From: mcconnel@Nimitz.mcs.kent.edu (Mike McConnell)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.tolkien
Subject: Re: Technology and Morality in LOTR (was Re: new theory on bombadil)
Date: 13 Dec 92 19:23:45 GMT
Organization: Kent State University

In article <1992Dec11.111035.11279@genie.slhs.udel.edu>, nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
|> In article <STSSRAM.92Dec10161109@st.unocal.COM> Bob.Myers@st.unocal.com writes:
|> >>>>>> On Tue, 8 Dec 1992 10:44:46 GMT, nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz) said:
|> >
|> >Nancy> And if you'll excuse my bringing in the Silmarillion, Feanor's trapping
|> >Nancy> the light of the Trees in the Silmaril's was also a mistake--and he
|> >Nancy> didn't even use moving parts or produce pollution!
|> >
|> >A mistake!!!  A mistake!!!
|> >
|> >Without the Silmarils, the light of the Two Trees would have been lost forever!
|> 
|> Yes, but people just fought over the Silmarils....the light didn't do any
|> good that I can remember. (It would have, if Feanor had used the Silmarils
|> to revive the Trees, but he didn't.)
|> 
|> >It was most emphatically not a mistake, but rather the greatest of the 
|> >works of the Firstborn.
|> 
|> My impression is that it was both the greatest work of the the Firstborn
|> _and_ a mistake.
|> 
|> Nancy Lebovitz
|> nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu

 IMO, Tolkien doesn't look at the making of the Silmarils as a mistake, but rather
 in the over-weening pride that Feanor takes in their creation and in the lust
 that Melkor has for them.  He says something to the effect that Feanor's grea
 mistake is in refusing to allow them to be used to restore the two trees after
 they have been injured.  But notice, this is not because of the direct outcome 
 of this refusal.  After all, Melkor was already in the process of stealing the
 Silmarils.  It was rather a graphic depiction of Feanor's pride.

 I think that much of the "morality" of technology in Tolkien's work should be
 viewed in a similar manner.  Very often, it is not the technology itself that is
 evil, but rather the use to which it is put.  The three Elven rings are not 
 themselves directly tainted, in fact, they are a major reason why the wise are
 able to hold off Sauron--so long as he doesn't have his own ring.

 On the other hand, Tolkien focuses a good deal of attention on corruptability.
 Perhaps first and formost, Morgothg is a corrupter.  Sauron, becuase he emulates
 Morgoth (and later Saruman) are also corrupters.  This is because they cannot 
 create things for themselves, so they corrupt those things that others have 
 created.  They corrupt natural things, making Orcs out of elves and Trolls out of
 Ents; Saruman continues this type of corruption by breeding his half-orcs.  The
 beast that the Witch King rides at Minas Tirith is, if I remember right, the 
 corruption of a natural beast, raised on fell meats.  

 They corrupt the land.  The descriptions of Thangorodrim (sp?), Mordor, and Isen-
 gard show this.  Saruman's attacks, through his orcs, on Fangorn give another 
 example.

 And, most importantly, in many different ways, they work to corrupt people.  We
 can see this with Grima Wormtongue in Thoedred's hall.  Remember how Aragorn
 explains that this is were the real injury to Eowyn's spirit was caused.  Den-
 ethor and Boromir are examples of how Sauron's corruption spreads.  Moreover, we
 see here that his corruption does not necessarily spread through people's greed,
 or their evil nature, but through their desire to do good, all-be-it a desire 
 that is tinged with pride.  As Galadrial says (wise enough to avoid this flaw) 
 it would be her desire to save Middle Earth that would allow the ring to trap 
 her.  I suspect that this is the way in which Saruman was originally corrupted.

 Living, breathing, thinking creatures, immortal like Galadrial or mortal like 
 Aragorn, are able to avoid corruption, as we see by their declining the ring.
 Even in unlikely places, like Bagshot row, we find what seem like weak, meek 
 little gardeners, until they show their iron will at the appropriate time.  Sam 
 took up the ring though love and he gave up the ring through love.  Therein lay
 his saving grace.

 But inanimate objects, artifacts, have no will to resist corruption.  I don't 
 think, however, that Tolkien is presenting them as inherently corrupt, just 
 easily used for corrupt porposes.  But machines and artifacts are things of 
 power.  Many are originally intended as weapons, others can be manipulated to be
 used as weapons, such as the Palantri.  So we see that Sauron is able to ensnare
 mortals with the nine rings because they are men who look for power.  The seven
 rings only effect on dwarves is to increase their greed for gold.  The palantri 
 in Orthanc and Minas Tirith become weapons for Sauron, once he has the Ithilian
 stone.  It is not the stone's which are inately corrupt, but rather the use to 
 which Sauron is able to put them.

 Similarly, Sauron was not directly involved in the making of the three rings, 
 and they are not corrupted by him because they are not used for power. Galadrial
 uses hers to nurture Lorien; Elrond uses his to create a safe haven at Riven-
 dale; Gandalf uses his to give courage to men.

 Similarly, it is not because the hobbits do not have many machines and weapons 
 that they are hard to corrupt, nor that they are non-corrupt, and so they shun
 technology.  Rather, they are hard to corrupt because they have, in general, an
 easy going nature in which they see no reason to dominate other people or look 
 for power.  They look for simple pleasures and their desires are simple ones.
 Therefore they have no need for large machines, weapons of war.  And, therefore,
 Sauron or Saruman have no direct line of attack for corrupting them.  Saruman 
 frighten them and he can corrupt their land, but he cannot corrupt the hobbits 
 themselves. 

 No, Tolkien doesn't depict technology as a moral wrong.  It is greed and the 
 lust for power that are wrong.  The reason that artifacts show up so often in a
 negative light is because they are so easily turned to negative uses by power-
 hungry people.

 Mike McConnell
 Dept. of Mathematics
 Kent State University