Was Melkor Bipolar?

[Ren the Unclean]

I have always found the evil characters interesting. I like to analyze their character traits and motives.

I have always thought of Melkor as a Charismatic Sociopath. He was charming and manipulative, and almost totally lacking in empathy.

But there was more to him than that. He was impulsive, exuberant, reckless, irritable, destructive, self-confident to the point of grandiosity, and more interested in sex than most Ainur.

I recently started reading Andy Behrman’s memoir about his struggle with bipolar disorder. “Manic Depression is about … madness, moments of absolute delusion, bliss, and irrational choices made in order to heighten pleasure and excitement and to ensure a sense of control. … Most days I need to be as manic as possible to come as close as I can to destruction” And I thought, “He’s acting just like Melkor!”

A recent news article on Charlie Sheen listed some characteristic bipolar symptoms including “grandiosity (or is it delusions of grandeur?), exhilaration, hyper-energy, inappropriate and reckless behaviors, impulsiveness”. All of which sound very like Melkor.

I do realize that Melkor is a fictional character penned before Manic-Depressive/Bipolar disorder was recognized. However, so was Mr. Toad from “The Wind in the Willows”, and he definitely had the disorder. (Badger: “Toad may be brought back at any moment – on a stretcher, or between two policemen.”)

So what do you think? Bipolar Disorder doesn’t justify Melkor’s behavior, but does it help to explain it?

[Nerwen]

I'm sorry, Ren, but I don't understand how it can be valid to diagnose a fictional character with anything. At most you can say something like, "he had the symptoms of X" or "might have been diagnosed with Y if he'd been a real person".

This–

Originally Posted by Ren

I do realize that Melkor is a fictional character penned before Manic-Depressive/Bipolar disorder was recognized. However, so was Mr. Toad from “The Wind in the Willows”, and he definitely had the disorder.

–is, I'm afraid, simply begging the question.

[Nerwen]

Besides, Ren, surely you've noticed that every time some disease or other gets a somewhat positive media coverage, and a crop of "celebrity victims" many people are– for a little while– convinced they see it in themselves, their family members, historical figures, characters in Shakespeare... etc., etc. In fact, there's probably about fifty other things you could "diagnose" Melkor with just as easily.

Was he in fact, crazy? Well, I certainly wouldn't call him a paragon of mental balance, would you? But I think it's just more valid to leave it at at "generally, amorphously crazy" rather than trying to pin a medical diagnosis on a fictional character, especially one who isn't even a human being.

[Morthoron]

I wonder if one can even state a divinity or angelic being (albeit, a fictional deity) can exhibit any form of mental illness or ailments whatsoever. Being immortal, it would seem that such a being would not suffer from diminished mental capacity or the thousand natural shocks which flesh is heir to.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I wonder if one can even state a divinity or angelic being (albeit, a fictional deity) can exhibit any form of mental illness or ailments whatsoever. Being immortal, it would seem that such a being would not suffer from diminished mental capacity or the thousand natural shocks which flesh is heir to.

All the same, I do quite like the idea of Morgoth trying to plead insanity after the War of Wrath.

[Cirdan]

And was Melkor tired, depressed and suicidal? -the other "pole"?

https://health.google.com/health/ref/Bipolar+disorder

Melkor was evil, the Satanic, fallen 'angel'.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Cirdan

Melkor was evil....

Och, go on with ye then! He weren't evil, he were jus' misunderstood.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Och, go on with ye then! He weren't evil, he were jus' misunderstood.

Curse you, Morth! I was just about to post that myself!

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Ren the Unclean

I have always found the evil characters interesting.

Wouldn't have guessed that from your screen name...

Originally Posted by Nerwen

At most you can say something like, "he had the symptoms of X" or "might have been diagnosed with Y if he'd been a real person".

Or you could have been charitable and assumed that this was what he meant. I know what you mean though concerning the hype about some disorders - back in the good old days it was en vogue to talk and write about Hamlet's Oedipus complex, nowadays it's ADHD, Bipolar and Asperger's. (I dimly remember a thread from some years ago that proposed Bilbo and Frodo were Aspies...)

Originally Posted by Cirdan

And was Melkor tired, depressed and suicidal? -the other "pole"?

This is were Ren's diagnosis fails, I think. I'm sure Melkor was a hell unto himself, but he had lots of energy, and all his aggression was turned outside, none on himself.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I wonder if one can even state a divinity or angelic being (albeit, a fictional deity) can exhibit any form of mental illness or ailments whatsoever.

If I remember correctly, Tolkien himself said somewhere in Morgoth's Ring that M. was insane by the time of the War of Wrath, contrasting him with Sauron, but I don't have the book to quote it.

Anyway, welcome to the Downs, Ren! Being undead by nature, you should feel at home here.

