From: mjw@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Alien)
Subject: Re: Tolkien a racist?
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:33:01 GMT

In article <BzByL9.IF4@news.iastate.edu> mjkugel@iastate.edu (Michael J Kugel) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.205334.19776@leland.Stanford.EDU> jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU (James Alexander Chokey) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec15.135547.14456@lgc.com> mbs@zycor.lgc.com (Matt Shostak) writes:
>>
>>>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.
>>
>>	But it _does_ make a political statement--  in fact, it makes many! .
>>Just because a work falls in into the category of "fantasy" doesn't mean that 
>>it has no ideological underpinnings.  In the case of LOTR, I think these 
>>underpinnings embed themselves quite deeply and noticeably into the narrative.
>>LotR, like all great works of literature, is a marvelous story--  but I don't
>>see how we could somehow pretend that, unlike other works of literature, the
>>story is not, at least in part, shaped by and imbued with political concerns.
>>I'm not saying that LOTR is all politics and ideology or that that's the only
>>level on which the work operates--  but it certainly seems to be an interesting
>>one to think about, judging from the traffic that this thread has generated.
>>
>>	BTW, I haven't seen anybody on this newsgroup trying to "impose PC 
>>dogma" on LOTR or on Tolkien's other works.  This thread has consisted, almost
>>solely of discussion of the way races are represented in LOTR and some 
>>speculation on the reasons for that system of racial representations--  I've
>>seen no condemnations of Tolkien or his works, no demands that we bring up
>>our children on works that are more "ideologically pure, no insistences that 
>>we focus only on questions of race, gender, class, etc., when talking about 
>>Tolkien. The fact of the matter is that issues of race _are_ an integral part
>>of LOTR, and that makes them worth discussing.  Just because people are 
>>talking about race doesn't mean they are trying to impose a PC dogma on the 
>>world.  Don't be so quick to grind that axe.
>>
>
>But the general drift of this thread has alot of similarities with the
>arguments of PoliCor-types---namely an obsession with race that comes
>at the exclusion of everything else (with the possible exception of
>gender and sexual orientation---hey, there's a thought. Anyone wish to
>start 'Was Tolkien a homophobe' or 'Was Tolkien a speciesist' or 'Did
>JRRT practice lookism' threads?).  
>
>Typically, at least at universities, the following progression of events
>seem to take place:
>
>1. Someone will accuse the author (must be a white european male,
>preferably dead) of being a racist.
>
>2. Regardless how dubious the evidence is, the author will be judged
>guilty. 
>
>3. His works will be regarded as crypto-racist propaganda, and will be
>scorned, dismissed, and if appropriate, removed from the curriculum.
>
>A few years ago, we, at Iowa State, had a real good look at this process
>in action.  Certain groups made charges that a video game in the
>student union was racist.  Apparently, the hero was blond and the
>villains were of all colors (though mostly green).  The game was
>removed.
>
>What bothers me, and apparently a few other people as well, is how this
>thread seems to be paralleling the typical PC debate.  The two bits of
>evidence that people seem to be putting forward are 1). the races of
>middle earth seem to occupy a hierarchy and that this, consciously or
>unconsciously is symbolic of Tolkien's own view of race, and 2). the
>darker complexion of the men who served under Sauron (wasn't the mouth
>of Sauron very pale?).
>
>I think it's obvious the JRRT's use of the word 'race' corresponds more
>with our use of 'species' then our own use of the word 'race'.  Any
>relationship between these races, I believe, has no connection with our
>own pigmentation-related concerns.  I, therefore, deny the whole premise
>of this first argument, but let's play devil's advocate.  Is there a
>racial hierarchy?  I think Tolkien goes out of his way to indicate that
>each 'race' has is own strengths and weaknesses.  When bigotry is
>presented, as it is on occasion between man and elf and dwarf and elf
>(and even the hobbits of the shire and the hobbits of bree), it is shown
>in an unfavorable light.  Certainly the elves have the most advanced
>culture but this would primarily be due to their immortality, the fact
>that they awoke first, and that some of their members lived with the
>valar.
>
>The interbreeding of men and orcs presented as a black evil must be
>viewed in this light(oops, call the PC police).  I've read that some
>people believe that it might be possible to interbreed a human being and
>an ape.  I would regard such an act as a black evil, a great evil, and
>just plain evil.  Am I a racist?  Granted men and elves do interbreed,
>but remember that they, along with the dwarves are children of Illuvatar
>(though it must be admitted that dwarves are only 'adopted').
>
>In regards to the swarthy southerners: 
>Speaking as someone who might be described as swarthy, I see no
>connection between the way Tolkien presents these people and racism.  At
>no point are they considered inferior or *inherently* evil.  They were
>corrupted by Sauron---probably more to bad geographic luck then anything
>else---as were the people of Numenor (who were fair-skinned).
>
>
>
>Mike.