August 2, 2002

Response To 'Stir the Hornet's Nest'
Peter D.

Well Annatar, I dont know if you have stirred a hornets nest, but you will probably get some reactions to your posting of the 26 of july (but hey that is probably not a surprise to you - and besides what the f#¤* would a forum of debate be without debate). Forgive me if some of the issues in the folloing have been discussed here before, but a response is called for. From what I gather from some of your earlier postings here, we more or less agree (at least on some of the central aspects) on matters discussed so far.
In your latest posting you define the concept of fate as "the preordained unalterable future". This definition is brief but of course true. But when you say that every evil then becomes the will of God (in this case Eru) you are really getting into a fairly extensive theological issue. The existence of an allmighty God and an element of fate, does not mean that the way the affairs of the world for "good" or "evil" turn out, is what the central creator originally intended. By this I am not inferring that Eru was weak or short-sighted, but that whatever happens in a world after its creation is part of that world and subject to change. The overwhelming central theme of Tolkiens classics is of a fall, and this is one place where Tolkien lets his personal religious beliefs shine through (allthough, not being a christian myself, I admit that my knowledge is somewhat sketchy on the finer points of christianity). The notion of a fall is played out by the classical fall of Morgoth or Melkor if you will, of Sauron (and the Balrogs for that matter) - all of them angelic beings that "fall from grace" (of course defined by the eye of the beholder), and also of the fall of man in Numenor and Gondor, the fading of the elves and you could go on and on - the list is long. But all this is the nature of that world - of the protagonists and events that shape history, not because Eru has something against things remaining unspoiled let alone performing "evil".
Though angelic powers rebel, and evil, destruction and decay dominate through the passage of time (just think of the events in Silmarillion)- the world must run its course. What led to the destruction of the ring, was the result of a long and strange sequence of events, the nature of which I dont think anyone could fully account for. And finally remember that Tolkien himself more than anyone admitted that his epics did not bear that close scrutiny, as is the case with any mythological work of fiction, however great the skill and detail. With regards to your claimed absense of free will in a world ruled by fate, I can only say that if the biography, the letters he left behind (in "Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien") and in general all the knowledge that has been compiled on the thoughts and opinions of the late professor is anything to go by, it is clear that nothing scared him more than a world devoid of free will, ruled by the "machines", and consequently that this was never his ideal and intention for middle-earth, and the role played by the central God. So, to put it short, your train of thought that leads you to conclude that Eru is evil and (traditionally evil) beings such as Sauron is good, well, that may be the case (I dont know), but you havent really convinced me. (Sorry for the far too long reply...)