[Durelin]

Yes, I would echo Cirdan and say that Melkor was way too focused to be bipolar. Beside the fact that bipolar disorder as far as I know can't be boiled down to mood swings or simply being at one or other end of a spectrum of 'feeling'...

Where I guess you could also go with this is what personality traits were meant to emphasize his evilness? And then...oh no, on to shaky territory, talking about what the author intended...what traits did Tolkien associate with evilness? I don't think Tolkien was the type to sit down and sympathize with his evil Maiar, though...

Or simply, evil is insanity. And obviously insanity doesn't equal having some sort(s) of disorder(s) -- but the idea of insanity. Mythical and literary insanity rather than psychological and technical. It is everything that is not right.

(But actually I don't think Charlie Sheen is too bad of a comparison since I think he is quite purposeful in his insanity, both the feigned and real.)

[Cirdan]

Melkor's traits of "evilness": discordant, resentful, selfish, hateful, harmful/destructive.

[Sarumian]

Originally Posted by Durelin

. Or simply, evil is insanity.

I think, this is it. And more of that, as we are talking not about someone evil but about the one who begot evil. Unable to control his own wrath, Melkor is insane, though his insanity is not a disease, e. g. not something that happened to him, but something he was developing in his soul (or allowed it to be developing) - his hate, anger, violence and deceit seems resembling not a disease but an addiction to drugs or alcohol .

We know that in the begining Melkor was not evil. He was the most powerful and beautiful Ainu, and his power was probably his downfall. When music of Ainur came to being Melkor tried to impose the theme of his own as he thought he could create something better than other Ainur together. Thus he brought about diharmony and Eru had to step in to resolve it.

When Vallar were sent to shape Arda, Melkor again intended to carry out his own project. At that moment he was not evil yet: he wanted to prove he was the best to do the job. But the poison of envy started to corrupt him as he wanted to do everything himself, not collaborating with other Vallar. And then he was trapped: all he could achieve was disrupting and impeding. His choice was either to admit his failure or to fight desperately for the control of Arda (or, at least, Middle Earth) in order to re-shape it in the future. The more he fought, however, the more creative power he wasted. And finally it was only a fight for posession and revenge. That was an ultimate evil and a pure insanity.

I don't think we can diagnose Melkor with a human disease. Tolkien tried to give us an idea of what happens to a soul once great but heavily damaged.

[Bêthberry]

Tolkien does not write within the contemporary model of disease. He writes within the old model of moral failing.

I cannot recall any passage in The Silm which suggests any addiction in Melkor nor any reference to drugs or alcohol.

Tolkien writes within a moral universe, not a medical universe. Melkor succumbs to his own grandiose desires for power, control, domination, personal self-satisfaction, pride. Those terms are not found, if I recall correctly, in the Wiki discussion of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. It might be tempting to think of him in these contemporary terms, but Tolkien's conceptual universe is very different.

[Sarumian]

Originally Posted by Sarumian

his hate, anger, violence and deceit seems RESEMBLING not a disease but an addiction to drugs or alcohol .

Sorry for quotung myself, but I didn't say Melkor was an alcoholic or a drug addict. My idea was that the way he succumbed to his own dark side is more alike to developing an addiction, it was not as if he fell ill.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Sarumian

I don't think we can diagnose Melkor with a human disease. Tolkien tried to give us an idea of what happens to a soul once great but heavily damaged.

Originally Posted by Sarumian

My idea was that the way he succumbed to his own dark side is more alike to developing an addiction, it was not as if he fell ill.

I agree with your first statement here-- --that diagnosis with a human disease is not applicable. I meant to reply generally to Ren the Unclean's thread idea of applying modern medical diagnoses to a work which is morally-based and that got tied in with your allusion. It's really tempting to apply modern notions of psychology to texts, but I think it tends to shift the focus of the work away from its compelling questions of the nature of wrong-doing. I don't have my Silm at hand, but I will try to come back when I do to explain in more detail why I think this notion does not do credit to Tolkien's depiction of Melkor's failing.

However, since you have expanded on your post, Sarumian, I would point out that modern medical diagnosis regards addiction as a disease. It is not an illness caused by viruses or bacteria, but is thought of as a psychiatric disorder. It is an illness under those terms.

Is it possible we are arguing the same side of the discussion but getting mixed up with terminology?

[Sarumian]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Is it possible we are arguing the same side of the discussion but getting mixed up with terminology?

Yes, I quit agree with you. It is difficult to discuss divine matters without terminology issues. At some point there's no other way but through analogy of some kind, I believe. I don't see a crime in finding likelyhood between two things, but for me it's rather a matter of further questions about roots and reasons (poor old Smeagol ) And if I wanted to work something out of this finding, I would rather ask why Tolkien used those characteristics typical for the disorder to describe the Father of All Troubles? Honestly, I am not ready to give an answer at the moment.

I am sorry, my comment was aborted for some technical reasons and I had to restore it.

