![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#1 |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
You think you've read drivel? You haven't read drivel until you've read this
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Oh boy.
For my own entertainment as much as anything, my thoughts and comments: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The statement that Tolkien is responsible goes back to the question of how influential 'The Monsters & the Critics' was. I still don't know. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Tolkien didn't write the films. Quote:
Quote:
Okay: this appears to be broadly correct. Tolkien's argument is that, because Sigelwara means both Ethiopia and Hell, it must mean 'black people living in a hot region', and therefore the unknown elements that make it up must form that meaning. He goes to great lengths to draw a link to 'sigel' as a word for the sun. Quote:
The connection from Ham to Cain is, uh, I'm gonna go with 'unsupported at this time'. I think I've heard it occasionally, but assuming that Tolkien thought it is a huge leap. Assuming that Tolkien even thought about the ways Americans had justified their virulent racism is an even bigger one (slavery had been outlawed in Britain a long time earlier). I... have no idea why the etymology not mentioning slavery is relevant. It also doesn't mention the purported presence of the Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia. (Weren't slaves mostly taken from the west coast of Africa, rather than Ethiopia in the east?) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
There follow a few paragraphs discussing Toni Morrison's essay as a keystone in black discussion of Beowulf. There's no Tolkien so I'm not commenting. ^_^ Then we get this: Quote:
Or at least, that is a valid stance to take in discussing the poem. It seems Ms. Morrison has a different stance, which she develops in her essay, and that's fantastic! But Ms. Kim does not explain that stance: she just asserts that Tolkien was wrong to not take it, and implies that it's the only correct stance to take. --- In conclusion? Painting Tolkien as racist fails here as it has so many other times, and in particular, the pile of assumptions and leaps that have to be taken to get there is extraordinary. But I'm very pleased that Toni Morrison has found a new angle to consider Beowulf under - I just hope she hasn't built her article around the concept that Tolkien Must Be Wrong. hS |
||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 785
![]() ![]() |
The article isn't terribly well-supported, as Huinseron has said, and I think it's couched in rather sensationalist terms, but I don't think the point it makes is entirely unreasonable – or rather, to again agree with Huinseron, whatever Morrison is saying in the essay about which this article was written sounds rather more substantial than this article itself.
I do think the implication that "The Monsters and the Critics" still dominates Beowulf isn't right, though; I haven't studied it for a long time, but I consistently get the impression that most contemporary scholars of Beowulf consider Professor Tolkien's reading to be very idiosyncratic and rather outdated. There have been decades and decades of scholarship since "The Monsters and the Critics" came out. In my university studies it was only read as one among many interpretations, and not one which was afforded much attention in particular.
__________________
"Since the evening of that day we have journeyed from the shadow of Tol Brandir." "On foot?" cried Éomer. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | ||
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
(Just for anyone who isn't conversant with one of the fundamental cultural texts of Western civilization, the Book of Genesis, here's what it says about Cain (after he murdered his brother and was exiled): Quote:
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Gruesome Spectre
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,036
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
It seems pretty obvious that one bent on seeing hidden meanings and colorings in anything will tend to find them, regardless of whether they are actually there.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Lewis had a great term for it: "chronological snobbery." And he was referring to that sort of thing when it had some whiff of actual merit, not counterfactual codswallop like this piece.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Spectre of Decay
|
This piece, though in my opinion mainly written as a lure for clicks, is symptomatic of a disturbing and all-engulfing trend towards tribalistic identity politics that seems to have infected everything. Tolkien and Beowulf have drawn the basilisk's gaze because they are well-known and therefore provide a good soapbox from which to screech this hate-filled nonsense to the world. This is why comics, Hollywood, computer games and other mainstream cultural outlets are targeted for infiltration by these harpies. Their interest in literature and art is not cultural, it is political; and its primary motive is self-aggrandisement.
