The Inherent Incompatability of Morgoth and Sauron

[Zigûr]

Originally Posted by Sarumian

The question is when. If it happened before Melkor's final downfall, it is unclear why than Sauron did not abandon Melkor.

I just noticed this and wanted to offer an answer while I had it in mind. There's so much discussion of Sauron on this forum I think it's enlightening to have as much material to hand as possible. To quote "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" regarding Sauron's behaviour:

"Therefore when Ëonwë departed he hid himself in Middle-earth; and he fell back into evil, for the bonds that Morgoth had laid upon him were very strong."

Sauron was Morgoth's first lieutenant. That does not, however, change the fact that in the heirarchy of Morgoth's 'realm' (such as it was) everyone apart from Morgoth himself, regardless of rank, was Morgoth's slave. On the other hand, we receive no mention, I believe, of any participation on Sauron's part in the Great Battle. So I think Sauron may have been capable of abandoning Morgoth, but that he was so deeply entrenched in evil that this was only really possible at the point where it was a choice between supporting Morgoth and his own survival. Being evil and serving Morgoth (the individual) were not the same thing by the end of the First Age, which I think might go some way to explaining how Sauron persisted with Morgoth until the time came to strike out on his own. Of course, slave or not, for a being as evil as Sauron, and accustomed to a certain lifestyle, being second in command of Morgoth's realm would probably also have been preferable to indefinite ages of service to the Valar in Aman (even before the Great Battle, I mean).

[Faramir Jones]

Originally Posted by Zigûr

Of course, slave or not, for a being as evil as Sauron, and accustomed to a certain lifestyle, being second in command of Morgoth's realm would probably also have been preferable to indefinite ages of service to the Valar in Aman (even before the Great Battle, I mean).

I agree with you here. When I first read the first part of "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age", I remembered what Satan said in John Milton's poem Paradise Lost to his followers, after their failed rebellion led them to be cast out of Heaven, and into Hell:

Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n. (Book I, lines 161-3)

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Faramir Jones

I agree with you here. When I first read the first part of "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age", I remembered what Satan said in John Milton's poem Paradise Lost to his followers, after their failed rebellion led them to be cast out of Heaven, and into Hell:

Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n. (Book I, lines 161-3)

The Silmarillion seems to make it clear that an aversion to penitently serving the Valar was indeed behind Sauron's failure to take advantage of the opportunity to turn his back on his past.He had had too much power and authority under Morgoth.

As an aside, could something similar be said of Denethor? He was so enamored of his position as de facto ruler of Gondor that he would not entertain the idea of relinquishing power, even to a proven, rightful king. Possibly the influence of Sauron via the Palantíri, enhanced by Denethor's own pride?

[Nikkolas]

Despite what people say about the movies, Tolkien does not seem to particularly like or care about Denethor. I know he addressed him in at least one of the letters I read and he was none too sympathetic, calling him nothing more than a petty tyrant. This is in sharp contrast to how a lot of people online seem to view him ie. as a tragic ruler manipulated by the evil Sauron.

[Nerwen]

Nikkolas, you sound rather as if you think this is some kind of internet mass delusion. . In fact I imagine most are simply going by the character as he appears in the book itself. An author's view of his own work isn't necessarily fixed, anyway.

(Btw, many of us have read Tolkien's letters too.)

[Nikkolas]

I just didn't feel particularly sory for him.He's often cited as the single greatest character screw-up of the movies by book fans but when i got to ROTK a few months ago, I didn't really care for him one way or another. He was just kind of a jerk who made a very problematic situation even more problematic through his jerkiness.

Besides, Gandalf didn't spare a word of sympathy for him either. (in contrast to Saruman)

[Zigûr]

I think that as unsympathetic as some people might find Denethor in the books, he still has a certain dignity to him. In the films he's this grubby, messy slob who's more barking mad than melodramatic in despair. To me in the books Denethor feels like a real person whereas I feel like the film depiction has him as a rather effortless caricature of an incompetent politician.
To digress slightly further for a moment, I think Denethor is actually a very impressive example of Professor Tolkien's skill as a writer. The Steward appears in what, three chapters? Yet in my opinion at least, by the time he is proclaiming the doom of the West from his pyre I feel as if we have known him for years. Critics who are skeptical of Professor Tolkien's ability with complex characterisation should look no further than Denethor.

Anyway, to return to what Inzil said, let us consider again Professor Tolkien's remarks in Letter 183: "Denethor was tainted with mere politics: hence his failure... It had become for him a prime motive to preserve the polity of Gondor, as it was, against another potentate, who had made himself stronger and was to be feared and opposed for that reason rather than because he was ruthless and wicked."
Denethor was conservative and politically minded, concerned with the maintenance of the status quo. Professor Tolkien observes that his motives were the main issue. He opposed Sauron not because it was a moral imperative to do so (and metaphysically speaking it was as Sauron was evil's representative in the Third Age) but because he feared change.
"I would have things as they were in all the days of my life... and in the days of my longfathers before me: to be the Lord of this City in peace, and leave my chair to a son after me, who would be his own master and no wizard's pupil."
Sauron, really, desired the same end. A realm built on the One Ring would last as long as the Ring lasted, in perpetual stasis, stale and stagnant. After Morgoth's defeat, Sauron ultimately could not resist the urge to attempt the same thing on an arguably lesser scale with himself as supreme ruler. Perhaps he could manipulate Denethor so well because they were alike in this way. When Denethor beheld the black sails of Umbar in the Anor-Stone, his chiefest despair was the end of Gondor and, thus, change. After his suicide, Gandalf told his servants: "so pass also the days of Gondor that you have known; for good or evil they are ended."
Like Sauron, Denethor hated change. The Noldor had suffered the same delusion in the Second Age. One of the prevailing virtues in my view of Gandalf is that he understands one of Professor Tolkien's most significant themes: change is inevitable, but it does not have to be bad.