[Galadriel55]

Applying modern medicine, psycology, whatever to the legendarium would be the same as asking where exactly are the tectonic plate boundaries in ME. And vice versa: we don't have SOOO may things that ME does - like we don't have the semi-magical athelas. You can't diagnose Morgoth with a disease from our world.

[Ren the Unclean]

Originally Posted by Sarumian

We are talking not about someone evil but about the one who begot evil.

This is a really powerful insight. I think it describes, in one statement, who Melkor was. He's not just a character who became evil. He's the original architect of evil.

And I think you guys are right - Tolkien's writing should be interpreted in moral terms rather than medical, as tempting as it is to view his world through scientific eyes. (I like technology. I like machines. I'm guessing I shouldn't try to pick up a Silmaril.)*


Continuing to ask, "What is the nature of evil?" I'm beginning to believe that power itself is a big part of the nature of evil. By which I mean, my guess is that an ordinary person, if he were suddenly given great power, would have a very hard time *not* being evil.

Mildly negative traits that aren't so terrible in an ordinary person could become sources of great evil in a person having significant power. If an ordinary person with character traits not normally considered dangerous (anger, selfishness, impatience, being controlling, etc.) became extremely powerful, all of a sudden their actions, resulting from their character and temperament, could have a lot more impact and a lot more potential for harming others.

Power is a multiplier, and it seems to multiply the dark side more than the light.

This thought has given me enormous respect for the characters who are powerful and are *not* evil, Elrond and Aragorn for example. But I remain most in awe of Manwe. His power is staggering, yet he's got to be the nicest guy around. How does he do it? I'm no longer assuming it's easy.



*joke, refering to Tolkien's model of "English countryside = good", "technology & development = evil"

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Ren the Unclean

*joke, refering to Tolkien's model of "English countryside = good", "technology & development = evil"

Well, that's also some interesting insight. If we consider English countryside to be the Shire, then the most-good, maybe even the happiest people, are hobbits, and not Elves, Men, or even Valar. Maybe because they are content with what they have and resent having any kind of power (over sitting at the head of the table, that is. ).

What do you think?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Ren the Unclean

And I think you guys are right - Tolkien's writing should be interpreted in moral terms rather than medical, as tempting as it is to view his world through scientific eyes. (I like technology. I like machines. I'm guessing I shouldn't try to pick up a Silmaril.)*

. . . .

Mildly negative traits that aren't so terrible in an ordinary person could become sources of great evil in a person having significant power. If an ordinary person with character traits not normally considered dangerous (anger, selfishness, impatience, being controlling, etc.) became extremely powerful, all of a sudden their actions, resulting from their character and temperament, could have a lot more impact and a lot more potential for harming others.

If you are going to consider the moral terms of LotR, then it is not possible to claim that some traits would not be considered dangerous in an ordinary person. Every trait that is a traditional sin is harmful and wrong in every person, regardless of their social or political status. Such traits are wrong because they destroy charity in the heart of the beholder as well as leading to harm of others. Anger, for instance, is one of the traditional "deadly sins". See Wikipedia on the seven deadly sins.. (They are in distinction to the main virtues of faith, hope and charity, the last of which is the greatest according to Paul--there are other, "cardinal" virtues as well. See Wiki on Seven Virtues.).

Characters like Melkor are studies in pride, anger, envy, greed while Gollem appears to be a study in lust, gluttony and envy.

Originally Posted by Ren the Unclean

Power is a multiplier, and it seems to multiply the dark side more than the light.

Mellkor was the most gifted and the least humble. Yet Aule, who was able to sub-create--something Melkor could not do--was also able to admit wrong and apologise.

[Galadriel]

Bipolar? I really don't think so. If he were honestly a bipolar, he'd be running around screaming, "MURDER, BLOODY MURDER!" one week and, "Let's forget the whole thing about taking over Arda...sigh," the next. Furthermore, I don't think bipolars have the capacity to be 'charming'. They're pretty darn frightening.

At least as far as I know...

[Bom Tombadillo]

As someone with a bipolar relative, whose most recent and, hopefully, last episode I got to experience the peak of, I can say that Melkor's behavior does not remind me of someone bipolar. I agree with Galadriel that bipolar people are far more frightening than charming (at least during manic periods - it's just sad when they become depressed ).

Also . . . all right, I'll bite. Where do you get the impression that he is

more interested in sex than most Ainur.

? I for one have not seen anything that would indicate that. Then again, I am just starting my second reading of the Silmarillion and lack some of the familiarity with the subject matter possessed by others here.

[Ren the Unclean]

quote
"all right, I'll bite. Where do you get the impression that he is more interested in sex than most Ainur."


Just an impression, but based on a couple of things:


1. Melkor's interest in Luthien. When Sauron saw Luthien in Tol Sirion, "he thought to make her captive and hand her over to the power of Morgoth, for his reward would be great." (The text doesn't specify, but I assumed she would be sent to his bed.)