Hence you will see in this sort of article a lot of unsubstantiated assertions and no small number of half-truths, which when followed to their ultimate sources prove to be based on more of the same. The house is founded not on sand, but on its own roof. The worm eats its tail, or disappears into its own fundament. An endless wheel of circular argumentation. It is like arguing with a Puritan: every disagreement is heresy; all dissent is sin. What, I would like to ask Miss Kim, is wrong with being English or white? Or a man? Would she, I wonder, be surprised to know that recently a group of pranksters took passages from Mein Kampf, substituted 'men' for 'jews' and got it accepted for publication by a supposedly peer-reviewed feminist journal? Well, a peer is only an equal; and some things are equal to zero. So what if Tolkien wouldn't let one of his students engage in lit crit where he was supposed to be translating? Keeping people on topic was part of his job, and if they wouldn't keep to the discipline of learning the sources and their languages they didn't belong in medieval studies in the first place. Perhaps this is what Kim and her ilk are truly enraged about: entry into medieval studies still requires a modicum of learning and a little sanity. The cards won't play. It is not enough to be resentful, hectoring and iconoclastic: one must actually know something that is difficult and laborious to learn. Perhaps they should confine themselves to friendlier, less factually demanding places, like the Flat Earth society or a crystal healing clinic. There is still a big market for Bermuda Triangle literature, which has much the same degree of academic merit.
__________________
Man kenuva métim' andúne? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
(I say this as the person who commented up the original article, so envisage the appropriate shades of grey in my reactions to both this and that.) As someone who is all three, my understanding is that it has nothing to do with there being 'something wrong' with those things; rather, the problem is with the vast number of people - indeed, the vast swathes of society and culture - which implicitly or explicitly insist that those things are a) better, b) more normal, or c) more important. So you have cars being crash-tested using dummies designed to model the average human male, making them actively dangerous for shorter women with different average weight distribution. You have facial recognition technology going into wide release when it has a vastly lower accuracy with non-white faces. You have sports divided into 'football' and 'women's football' (which one do they show down the pub?). You have diseases being dismissed as not significant because the tens of thousands of people they're killing are only in China, or Africa, or India - not here, not in the countries that matter. I could go on, probably for years. These things are an embedded problem in our society, and I like to think we're working on them, improving on them. One way we do that is by deliberately highlighting other perspectives, other people who are neglected by the historic view of 'normal' - and when, for example, a white, male, Anglo-Saxon academic gets in a huff because his students aren't treating white-male-Anglo-Saxonism as the standard baseline for opinions that his culture has taught him it Should Be, it's a step - only a small one, but a step - in the wrong direction. (As I said at the first: the article provides no evidence that Tolkien did anything of the sort. But soooooo many people do.) hS |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 785
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
__________________
"Since the evening of that day we have journeyed from the shadow of Tol Brandir." "On foot?" cried Éomer. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Fun fact: the womens' Olympic records across the track and field events wouldn't quailfy in the top 50- of US high school boys' results. The reason why the huge controversy over letting biological males with lipstick compete as "women."
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
To avoid getting tangled up in my own answers, I hope you won't mind me turning them into a list? It's not any kind of structured response, just an attempt not to Too Many Paragraphs at you. ![]()
And yes, both of these are very minor things in the scheme of things. But they're minor things that lean in exactly the same direction as countless other minor things - malewards. In a community like the Downs, it's okay to have a lean or explicit bias: we all angle Tolkienwards here, and that's fine because people can just not join if they don't like that. But when the community is a country, that option isn't there. hS |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Spectre of Decay
|
![]()
In all fairness, the presence of football is not what I look for in a pub.
