The "evil" animals of ME

[Birdland]

One thing that always bothered me about Tolkien's mythology was how the characters seem to be constantly under attack by evil wildlife, mostly under the control of Sauron.

You have the wargs (wolves) of course, spying birds, attacking bats in The Hobbit, man-eating spiders, black squirrels, (evil squirrels?!), the cats of Queen Beruthiel. And I'm sure there are others that I've forgotten.

The only one he seems to have overlooked is serpents, and I'm sure they're covered someplace in the Silmarillion.

Now I'm not talking about mythological creatures, like the Nazgul's steeds, or dragons, but just your everyday fauna. They're all evil!

The only wild creatures I can think of that were on the "good" side are the Eagles. All other creatures were domesticated, like horses and dogs. Then there is the fox mentioned in The Shire, who is basically clueless as to what's going on.

These days most of use have a more benevolent view of wildlife. Wolves have an admirable social structure. Bats and spiders are beneficial. Crows and ravens are wise, etc.

Was Tolkien's view just part of the old "man vs. nature" beliefs of the time? Did he not "like" or observe wildlife? Was he just playing on ancient fears? Why does it seem that everything "natural" in Middle Earth is portrayed as the enemy?

[zifnab]

Interesting idea, Birdland.

I don't totally agree with you on it though, I don't believe all animals were evil or evil-influenced expect the Eagles. I think 3 important species of animals(Good or Evil) you left out were:

1.Bears - who were pretty much under the control of Beorn and the Beornings.

2.Oliphaunts - Which we know were used for war, and were fierce animals.

3.Swans - The Teleri revered them, and Tuor loved them.

It is also said that deer followed Nessa wherever she would go. I also never heard of a company being attack by a pack of ferocious coneys. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] It would also seem that Radagast was off his rocker to have love for all beasts and animals. Wouldn't they turn on him? Animals are animals be they domastic or not, they are just used to men and elves, and understand them a bit better. Huan was a valuable part in the "Search for the Simarils". It seemed also that hunters would "ask or listen to the animals" for hints as to wear the hunty would be. My point is that there are propably hundreds of different species of animals that are never mentioned in Tolkiens works as being good or helping out.

[VanimaEdhel]

I believe that it is just the evil animals that gave more problems...I mean it would be boring to say "and then a little sparrow flew over" every 3 sentences. There WERE other creatures that were nice; they, like most creatures, were probably frightened by the travellers and hid. Only the evil creatures went to fight, and the few BRAVE nice animals fought for the company. I mean, most deer aren't going around saying "Oh! A bunch of strangers! Even though I do not know whether they are good or want to eat me, I will go say 'hi' anyway!" That is my opinion anyway!

[Birdland]

Zifnab, I considered Beorn, but put him more in the supernatural catagory. He and his kind are more like pookas or shape shifters than actual bears.

The Mûmakil or Oliphaunts; I felt sorry for them more than anything, another species being used and corrupted by the Dark Lord. Perhaps not so much ferocious as big and terrified. Still a bad combination, granted. But when you think of the intelligence and beauty of the elephant, though, the treatment of them in Tolkien's tale seems horrific to me.

Huan was a hound, a domestic animal. So he doesn't really count. I'm thinking more about the roles of the wild creatures.

I don't know the tale of Tuor and the swans, or even if there was a tale.

On the other hand...I did forget the role of the thrush and Roäc the Raven, who both played very important parts in The Hobbit, and had a bond with the Men and Dwarves in the story.

This is lacking in LOTR. Plenty of evil, corrupted creatures. No helpful, friendly creatures, except the Eagles. That bond seems to have disappeared, except for the case of Radagast, who is treated like a fool. You'd think that at least the Elves would have had good will of the animals and birds of Middle Earth.

Ah well, maybe since I was raised on the works of the great naturalist writers like Ernest Thompson Seton and Felix Salten, I feel the loss more than others. But I still think wildlife got a bum rap in LOTR.