Later, Melkor saw her (and Beren) in Angband. "Then Morgoth looking upon her beauty conceived in his thought an evil lust, and a design more dark than any that had yet come into his heart since he fled from Valinor. Thus he was beguiled by his own malice, for he watched her, leaving her free for awhile, and taking secret pleasure in his thought." (Again, the text never says what his dark thought was, but most likely same as above.)


2. Melkor's attempt to ravish Arien, the maia who piloted ship of the Sun. "In other writings, Morgoth wanted to claim Arien as a wife, and ravished her, upon which she abandoned her body and 'died', leaving the Sun to travel through the skies uncontrollably and burning parts of Arda."


Since Ainur don't reproduce, I tend to think of them as asexual (again, just my impression). So I find it out-of-the-ordinary that there's an an Ainu who seems to have an interest.

[Bom Tombadillo]

Hmm. I recognize the Luthien quotes, although I personally disagree with your interpretation . . . but from what source did you get the Arien quote?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Bom Tombadillo

Hmm. I recognize the Luthien quotes, although I personally disagree with your interpretation . . .

Same here. I thought that the "lust" was having a bit of entertainment by torturing the girl to insanity by some extra-special means.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Bom Tombadillo

As someone with a bipolar relative, whose most recent and, hopefully, last episode I got to experience the peak of, I can say that Melkor's behavior does not remind me of someone bipolar.

Right. Those who are bipolar are not evil. They do not perpetrate cruelty and impose domination over others; at the worst of the manic phase they can be aggressive, intolerant, or intrusive but those traits are mild in comparison to what Melkor intends. They also cannot control their own "swings" nor are they motivated by malice. In contrast, Melkor's behaviour is almost always premeditated, even when it is influenced by his own cruelty and malice. I don't think he is ever referred to as "fey", as is Feanor in "Of the Return of the Noldor."

Originally Posted by Sarumian

I don't see a crime in finding likelyhood between two things, but for me it's rather a matter of further questions about roots and reasons (poor old Smeagol ) And if I wanted to work something out of this finding, I would rather ask why Tolkien used those characteristics typical for the disorder to describe the Father of All Troubles?

I never said it was a crime to compare, but that the comparison was not fitting or appropriate. Unlike Melkor, people who are mentally ill are not held responsible, criminally responsible, for their behaviour. And also Melkor does not have, as others have said here, characteristics of bipolar behaviour.

[Durelin]

And just as a note, as far as I know, we're talking about a disorder that can be diagnosed at various degrees of severity...so someone with bipolar disorder being 'frightening' or running around screaming suggests to me great severity, other problems, or they're just messing with you. (I also am close to someone with the disorder, though not severe.)

But I agree with Ren that I considered Melkor to demonstrate his evil in many ways. I recall reading the bit about Melkor and Luthien and thinking he exhibited lust, as well. But what Melkor is all about is (as with all great evils), of course, power. He desires control over people and demonstrates his power through harm.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Durelin

And just as a note, as far as I know, we're talking about a disorder that can be diagnosed at various degrees of severity...so someone with bipolar disorder being 'frightening' or running around screaming suggests to me great severity, other problems, or they're just messing with you. (I also am close to someone with the disorder, though not severe.)

Dury, your point about degree is well taken, yet that does not change the question of whether this issue opens up the text to greater understanding if we apply the contemporary context of psychotic disorder or if it leads us astray in trying to understand Melkor's role. Is his fundamental motivation to control people and employ harm to gain power part of the current description of bipolar disorder?

Originally Posted by Durelin

But I agree with Ren that I considered Melkor to demonstrate his evil in many ways. I recall reading the bit about Melkor and Luthien and thinking he exhibited lust, as well. But what Melkor is all about is (as with all great evils), of course, power. He desires control over people and demonstrates his power through harm.

One other issue about interpretation is that the word "lust" has undergone signifcant shifts in meaning, and the Old English meanings in particular are not limited exclusivley to sexual desire. We can point to Tolkien's knowledge of Old English and consider if he was using these older meanings. And we can examine the text to see how well it supports interpretation of sexual desire.

Readers are free to make any interpretation they wish, but they should also be able to justify their interpretion or explain their theoretical perspective.

Here are some of the older meanings of the word lust.