I don't see how it's possible to address a highly racially charged article (which in my view is deeply and intentionally racist) without engaging with the politics that seem to lie at the very core of its being. This obsession with identity has largely driven me from the internet, because it insists on reducing every individual person to inborn characteristics over which they have no control; every relationship to an inevitable clash of those identities in abusive power dynamics. I've seen it before, from the opposite direction. I didn't like it then and I don't like it now. Tolkien was very much opposed to literary criticism in his subject and was a champion of the linguistic approach. I'm sure that the lit side of the English School would have welcomed with open arms the modern critical techniques approach, but it was not Tolkien's way. If you want to make it about race you have to earn it. You have to prove that Tolkien didn't want to hear a black man's perspective and that it had nothing to do with his well-documented distaste for contemporary critical theory. Throwing in all those references to Tolkien being South African, which are intended to dredge up memories of Apartheid, is blatantly disingenuous. Tolkien wrote a letter to CRT (Letters #61) in which he explicitly condemns that system, saying "...the treatment of colour nearly always horrifies anyone going out from Britain, & not only in South Africa. Unfort[unately] not many retain that generous sentiment for long." That, however, wouldn't suit the author's purposes. Her story is the racist famous academic holding back the Jamaican-born Rhodes scholar. Because those are the only grounds on which anybody can judge anyone, apparently. I prefer the provable story of a language specialist trying to hold back the ever-encroaching tide of literary criticism in English schools. Odd, since Tolkien champions in his essay the treatment of Beowulf as literature rather than a mine for information. It was a bitter struggle, though, and hard fought. I'm sure that such injustices were committed by both sides of it. Writers of articles like these are professional activists. They make a living by declaring prejudice to exist, and arguing against them is considered proof of prejudice that invalidates opinion. You might as well debate theology with Matthew Hopkins as get involved in their game.
__________________
Man kenuva métim' andúne? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Well said. Kim's paper is nothing more or less than race-based trolling: factually incorrect and intellectually dishonest.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
And there's no question that networks choose to broadcast the highest level of competition available. Which match is Sky or ITV going to air: Liverpool vs Man City, or Colchester vs Sutton Walden? Over here, TV networks broadcast major-league baseball, not minor-league.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Wight
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 118
![]() |
The original audience of Beuowulf would not have associated Grendel or his mother with africans, the sons of Ham, or anything of the kind. At best the author is assuming Tolkien or the English scholars would have imposed some sort of 19th century Racial nous on the text-which...maybe happened? Tolkien wasn't however interested in...what did 19th century race theorists or 17th century writers who would have said things like, "the sons of Ham have been cursed into subjection" thought about the text(also it wasn't rediscovered until the 18th century so).
But then again, this is the sort of "scholarship" that is why academia by and large is a useless waste of time. On that note-the idea of "marginalized" voices is just stupid. It permeates critical theory and modern academic discourse. Essentially it comes down to a Foucaltian idea of the world, those with unjust privilege speak and those who are oppressed can't. Which is not the sort of view the ancient anglo Saxons would have had and is definitely something Tolkien would have found nonsensical. Last edited by Rhun charioteer; 05-23-2020 at 10:16 PM. Reason: Add material |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits
Posts: 2,506
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Historical negationism. I find the whole decades-long rush to revisionism a distasteful aspect of academia. One should discount anyone imparting a modern worldview on people(s) in the past, even in a relatively short 50-100 year time period.
__________________
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Gruesome Spectre
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,036
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
It's doubly disgusting to me when applied to Tolkien. The man was by no means perfect, but his works clearly exhibit a respect and compassion for those of many races and creeds.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Not that Prof. Gibberish linked above has ever read Adorno-- or the Book of Genesis, either. Cain is not Ham, ya maroon!
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 | ||
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits
Posts: 2,506
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Did anyone notice the editor's emendation at the end of the article:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
1) If we really want to be picky, Tolkien was never "South African", because the Union of South Africa wasn't created until 18 years after his birth. He was born in the Orange Free State, which was an independent Boer republic.