[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: Birdland ]

[Watcher in the Water]

If I may add my two cents worth... I dont think tolkien was from the school of "man vs nature" as he appeared to have an anti-technology idealism. I cant remember where I studied it all but he was very anti-machine etc. He was saddened at the destruction caused to his native Britain as the Industrialation of western society pushed on. From that I take the viewpoint that he was very fond of the natural environment and so would not have viewed animals with disdain. Also i agree that 'evil' animals would of course enter the story to a greater extent as they are far more pivotal in that regard. Additionally though I dont know that all of the 'evil' animals mentioned were themselves 'evil' by nature. For example the spying birds were used to that end and may not themselves have been malevolent. I think the same probably holds true for the Oliphants and so forth.

I'm Kent Brockman and this has been my 2 cents [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Bruce MacCulloch]

Let's not forget the thrush and the ravens at Erebor. They were certinly not evil - indeed, quite the opposite.

I agree, there are lots of birds that have helped out! In both LOTR & The Hobbit.

I think that it may be that rather than make LOTR a happy and chirpy read he chose to illustrate the many dangers that surounded the "nine walkers", so as to make it feel more moody.

[img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[zifnab]

The swan part in “Of Tour and his coming to Gondolin”, isnt very important but it seems to me that Tuor, was drawn to the Sea, and tallied to long on the shores watching the waves. The swans seem to come at a good time before winter to tempt Tuor away from the shores of the mighty sea.

“And one day, as Tuor sat upon the shore, he heard the rush and whine of great wings, and he looked up and saw seven white swans flying in a swift wedge southward. But as they came above him they wheeled and flew suddenly down, and alighted with a great plash and churning of water.
Now Tuor loved swans, which he knew on the grey pools of Mithrim; and the swan moreover had been the token of Annael and his foster-folk. He rose therefore to greet the birds, and called to them, marveling to behold that they were greater and prouder than any of the kind that he had seen before; but they beat their wings and uttered harsh cries, as if they were wroth with him and would drive him from the shore. Then with a great noise they rose again from the water and flew above his head, so that the rush of their wings blew upon him as a whistling wind; and wheeling in a wide circle they ascended into the high air and went away south.
Then Tuor cried aloud: “Here now comes another sign that I have tarried too long!”


Yes, I see what you mean buy a shape-shifter is a tad bit different then a normal animal. But Beorn’s house comes to mind too, If I remember correctly, his house servants were all animals. They must have truly loved him to help out so much. Maybe he protected them from evil? But I don’t think they were slaves, or were terrified of him.

Oliphants and Elephants I believe are two separate species. The Oliphant, being the larger more “war-like” one of the two. Elephants are mentioned twice in the Hobbit:

“….except the ordinary everyday sort which helps them to disappear quietly and quickly when large stupid folk like you and me come blundering along, making a noise like elephants which they can hear a mile off.”

"Great Elephants!" said Gandalf, "you are not at all yourself this morning-you have never dusted the mantel- piece!"

Here is a nice quote from the Silm, it fits with my earlier thought about Men and Elves being able to communicate with animals. I believe at one time, Beren knew the voice of the animals.

Celegorm went rather to the house of Oromë, and there he got great knowledge of birds and beasts, and all their tongues he knew. For all living things that are or have been in the Kingdom of Arda, save only the fell and evil creatures of Melkor, lived then in the land of Aman; and there also were many other creatures that have not been seen upon Middle-earth, and perhaps never now shall be, since the fashion of the world was changed.

I see what you mean by, “Lack of good animals”, in LOTR. It does appear to have less animals helping then hurting. But I think it say’s, “The characters must go on, with or without help”. The struggle is deep, hard and intense. I think the lack of animals helping out, does not hinder the LOTR, as it is still a fantastic novel.

I think a good example of one of Tolkien’s work that is animal influenced is “The adventures of Tom Bombadil”. They are mostly just silly short stories, poems. But “Tom goes Boating”, is a great one about Tom and the animals. It really is a great read, even though it doesn’t have much to do with M-E or LOTR.