Originally Posted by OED

a. Pleasure, delight. Const. in, to, unto. (Sometimes coupled with liking.) Obs.
c888 Ælfred tr. Boethius De Consol. Philos. xxiv. §3 Þa sæde he [Epicurus]  se lust wære  hehste good.
c1275 Luue Ron 93 in Old Eng. Misc. 96 He [Jesus] is feyr and bryht on heowe‥Of lufsum lost of truste treowe.
1340 Ayenbite (1866) 92 Of zuyche blisse and of zuyche loste no liknesse‥ne may by yuounde‥ine lostes of þe wordle.
c1380 Eng. Wycliffite Serm. in Sel. Wks. I. 2 Sone, have mynde how þou haddist lust in this lyfe, and Lazar peyne.
a1470 Malory Morte Darthur (Winch. Coll. 13) (1990) II. 810 Alas! my swete sonnys,‥for youre sakys I shall fyrste lose my lykynge and luste.
a1529 J. Skelton Elynour Rummyng (?1545) 222 Whan we kys and play, In lust and in lykyng.
c1580 Sir P. Sidney tr. Psalmes David xxii. v, Let God save hym in whom was all his lust.
1594 Shakespeare Lucrece sig. K2, Gazing vppon the Greekes with little lust.
a1616 Shakespeare Timon of Athens (1623) iv. iii. 486.

c888—a1616(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »

†b. pl. Pleasures. Obs.
c1000 West Saxon Gospels: Luke (Corpus Cambr.) viii. 14 Þa ðe‥of carum‥& of lustum þiss lifes synt for-þrysmede.
1340 Ayenbite (1866) 72 Þer hy habbeþ‥hire solas, hire blisse, and hire confort, and alle hire lostes.
c1369 Chaucer Bk. Duchesse 581 My lyf, my lustes be me lothe.
1382 Bible (Wycliffite, E.V.) 2 Tim. iii. 4 Loueris of lustis [Vulg. voluptatum amatores] more than of God.
c1420 Anturs of Arth. 213 This es it to luffe paramoures, and lustis [v.r. listes] and litys.
c1540 Destr. Troy 3317 All your ledys‥[shal] lyue in þis lond with lustes at ease.

c1000—c1540(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »
Categories »

c. quasi-concr. A source of pleasure or delight; †an attraction, charm (obs.). poet.
1390 J. Gower Confessio I. 46 O Venus,‥Thou lif, thou lust, thou mannes hele.
1390 J. Gower Confessio II. 46 In kertles and in Copes riche Thei weren clothed‥With alle lustes that eche knew Thei were enbrouded overal.
1423 Kingis Quair lxv, Our lyf, oure lust, oure gouernoure, oure quene.
1549–62 T. Sternhold & J. Hopkins Whole Bk. Psalms lxii. 7 God is my glory and my health, my soules desire and lust.

1390—1549-62(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »

†d. Liking, friendly inclination to a person. Obs.
c1430 Freemasonry 506 For they were werkemen of the beste, The emperour hade to them gret luste.
1535 Bible (Coverdale) Num. xiv. A, Yf the Lorde haue lust vnto vs [1611 If the Lord delight in vs].

c1430—1535(Hide quotations)

†2.

a. Desire, appetite, relish or inclination for something. Const. of; to (with n. or inf.). Sometimes joined with leisure (cf. list n.4 2). Obs.Now merged in the stronger use 5 (influenced by 4).
a900 tr. Bede Eccl. Hist. (1890) v. xiii. [xii.] 436 Mid unges~wencedlice luste heofonlicra gode.
c1000 Ælfric Homilies I. 86 Him wæs metes micel lust.
?c1225 (1200) Ancrene Riwle (Cleo. C. 6) (1972) 96 Oðer hwile þe lust is hat towart an sunne.
1340 Ayenbite (1866) 253 Þe oþer stape is þet me zette mesure ine þe loste and mid þe likinge of þe wille.
c1400 Mandeville's Trav. (1839) xxviii. 285, I hadde no lust to go to tho parties.
a1470 Malory Morte Darthur (Winch. Coll. 13) (1990) I. 253 The wedir was hote aboute noone, and sir Launcelot had grete luste to slepe.
15.. Frere & Boye 56 in J. Ritson Pieces Anc. Pop. Poetry (1833) 37 Hys dyner forth he drough: Whan he sawe it was but bad, Ful lytell lust thereto he had.
1528 Tyndale Obedience Christen Man To Rdr. f. iiijv, Yf we thurst, his [sc. God's] trueth shall fulfill oure luste.
1530 J. Palsgrave Lesclarcissement 580/2, I have nothing so good luste to my worke as I had yesterdaye.
1570 J. Foxe Serm. 2 Cor. v, Ep. Ded. sig. A iiij, Men wholy geuen ouer to worldly studyes haue litle leysure, and lesse lust, either to heare Sermons or to read bookes.
1613 F. Beaumont Knight of Burning Pestle i. sig. C3v, If you would consider your state, you would haue little lust to sing, I-wisse.
1627 W. Sclater Briefe Expos. 2 Thess. (1629) 276, I have neither lust nor leasure to enter the question.

a900—1627(Hide quotations)


†b. with indefinite article. Obs.
1426 Lydgate tr. G. de Guileville Pilgr. Lyf Man 23360, I had a lust‥for to holden my passage.
1528 T. Paynell tr. Regimen Sanitatis Salerni (1535) 11 b, No man ought to eate but after he hath a luste.
1530 J. Palsgrave Lesclarcissement 616/1, I have a luste to gyve you a blowe on the cheke.
1549–62 T. Sternhold & J. Hopkins Whole Bk. Psalms lxxi. (1566) 167 From my youth I had a lust Stil to depend on thee.
1641 J. Jackson True Evang. Temper ii. 161 Such as did seeke the Glory of Martyrs‥out of a lust of dying.