2) Given that Tolkien's remit was English Language, it would hardly be surprising that applying "contemporary literary criticism" completely missed the point of his lectures.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#21 |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
The topic of race is one on which only rank dishonesty is allowed, whether in the form of elaborate false narratives, or very delicately-crafted evasions of obvious fact. Both are present in this thread. It's a shame, really, to see the most honest people automatically put on the defensive because the deck is stacked and they don't even realize it. Thomas Dalrymple has a really wonderful quote about the tyrannical utility of forcing everyone to lie all the time (it's well-enough known that I'm not going to provide it verbatim). He was talking about communist tactics, and Adorno and the whole academic milieu he represents are downstream of the Bolsheviks. It's almost like Christ was speaking to these exact people when he said "you are of your father the devil...for he is a liar and the father thereof."
Oh well, argument is obsolete now. One of my other favorite quotes is: "Inigo? I hope we win." |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits
Posts: 2,506
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
__________________
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
Gruesome Spectre
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,036
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Glad I'm not the only one trying to figure that out.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Getting somewhat tangential, but still on the Tolkien/racism/Bible theme... I mentioned earlier the Medieval split of the world into the descendants of Japheth (Europe), Ham (Egypt & Africa), & Shem (Semitic & Asia). It's probably a coincidence, but Tolkien had a strong tendency to split his fictional races into three. He then, with incredibly consistency, called out one group as pale, and another as not:
(The Teleri and Stoors go somewhat undescribed, while the relation of the Haladin to the other Edain was in a bit of flux.) That's a large enough sample that we can actually compare how Tolkien treats them, and again he shows remarkable consistency. The pale Vanyar, Fallohides, and Hadorians are highlighted as the noblest/holiest (the Vanyar) part of their race (note that the Hadorians lived alongside the High King, while the Beorians and Haladin hid in the woods); if the idea that 'Broadbeam and Firebeard, Nogrod and Belegost' means that the Firebeards lived in Belegost, they're also far and away the nicest Dwarven house. But... they're also the least interesting, to Tolkien as well as us. The Vanyar vanish from the stories very quickly. The Hadorians we pay most attention to are half-Beorian (and in Turin's case has Beorian colouring; not sure on Tuor). Tolkien himself described Sam - the only non-Fallohide in the Fellowship - as the 'chief hero'. And it's the Longbeards, not the Firebeards, who gave us Thorin and company. In fact, in Beleriand, it's specifically the houses called out as darker - Beorians and the Noldor - who get all the attention, and Sam the Harfoot falls into the same category. What does all this mean for Tolkien and racism? It certainly shows he thought about it more than I'd assumed, to the point that he had a consistent position. Is the fact that the Goodest Good Guys were the palest ones indicative of bias? Arguably yes - but if so, it's one Tolkien seems to have been using deliberately. Notably, he neither dug in to defend it by making his white characters heroic (Frodo et al aside), nor tried to blunt it by adding a Token Brown Hero. Instead, he shoved his white nobles off to the side and let the more interesting 'swarthy' Beorians and Noldor become the heroes. hS |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
Gruesome Spectre
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,036
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Hador showed a remarkable lack of wisdom when, upon being released by Morgoth, he went to the area of Gondolin knowing he was being watched. King Helm of Rohan fanned the flames of war with the dark-haired Dunlendings by first insulting, then murdering Freca, one of their lords. All Freca did was ask if his son could marry Helm's daughter. That led to dark times for Rohan, with Freca's son eventually capturing Edoras itself.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 | ||
Laconic Loreman
|
Quote:
In an essay, Exploring Theme and Vision in JRR Tolkien's Middle-earth, by Rico Marcel Abrahamsen. A part of the essay discusses Heroism, and "Ofermod as Tragic Motif" Quote:
Bold/high spirit = positive Foolhardy/excessive = negative And I think most of Tolkien's heroes, whether gold-hair and fair skinned or swarthier and darker hair, fall because of ofermod. We see it in the decisions that Inzil points out and many others (I think of Oropher's foolish charge during the Last Alliance which got his people slaughtered). I'm not sure if this says anything about Tolkien's racial biases or not, I usually don't engage in these topics, because nothing has stood out as being racist intent. I think were the critics looking for racism in The Lord of the Rings stumble is they think the theme is about good vs. evil. "All these fair-skinned westerners are good guys" the "black-robed Ringwraiths, swarthy Easterlings are bad guys" must mean Tolkien's racist. The central theme has always been, to me, Hope vs. Despair. The heroes who hold on to hope, even if it's just a fool's hope. And the villains (despair) who efforts to destroy hope (Saruman and Denethor come to mind as 2 who fall to despair). But also reminded of Galadriel's words about "fighting the long defeat."