Just a small part of “Tom goes Boating”.

Rings swirled round his boat, he saw the bubbles quiver.
Tom slapped his oar, smack! at a shadow in the river.
'Hoosh! Tom Bombadil! 'Tis long since last I met you.
Turned water-boatman, eh? What if I upset you?'

'What? Why, Whisker-lad, I'd ride you down the river.
My fingers on your back would set your hide a-shiver.'
'Pish, Tom Bombadil! I'll go and tell my mother;
"Call all our kin to come, father, sister, brother!
Tom's gone mad as a coot with wooden legs: he's paddling
down Withywindle stream, an old tub a-straddling!"'

'I'll give your otter-fell to Barrow-wights. They'll taw you!
Then smother you in gold-rings! Your mother if she saw you,
she'd never know her son, unless 'twas by a whisker.
Nay, don't tease old Tom, until you be far brisker!'

'Whoosh! said otter-lad, river-water spraying
over Tom's hat and all; set the boat a-swaying,
dived down under it, and by the bank lay peering,
till Tom's merry song faded out of hearing.


[img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

[ March 13, 2002: Message edited by: zifnab ]

[Birdland]

Zifnab, thank you for all those wonderful quotes! (I hope you have a scanner, and our not typing those all out.)

Seems like the swans did not play an unimportant role, since they were obviously sent to remind Tuor...of what? Where was Tuor suppose to be going? (I got to find a used copy of the Silm, but they seem to be flying off the shelves these days. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] )

As for the rest of you: get off the Disney kick! Animals have played a major role in the mythology of all of earth's cultures, until modern man reduced their role to "kiddie books".

I'm glad to learn that Tolkien did acknowledge this in his other writings. A Middle Earth without an Animal Spirit would be a souless world.

[Gorin Icearms]

man-eating spiders, black squirrels, (evil squirrels?!)

Spiders.

I doubt they're "man" eating in the sense that they only eat people (like lions who have tasted human flesh). I'm sure the spiders would've eaten anything they could get their claws on. Elves, horses, humans, dwarves, hobbits, you name it.

Black squirrels

They're just squirrels, they're not evil. Like the fish in Gollum's pond, they're victims of their environment. Being black is just a survival tactic, like camoflauge. Black cats always live longer because they're a solid, dark color. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

*disappointed* None of you remembered the fox that saw Frodo and co on their way to Buckland! The fox that sniffed them and wondered at the sight of 4 hobbits sleeping outside. *shakes head* Really, I thought you had better memories than that! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Birdland]

I mentioned him, but he's kinda neutral. Tolkien just threw him in for "local color".

Also before he had made up his mind if he was writing a children's book or not. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Child of the 7th Age]

The ineresting thing is that Tolkien seems to have had much deeper and sweeter feelings about the world of plants and trees than about animals. Everywhere you turn in LOTR, there are beautiful descriptions and references to trees, flowers, and herbs that were beautiful or beneficial. The list is endless--who can forget the Ents, the golden mallorn trees, or the yellow blooms of elanor? And what about athelas? We know Tolkien loved to garden himself. Maybe he just had more personal experience with growing things than with animals so they naturally appear more frequently in his writings. In my mind, there are two fantasy writers who show their love of the natural world. For the world of green things, it's Tolkien. For the world of animals, it's T.H. White. White's descriptions of how Arthur learned from the fish and geese and badgers both as a child and as a king looking back on his life are amazing to me. So Tolkien doesn't get an A+ with animals, but I sure can't think of another author who showed such sensitivity to the natural world of plants and trees. sharon [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Gorwingel]

I was wondering when someone was going to talk about the fox, but I guess that he really has no part because he was not really part of the story.

The evil animals are the only ones that are really talked about so they give a bad name to all the other animals that were in the story (except for the Eagles)