1426—1641(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »
Categories »

†c. (One's) desire or wish; (one's) good pleasure. Phr. at (after) one's lust . Obs.
c950 Lindisf. Gosp. John i. 13 Ðaðe ne of blodum ne of uillo vel of lust lichomæs ne from uillo vel lust [weres] ah Gode gecened sint.
a1300 Cursor Mundi 2899 Sua ferr your lust yee foln noght, Þat yee for-gete him þat yow wroght.
c1405 (1385) Chaucer Knight's Tale (Hengwrt) (2003) l. 1620 Weep now namoore, I wol thy lust fulfille.
a1500 (1450) Merlin (1899) xvi. 268 Whan he was all to-brosed and hym diffouled at her lust saf thei haue hym not slain.
1535 Bible (Coverdale) Psalms xci. 11 Myne eye also shal se his lust of myne enemies.
c1540 Destr. Troy 8852 All the pepull to pyne put and dethe at oure lust?
1576 A. Fleming tr. Cicero in Panoplie Epist. 18 If by the law of your lust, you account me a craftie‥felow.
1578 J. Lyly Euphues f. 14v, Will thy father‥giue thee libertie to lyue after thyne owne lust?
1609 Shakespeare Troilus & Cressida iv. v. 132 When I am hence, Ile answer to my lust.
1677 C. Sedley Antony & Cleopatra i. 5 The Valiant cannot board, nor Coward fly, But at the lust of the unconstant Sky.

c950—1677(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »
Categories »

†d. = longing n.1 2. Obs.
1530 J. Palsgrave Lesclarcissement 241/2 Luste as women with chylde have.

1530—1530(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »
Categories »

3. spec. in Biblical and Theological use: Sensuous appetite or desire, considered as sinful or leading to sin. Often pl. esp. in the lusts of the flesh , fleshly lusts.
OE Cynewulf Juliana 409 Him sylfum selle þynceð leahtras to fremman ofer lof godes, lices lustas.
c1200 Trin. Coll. Hom. 29 Ðre þing beð þat mankin heuieð. On is þe selue lust, oðer is iuel lehtres. Ðe þridde flesliche lustes.
c1230 Hali Meid. 3 Pricunges of fleschliche fulðen to licomliche lustes.
a1400 Cursor M. 28749 (Cott. Galba) , Fasting and gude bisines gers a man fle lustes of fless.
1526 Bible (Tyndale) 1 John ii. 16 All that is in the worlde (as the lust of the flesshe, the lust of the eyes, and the pryde of gooddes).
a1616 Shakespeare Othello (1622) i. iii. 331 Wee haue reason to coole our raging motions, our carnall stings, our vnbitted lusts.
1648 Bp. J. Wilkins Math. Magick i. i. 2 Which set a man at liberty from his lusts and passions.
1857 F. D. Maurice Epist. St. John viii. 130 These sensual pleasures, these gods of our creation, these lusts which we are feeding.
1900 J. Watson in Expositor Sept. 193 This world with its pride and its riches and its lust and its glitter must pass away.

OE—1900(Hide quotations)

Thesaurus »

4. Sexual appetite or desire. Chiefly and now exclusively implying intense moral reprobation: Libidinous desire, degrading animal passion. (The chief current use.)
c1000 Sax. Leechd. I. 358 Weres wylla to gefremmanne nime bares geallan & smyre mid þone teors & þa hærþan þonne hafað he mycelne lust.
a1100 in T. Wright & R. P. Wülcker Anglo-Saxon & Old Eng. Vocab. (1884) I. 524/34 Ueneris, lustes.
a1300 Cursor Mundi 26254 Man þat menges him wit best for his flexs lust to ful-fill.
c1315 Shoreham Poems i. 1981 Ne stren may nou encressy Wyþ-oute flesches loste.
c1400 Mandeville's Trav. (1839) iv. 27 The grete lust that he had to hire.
c1412 T. Hoccleve De Reg. Princ. 1563 Thou deemest luste and love convertible.
1593 Shakespeare Venus & Adonis sig. Fv, Loue comforteth like sun-shine after raine, But lusts effect is tempest after sunne.
1607 E. Topsell Hist. Fovre-footed Beastes 105 In the time of their lust (commonly called cat-wralling) they [sc. cats] are wilde and fierce, especially the males.
1641 Naunton's Fragmenta Regalia sig. A3, He never spared man in his Anger, nor woman in his Lust.
1667 Milton Paradise Lost ix. 1015 In Lust they burne: Till Adam thus 'gan Eve to dalliance move.
1697 Dryden tr. Virgil Georgics ii, in tr. Virgil Wks. 90 Wine urg'd to lawless Lust the Centaurs Train.
a1704 T. Brown Satire against Woman in Wks. (1707) I. i. 84 We need not rake the Brothel and the Stews, To see what various Scenes of Lust they use.
1757 E. Burke Philos. Enq. Sublime & Beautiful i. §10. 17 The passion which belongs to generation, merely as such, is lust only.
1855 Tennyson Maud xxii. ii, in Maud & Other Poems 75 The feeble vassals of wine and anger and lust.