__________________
Fenris Penguin
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
In other words, coloration akin to the "black Irish" of the real world, not a Mediterranean type.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 47
![]() |
The thing to remember is that in the pre-1960s, no one thought they had a capacity or responsibility to influence society to be less racist. Tolkien has his famous philo-semitic letter to show that he wasn't antisemitic, and if he could rise above that most endemic of European racisms, it's likely his attitude toward people of color was also liberal for his time.
But even if he condemned racism, he would have thought, along with all whites (I can't vouch for non-whites) that there was nothing he could do to change others' attitudes. There was no notion of symbolism in the arts influencing people's attitudes one way of the other. Realism, of course, was influential. Uncle Tom's Cabin could improve things. Pygmalion could improve things between the classes. Robinson Crusoe was thought to be enlightened. I suppose there were racist stories that haven't stood the test of time that were thought to be detrimental. But if you didn't want to be directly polemical, your words were understood to be inert socially and politically. So White and Black as the most ancient of symbols for Good and Evil was "known" to have no implications whatsoever for real world whites and blacks. Coming from a mindset where casting white and black that way had no chance of reinforcing racism in others allowed non-racists like Tolkien to use that trope with no conflict of conscience. Real swarthy people were as good or bad as his liberal mind chose to think them, and swarthy Haradrim were as good or evil as his creative imagination chose to fashion them. And that's it. No crossover. Crossover, lit-crit thinking has taught people to find influences in every symbol, which may have made us more susceptible to those symbols. And maybe we were always susceptible to them. But using them, in Tolkien's era, was only a sign of classical imagery, not racist ideology. As an aside, I suspect that Tolkien did not envision many people of color reading his legendarium. The UK was less diverse in his time, the US didn't interest him much, English speakers elsewhere were white or English was their second language. And his story was meant to be a mythology for England, after all. He probably just didn't think about how dark-skinned readers might feel reading about the white good guys vs the swarthy bad guys. If the whites could enjoy the story without being made more racist, then why not go with the classic white/black dichotomy? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 47
![]() |
The thing to remember is that in the pre-1960s, no one thought they had a capacity or responsibility to influence society to be less racist. Tolkien has his famous philo-semitic letter to show that he wasn't antisemitic, and if he could rise above that most endemic of European racisms, it's likely his attitude toward people of color was also liberal for his time.
