From: mjw@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Alien)
Subject: Re: Tolkien a Racist?
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:16:29 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.135547.14456@lgc.com> mbs@zycor.lgc.com (Matt Shostak) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.214815.20461@leland.Stanford.EDU> jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU (James Alexander Chokey) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec14.145951.26044@lgc.com> mbs@zycor.lgc.com (Matt Shostak) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec12.015308.15707@leland.Stanford.EDU> jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU (James Alexander Chokey) writes:
>>>>
>>>
>>>Neither.
>>>
>>>It's a work of fantasy, Jim.
>>>
>>
>>	
>>	Now what does that explain, Matt?   Are you saying that because this 
>>is a work of "fantasy" that it is somehow impossible to discuss it on 
>>anything but a superficial level--  the level at which we say, "Hey, let's 
>>pretend Middle-earth's real" and quiz each other on Middle-earth trivia?  
>>Or are you saying that such focus on racial distinctions are somehow 
>>explained by the fact that this is a work of "fantasy"?  If so, that seems to 
>>me to be a very naive, unreflective, and untenable position.  
>>
>>	LOTR _is_ a work of fantasy.  In fact, it has probably had more
>>influence in shaping the modern genre of "fantasy" than any other single
>>work.  Many, if not most, of the standard and now-cliched themes of fantasy 
>>were in fact invented by Tolkien.  The forms and tropes which Tolkien 
>>pioneered are now so common that it is easy to lose track of their radical
>>newness.  You can't assume that just because most works of fantasy now
>>have racial hierarchies of good and evil that that is in any way a _necessary_
>>convention that Tolkien had to adhere to.  Tolkien _formed_ these generic
>>(meaning pertaining to the genre) conventions--  they didn't just appear 
>>out of nowhere.  In fact, I don't think it's really possible to talk about the
>>genre of "fantasy" before Tolkien wrote--  it didn't really exist yet.
>
>I'm not saying any of that.  What I'm saying is that to try to impose 
>current PC dogma on a work done 50 years ago is nonsense, especially since
>it's a fantasy, for cryin' out loud.  It's not meant to make a political
>statement.
>
>>
>>	One of the more significant tropes in LOTR (and one that has been
>>adapted by countless cureent writers of fantasy lit) is the division and
>>hierarchization of races into gradations of moral, cultural, and physical 
>>superiority.  I think it's interesting and that Tolkien adopted such a racial 
>>structure--  we can't just assume that it's an inevitable part of any work
>>of fantasy.  I thus think it's worthwhile to reflect upon _why_ that racial 
>>hierarchy is there in LOTR.  To say that it's just "a work of fantasy" 
>>explains nothing; it's a way of evading the question rather than answering it.
>>
>>	Some posters (and people who have contacted me through e-mail) have
>>pointed out that LOTR uses the moral dualism of good/evil and, as is commonly
>>done, combines it with the dualisms of light/darkness and white/black. The
>>use of this combinations of opposition, they have suggested, has an inherent 
>>racist potential.  It is this dualist system rather than Tolkien himself
>>that dictates the racial hierarchy of LOTR, or so the argument goes.
>>	I think this is at least partly true-- but I think there's more to
>>it than that.  I agree that the conflating of the themes good/evil, light/
>>darkness, and white/black does have an inherent _potential_ to be used in
>>a way that we would consider racist.  But, that potential is only a potential.
>>An author can make the choice to downplay it, to ignore it, to emphasize it,
>>to subvert it or some combination thereof.  Tolkien may not have _consciously_
>>chosen to play up the racial dimension of the white/black moral opposition,
>>but it certainly commands a noticeable presence in his work nonetheless. 
>>Deliberately or indeliberately, Tolkien did indeed emphasize the racial
>>potential of the good/evil and black/white pairing.
>>
>>	So the question remains--  why this great concern with race and with
>>the superiority of some races over others in LOTR?
>
>And the answer is: why not?  As you pointed out, Tolkien pioneered this
>genre in many ways.  He had to choose some way to structure things.  Why
>not use archetypes common to his culture?  It enhances the "believability"
>of the story, if you will.  By that I mean that by using familiar forms,
>the reader is more easily taken into the story.
>
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Matthew B. Shostak              Landmark/Zycor
>mbs@zycor.lgc.com               (512) 292-2357
>"So you think you are strong because you can survive the soft cushions.
> Well, we shall see." -- Cardinal Ximinez


Newsgroups: alt.fan.tolkien