[Durelin]

I wasn't suggesting anything about the application of a disorder to Melkor (I also disagree with it, but figured there was enough people coming down strongly against it). I was simply responding to some remarks I personally found a little disparaging in describing the disorder.

Yes, I realize lust's meaning has changed over time and really in my own vocabulary it doesn't necessarily mean sexual desire. It does seem to largely refer to desire; which is not necessarily a bad thing. Obviously the adjective 'lusty' was a positive adjective and really as far as I know could describe youthfulness or at least youthful vigor, which of course is full of desires. (One of the benefits of old age according to Seneca is the lack of desires, haha)

I don't think Melkor's 'lust' was necessarily (just) sexual desire, but perhaps the lust of owning a person in such a way that he clearly demonstrates his power. 'Lust' as simply 'sexual desire' is a pretty neutral feeling. Melkor's hardly neutral or hardly simple instinct. (I tried to express that I thought it was more than just simple sexual lust in my previous post, as well, but obviously it was short and didn't get much of anything across.)

"Then Morgoth looking upon her beauty conceived in his thought an evil lust, and a design more dark than any that had yet come into his heart since he fled from Valinor. Thus he was beguiled by his own malice, for he watched her, leaving her free for awhile, and taking secret pleasure in his thought."

Wen I read that, I think of lust in a sexual way because Tolkien specifies that Melkor apparently thought of her as 'beautiful,' but in the fuller context, it is more than just a sexual lust. He's bigger plans than that, with a darker heart. I don't have a text to look at and don't remember the story in full so I wonder what his design was that was somehow more dark than anything yet. And I recall the situation being rather strange...that Luthien is sort of distracting Melkor...why would she assume she could distract him? And was it with her physical beauty?

I seriously don't know why I posted when I honestly don't remember much and don't have any Tolkien books here with me at all.

Originally Posted by Bethberry

Readers are free to make any interpretation they wish, but they should also be able to justify their interpretion or explain their theoretical perspective.

Well, if they're posting in this forum, at least.

[Galadriel55]

*NOTE: Morgoth wanted to posess all of Arda, and all its beauty. If he could not take it, he'd rather destroy it.

He thought that he could keep Luthien to himself, just like he kept the Silmarilli.

[Durelin]

Then how was taking Luthien a 'design more dark' than any yet? He hadn't made up his mind what all he wanted at this point? I would think he wanted to possess and control (have the power to create and drestroy) from the beginning. Why was this 'more dark?' Just a way to make it sound more dramatic?

I think the possession here is of a different kind, because he focuses his desire for possession on an individual woman.

[Formendacil]

Although I agree that one should strongly avoid diagnosing literary characters with psychological illnesses (unless the diagnosis is made in-story), this thread raises an interesting question in my mind, about whether psychological illnesses are possible for Elves.

Now, let me be clear: I am not asking whether Elf X has Psychological Ailment Y. That falls under the general rubric of "impossible to say, because they're literary characters." However, it strikes me that even before one were to address the question of "does Elf X have condition Y," the question should be asked as to whether any Elf could have any psychological ailment.

We know that Elves were not generally susceptible to disease--but I have always taken that to mean germs (which psychological illness is not caused by) or physical defects (such as genetic illnesses or cancer).

Now, some psychological illnesses, I understand, ARE caused by things like genetic defects, which I would instinctively like to rule out. However, the issue is not 100% straightforward, because these are issues of the mind, and I would say there could be a case made that physical symptoms (such as chemical imbalances in the brain and whatnot) are caused by the mental issue, rather than the other way around--especially if you want to accept (as Tolkien did) that we have free will. Granted, not all mental illness would be attributable to free will originally, but it is certainly possible for a sane man to drive himself crazy.

There are also related issues. The first is that of Elves being biologically similar--if not the same--as Men, since they can interbreed, despite the obvious difference of fate. The second issue is that Elves do not seem to possess the same sort of free will as Men, since they don't share the Gift.