But even if he condemned racism, he would have thought, along with all whites (I can't vouch for non-whites) that there was nothing he could do to change others' attitudes. There was no notion of symbolism in the arts influencing people's attitudes one way of the other. Realism, of course, was influential. Uncle Tom's Cabin could improve things. Pygmalion could improve things between the classes. Robinson Crusoe was thought to be enlightened. I suppose there were racist stories that haven't stood the test of time that were thought to be detrimental. But if you didn't want to be directly polemical, your words were understood to be inert socially and politically. So White and Black as the most ancient of symbols for Good and Evil was "known" to have no implications whatsoever for real world whites and blacks. Coming from a mindset where casting white and black that way had no chance of reinforcing racism in others allowed non-racists like Tolkien to use that trope with no conflict of conscience. Real swarthy people were as good or bad as his liberal mind chose to think them, and swarthy Haradrim were as good or evil as his creative imagination chose to fashion them. And that's it. No crossover. Crossover, lit-crit thinking has taught people to find influences in every symbol, which may have made us more susceptible to those symbols. And maybe we were always susceptible to them. But using them, in Tolkien's era, was only a sign of classical imagery, not racist ideology. As an aside, I suspect that Tolkien did not envision many people of color reading his legendarium. The UK was less diverse in his time, the US didn't interest him much, English speakers elsewhere were white or English was their second language. And his story was meant to be a mythology for England, after all. He probably just didn't think about how dark-skinned readers might feel reading about the white good guys vs the swarthy bad guys. If the whites could enjoy the story without being made more racist, then why not go with the classic white/black dichotomy? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 47
![]() |
Sorry guys, I couldn't figure out how to edit the post to put in lines between paragraphs, so I reposted. I won't do that again.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 | |
Laconic Loreman
|
Quote:
When you click Edit there will also be an option to delete the post. Welcome to the Forum! Enjoy death with the rest of us :-)
__________________
Fenris Penguin
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
Blossom of Dwimordene
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,361
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I very much agree with Mindil (and welcome to the Downs!). The Haradrim and Easterlings are not bad or evil or immoral, they are unknown people who by chance of fortune not known to us ended up fighting on the side of Sauron. This is in contrast to the Black Numenorians who settled in those lands, who clearly knew better and yet chose corruption over kindness. So if Tolkien were to be condemning a real world phenomenon, it would be the colonization of unknown cultures and countries, not the races themselves. But that is all unintentional extrapolation; Tolkien never had in mind to convince anyone for or against some racial view or colonization debate, his purpose was entirely elsewhere.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 | ||||
Overshadowed Eagle
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: The north-west of the Old World, east of the Sea
Posts: 3,869
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() But yes, that does swing the needle back towards 'light-skinned elves', though as with seemingly everything else, Tolkien's view seems to have shifted from time to time. That's the fun of Middle-earth - you can find texts to support anything you want. ![]() hS |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
Wight of the Old Forest
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,329
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The thing is, whether any given group of people in Tolkien's work is described as pale or swarthy or what-have-you-got, ascribing certain qualities or character traits to somebody based on their hair and skin colour is a racist mode of thinking either way, positive or negative; and explaining that away by saying that e.g. the Vanyar just happened by coincidence to be both the most fair-skinned and the most holy/noble of the Elven kindreds is IMHO opinion just a cop-out. He chose to write it that way, nobody forced him to.
When Sam is described as brownish-skinned (and I remember, off the top of my head, a passage about the light of Galadriel's phial in his brown hobbit-hand, somewhere in the Cirith Ungol chapters, that I can't be bothered to look up right now), I read that as the natural tan of the gardener used to working outside all day, as opposed to the pale, posh Bagginses sitting in their studies poring over their books and letters. Nothing to do with race. But whenever people of clearly non-European racial phenotype show up in Tolkien, be it Hunnic Easterlings or Moorish Haradrim, they're presented as faceless mooks of the Enemy, little better than Orcs. There is, of course, Sam's one moment in Ithilien, a glimpse of the enemy as a human being who perhaps would rather not have fought in this war if he had a choice, which I suspect may be an echo of Tolkien's WWI experience, reflections that may have occurred to him at the sight of a dead Boche; but before and after that, the Haradrim exist only to be slaughtered by our heroes in a just war. Of course this is rationalised in the legendarium by presenting those peoples, by the sheer bad luck of their geographical position, as far removed from the enlightening influence of the Valar, Eldar and Númenóreans, and thus long steeped in the corrupting influence of Morgoth and Sauron, to the extent of worshipping them as God-Kings; whence the need to send the Ithryn Luin to them as missionaries. I find it hard not to see a colonialist discourse at work here. Now I think mindil has it right that Tolkien, like most white people of his time, thought nothing of these matters and saw no evil in writing what he wrote (which I suppose you could say is part of the problem). But we don't read LotR in the 1950s, we read it today, and I think if we wilfully blind ourselves to the parts of it which might be problematic in this respect we become part of the problem. (Note that this is no longer about Beowulf and Tolkien's interpretation thereof, which I'm in no way qualified to comment on, unlike other posters on this thread like WCH and Squatter. But I'd like to note that I found the knee-jerk hostility at the suggestion that there might be anything the matter about Tolkien and race earlier in this thread rather disturbing. Also, Adorno rocks. Pity he wasn't more relaxed about movies and jazz, but he totally rocks, and let nobody tell you otherwise.)
