In Tolkien's creation there was a hierarchy of authority - with "right" ultimately deriving from Eru, the One. We don't see him referenced much (tho he does sneak in even to the Trilogy in a side reference) because the Valar were his appointed vice-regents in Arda.

The clearest (I think) addressing of the question of "what is right" in direct language comes in a dialog just before the Downfall of Numenor when Amandil proposes to sail into the west to plead with the Valar (from "The Akallabeth")...

• Elendil: Would you then betray the King?
• Amandil: If I thought that Manwe needed any such messenger I would betray the King. For there is but one loyalty from which no man can be absolved in heart for any cause.

I would say that Huan made a judgment that in attempting to kill Beren, Celegorm had placed him in a position where he was no longer able to justly "walk the line" between loyalty to master and ultimate loyalty to Eru (tho he may not have thought it in just those terms).

[Galadriel55]

Great example, Puddleglum! That does explain a lot, doesn't it?
Maybe what Eru stands for in this case really is moral, because I can't say that all the people who had to choose between loyalties knew about Eru. Or at least know enough about Eru. They did follow their morals, though.

I know that there are different morals, but the point I'm trying to prove is right vs wrong in a person's (dog's?) head

[Puddleglum]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

They did follow their morals, though.
I know that there are different morals, but the point I'm trying to prove is right vs wrong in a person's (dog's?) head

I may be misunderstanding your meaning (if so, I apologize in advance) but ...

I think the key point is that it is *NOT* sufficient that one simply "follow their morals" to be justified.

In Tolkien's world (I'll avoid discussing our primary world to reduce controversy) Eru is real and the creator from whom all existence derives - and justification depends on *HIS* (if you will, tho I don't think I'd normally phrase it that way) "morals".

One person (or dog ) may or may not know clearly what is REALLY right - but they still can't claim absolute justification by simply saying "You can't condem me because I followed my morals".

If/When Eru (or the Valar/Mandos) judge a Fea (spirit) they may well consider "I honestly thought I was doing what you would say is right" as a mitigating factor - maybe even a fully mitigating factor. But I think the Fea (spirit) would still have to come in submission to their judgment, acknowledging their right and authority to pass the final judgment.

BTW, I'm using "Fea" here a bit loosely since it was a matter of uncertainty even to Tolkien (for a time) whether Huan had a Fea (as an incarnated spirit) or was merely an intelligent animal.

[Galadriel55]

The way I understand your post, Puddleglum, is that there are actually 3 different loyalties - to Eru, to a master/authority, and to one's heart. I'd say that very often two of these are against one.
Gaima has an interesting case. He says something like "when in doubt, wisdom tells us to follow our hearts" when Gandalf refuses to give his staff to him. The 2 loyalties in conflict are to master and to heart; you don't see much of Eru here, though. You could say that since Gaima followed his heart and that caused good things to happen (ie Gandalf "woke" Theoden) and ultimately do what Eru wants, the Eru loyalty was the same as the heart one. You could prove otherwise too, though.
Huan, on the other hand, has a clear case. His heart loyalty and Eru loyalty tell him to betray Celegorm, but his master loyalty says the opposite. It's 2 to one.
Maglor had a 2 to 1 choice too, though, and he chose the one, when he listened to Maedhros and stole one of the Silmarils, killing other people in the process (a bit of the Silmarillion, like Ibrin said).
Interesting thing, loyalty...can cause so much trouble...

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

The way I understand your post, Puddleglum, is that there are actually 3 different loyalties - to Eru, to a master/authority, and to one's heart. I'd say that very often two of these are against one.
Gaima has an interesting case. He says something like "when in doubt, wisdom tells us to follow our hearts" when Gandalf refuses to give his staff to him. The 2 loyalties in conflict are to master and to heart; you don't see much of Eru here, though. You could say that since Gaima followed his heart and that caused good things to happen (ie Gandalf "woke" Theoden) and ultimately do what Eru wants, the Eru loyalty was the same as the heart one. You could prove otherwise too, though.
Huan, on the other hand, has a clear case. His heart loyalty and Eru loyalty tell him to betray Celegorm, but his master loyalty says the opposite. It's 2 to one.
Maglor had a 2 to 1 choice too, though, and he chose the one, when he listened to Maedhros and stole one of the Silmarils, killing other people in the process (a bit of the Silmarillion, like Ibrin said).
Interesting thing, loyalty...can cause so much trouble...

I assume that "Gaima" means Gríma Wormtongue... not that this really needs to be clarified, for what I have to say.

As far as Middle-earth goes (like Puddleglum I will avoid straying into "the real world"), I am strongly leery of saying anything like "one should have a loyalty to one's heart." This is not to say that the heart does not play a role in loyalty, but I do not think it really deserves a "third loyalty."

Rather, the promptings of the heart (which sounds terribly melodramatic, by the way), are more in the nature of the conscience, which helps one distinguish between sworn loyalty and morality (loyalty to Eru, one might say) when the two seem to conflict. This does not, however, mean that you do the right thing by "staying loyal to your heart," introducing a third morality; rather, a properly formed conscience will prioritize loyalty to Eru, and prompt one to act according.

If one has an undue loyalty to the heart that causes one to deviate from proper loyalty to Eru (ie. to what is "right"), whether that is in order to be loyal to a sworn loyalty or some third party action, that is IMmoral, and to attempt to make it moral on the basis of "loyalty to the heart" is not really given much--or any--support in Tolkien's writings.

[Aiwendil]

I assume that "Gaima" means Gríma Wormtongue... not that this really needs to be clarified, for what I have to say.

I think she means Hama, the door-warden. Is that right, Galadriel?