So... out of all this tangle of factoids, I ask the question: can Elves possess psychological illnesses as we know it? In other words, if Celeborn and Maglor wandered down to the Seventh Age, could modern psychology have shed light on some of their kinsmen of old? Even if we, as readers, can never, ever say for sure that any literary character has any psychological ailment, can we rule out psychological problems as we know them for the Eldar, or do we have to say they could still have been in play?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Durelin

I was simply responding to some remarks I personally found a little disparaging in describing the disorder.

Ah, I misread you. Sorry. I would add that it is not only disparaging but also disconcerting to compare the disease with the most satanic character in the Legendarium. It wasn't so long ago that people with mental illness were commonly regarded as possessed by the devil and treated horribly as a result.

Originally Posted by Durelin

I don't think Melkor's 'lust' was necessarily (just) sexual desire, but perhaps the lust of owning a person in such a way that he clearly demonstrates his power. 'Lust' as simply 'sexual desire' is a pretty neutral feeling. Melkor's hardly neutral or hardly simple instinct. (I tried to express that I thought it was more than just simple sexual lust in my previous post, as well, but obviously it was short and didn't get much of anything across.)

. . .

Wen I read that, I think of lust in a sexual way because Tolkien specifies that Melkor apparently thought of her as 'beautiful,' but in the fuller context, it is more than just a sexual lust. He's bigger plans than that, with a darker heart. I don't have a text to look at and don't remember the story in full so I wonder what his design was that was somehow more dark than anything yet. And I recall the situation being rather strange...that Luthien is sort of distracting Melkor...why would she assume she could distract him? And was it with her physical beauty?

It is confusing in part because the most central feature of Luthien is her beauty and lots of guys other than Beren fall for her, some more honourably than others. And out of her beauty, many things also beautiful can be created. She sings spring into being and is closely aligned with the natural world. Her word can make walls and towers crumble. Her voice is like the voice of nightengales and larks. Her beauty is the beauty of Arda. (See "Of Beren and Luthien"). In at least two instances, Huan speaks in matters related to her, so possibly her light is so strong that it can cause animals to speak. She may even be able to shape shift herself and Beren into other creatures. So that when Melkor conceives his evil lust and dark designs, it is well more than mere sexual desire: here he has a chance, if he captures her and gains control over her, to gain that power over Arda. He would be forcing the uttermost example of beauty to his vile ends. He would be perverting all light and goodness to evil. He wouldn't be just destroying beauty; he would be appropriating it for evil. Speculation, of course, but based on what Luthien is capable of.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Although I agree that one should strongly avoid diagnosing literary characters with psychological illnesses (unless the diagnosis is made in-story), this thread raises an interesting question in my mind, about whether psychological illnesses are possible for Elves.

Now, let me be clear: I am not asking whether Elf X has Psychological Ailment Y. That falls under the general rubric of "impossible to say, because they're literary characters." However, it strikes me that even before one were to address the question of "does Elf X have condition Y," the question should be asked as to whether any Elf could have any psychological ailment.

I love it when a question is redefined.

They are cetainly capable of some brutal behaviours because of various oaths, wraths, etc.--killing their own kin and they do seem to share many emotions with the other Children. There are also differences amongst the elves which might play into your question. Would the dark elves be more susceptible to mental illness?

We are told that Feanor becomes "fey" when "consumed by the flame of his own wrath". Given the context, this sounds closer to the old beserker warrrior mode than mental illness, but attacking Morgoth as he does certainly does sound like he's 'taken leave of his senses.'

Your answer may lie in the hroar/fea discussions about elves, methinks.

Originally Posted by Formy

The second issue is that Elves do not seem to possess the same sort of free will as Men, since they don't share the Gift.

There have been several very important discussions of this amongst Tolkien scholars. Fleiger believes the elves don't have free will, but there have been several responses to her in the pages of Tolkien Studies that argue cogently elves do have free will. (Some of them, at least, do choose to relinguish their bodies.) I suspect Galin would be better able than me to persue this line.

Originally Posted by Formy

can we rule out psychological problems as we know them for the Eldar, or do we have to say they could still have been in play?

I think it might be more fitting to ask what would be a Middle-earth understanding of mental illness.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

There have been several very important discussions of this amongst Tolkien scholars. Fleiger believes the elves don't have free will, but there have been several responses to her in the pages of Tolkien Studies that argue cogently elves do have free will. (Some of them, at least, do choose to relinquish their bodies.) I suspect Galin would be better able than me to pursue this line.

You'll note that I hedged my bets by saying Elves don't seem to have the same type of free will as Men. Personally, I think they have free will, but that it's of a different nature from Men--perhaps I want to have my cake and eat it too?

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I think it might be more fitting to ask what would be a Middle-earth understanding of mental illness.

Well, there's always room to redefine the question yet again.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

He would be forcing the uttermost example of beauty to his vile ends.

That's sort-of what I meant: if it's the greatest beauty, it's the greatest lust. (In this case, you could say that greatest=darkest)