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#35 | ||
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 | |
Wight of the Old Forest
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Unattended on the railway station, in the litter at the dancehall
Posts: 3,329
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Good point. I suppose you could say they're portrayed as savages, but at least they're OUR savages.
![]() See, I'm not trying to make a case to condemn Tolkien as a racist. I am suggesting that elements of racism are present in Tolkien's work, as are elements of non-racism, and we need to discuss both and not pretend that either isn't there. Quote:
![]()
__________________
Und aus dem Erebos kamen viele seelen herauf der abgeschiedenen toten.- Homer, Odyssey, Canto XI |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,316
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#38 |
Pilgrim Soul
Join Date: May 2004
Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle...
Posts: 9,455
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
It is the emus that I had trouble with. Liable to get up close and very personal.was happily feeding adorable wallabies when an intrusive beak made me squeak.
![]()
__________________
“But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.”
Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#39 | |
Blossom of Dwimordene
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The realm of forgotten words
Posts: 10,361
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
With regards to Vanyar, I disagree based on the fact that no Elf that I can think of was ever described as swarthy, and "dark" Elves just had dark hair/personalities rather than skin. All Elves have fair skin, and having fairer skin than most may be more a consequence of aesthetic and personal taste. Paleness was attractive because it indicated non-working status, as much as a tan is attractive because it indicates good health through outdoor activity, and every person has their own preference for paleness or tan that they prefer aesthetically or associate with certain archetypes. That's not on a level of race by skin colour. Besides, Tolkien might have agreed with the Vanyar with his head but his heart was clearly with the Noldor. Therefore I don't think that being super pale vs simply pale is an indicator of racial preference per se. The point I do concede is the squint eyed Isengarders / Ruffians, who do seem to be evil by definition and for whom appearance seems to be synonymous with character. It's not clear to me whether they are of one race (related to Dunlendings? Corrupted by Saruman? Bred by Saruman? Interbred with orcs?) or various scoundrels who fell on the same path from different starting points and flocked to Saruman when the smell of profit was in the air. But regardless, that is a good point. And the other point I would add is the remarkable coincidence of pale people being able to put aside their differences and join forces, while the swarthy people of LOTR inevitably end up as the enemy of these forces. Now this I do not see as a reflection of racial influence in Harad, but rather in Dunland, which sort of sticks out amid fair-coloured people around it. Why are the local enemies swarthy too? Though admittedly Rohirrim are migrants from the North and Gondorians are ultimately descendants of Hador and Beor, so who knows what the "natural" melanin levels were on Dunlending lattitudes - but that would be rationalizing a decision that most likely did not involve any such considerations. Within the scope of the legendarium, it's natural that such endlessly warring nations as the Dunlendings and Rohirrim have hostile feelings towards each other and pick out whatever features stand out most to them (the Eorlings are called Strawheads too, they get their share of racial stereotyping and exaggeration of physical differences). There needed to be differences to highlight between the two peoples, and anyone except the Vanyar ( ![]() That is not to say that all enemies were dark skinned (I have tried and failed to imagine a dark skinned Variag, for instance). Moreover, there are enough shady characters among the "good guys". In trying to rebuttle my own point, I also came up with Bor the swarthy Easterling who countered the actions of Ulfang the other swarthy Easterling, so at least in The Sil the split can be called even. I second that I am not one to comment on Beowulf, but in that case the issue of racism falls short on the nature of the material. A case might be made for the legendarium on the grounds of being all in the hands and imagination of the writer. A translation, however, is by definition not in the authors hands. So I cannot comment on any specifics, not beong familiar with the material in the slightest, but would caution against mistaking Anglo-Saxon legends for Tolkien's beliefs. I think the reason many of us find ourselves in a knee jerk defensive reaction when loud accusations are thrown against Tolkien is that they are thrown so often with the intent to look clever but without the proper thought behind them. You find yourself in a defensive position against an unreasonable argument so often that you anticipate them. There are the legit question once but seriously if you pay attention you won't need to ask. Like, have you ever felt the urge to take the next person to think they outsmarted the Professor by suggesting the Eagles fly into Mordor and lock them up in Orthanc until they read all the core legendarium books thoroughly? Or the downright no idea what theu are talking about - ever wanted to bash the people who comment "LOTR is nice but a rip off from Harry Potter" on the head with the full trilogy in one volume? Not to mention the other popular exclamations, "Tolkien was a misogynist" and "Frodo and Sam are gay". Furthermore, in this thread specifically, the talk started with discussing a particular article, which opens with "J.R.R. Tolkien’s seminal scholarship on*Beowulf centers a white male gaze.*" - as opposed to what, the other Beowulf who was a Black Asian woman who just magically appeared among the Saxons? I think you might be judging this thread a little too harshly, given this context. I do not believe Tolkien himself was racist, in the sense that all I know about him would suggest that his respect for a person would not diminish if it was a non-Caucasian person. Does his writing reflect a tiny portion of the racism norm of his time? That is a whole different question, and for me personally, elicits a very different reaction. Which is, I suppose, why I am actually responding to your post and putting thought into it at very late hours. I apologize for the initial ramble, which I realize is not very well formulated. I also realize that I am biased by not sharing JRRT's essential moral of The Sil, that ultimately the cure must be divine. I slightly resent the worshipful status the Eldar have among the Edain, especially the House of Hador. I am instead sympathetic towards the Haladin and Thingol, who choose to live by their own decisions. I feel that if I was one of the Men meeting the Eldar, yes I would be fascinated by their advanced skill but I would resist adopting it as my ideal; the better skill is that which I can master and rely on. They may know a lot, but I have my own head to make decisions and judge my beliefs of the world. Yes, the Valar may be upholding the light in this world and may be the ultimate deliverance, but in the abscence of their influence on my world I won't count on them for anything and will count on myself to get things done. Unlike LOTR, which is a lot more subtle in philosophy, the blind... conversion, almost - of the Edain clashes with basic critical thinking. This makes me more akin to the non-Edain and non-Numenorians, whom I do not fault for not being infatuated with the Eldar, which probably skews my view in their favour in terms of portrayal. So as a consequence of a more religious disagreement, my view of the LOTR enemy races shifted in the last few years from evil by definition to cultural unknowns who deserve respect for certain things. With that said, I do not have much sleep left, and shall respectfully retire.
__________________
You passed from under darkened dome, you enter now the secret land. - Take me to Finrod's fabled home!... ~ Finrod: The Rock Opera |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#40 | |
Wight
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 118
![]() |
Quote:
Its a very Christian discourse. Gondor doesn't go to Rhun spreading the light Valarian civilization to the swarthy savages. The numenorians are pale white ubermensch and engender the animosity of these peoples due to their cruelty and slaving. They aren't heroes of virtue bringing reason and goodness to the savages. Tolkien was very much an anti imperialist. The idea of those "benighted in darkness" who are separate from the truth has arguably existed since...35 AD. Alongside Fanon, Foucalt, and the rest of those disgusting Academic deconstructionists. Their ideas are responsible for a lot of the rot and degeneracy in the world today. Last edited by Rhun charioteer; 06-03-2020 at 01:00 AM. Reason: Add material |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |