The importance of providing a way out

This week’s chapter is called “The Voice of Saruman.”  In it, we finally meet Saruman himself (Up to this point, though the text has given us many stories and rumors about him, we have not actually encountered him in the narrative).  The chapter title refers to his most powerful weapon – his voice.  He is able to cast a spell on anyone with his voice – his words will seem reasonable while the advice of all others will seem to be lacking.  In fact, we see this power being used, as Theoden’s Riders are temporarily bewitched.  They begin to doubt all the words of wisdom Gandalf has given them, even though those words directly lead to their victory at Helm’s Deep.  Saruman’s power is strong, indeed.

By now, Aragorn and the others have caught up to Gandalf and Theoden.  As they approach the Tower of Orthanc (Saruman’s stronghold, and really the only building in Isengard that survived the Ent’s attack (it’s heavily enchanted; The Ent’s attacked it, but found they could not damage it)), Gandalf says, “There is no knowing what he can do, or may choose to try.  A wild beast cornered is not safe to approach.”

The truth of this is obvious.  What will a wild beast do when cornered?  What won't a wild beast do?  When one has no rational options, all options are available.  This seems both paradoxical and self-evident.  It is why we cry when we are overwhelmed with sadness.  It is why we despair when we feel helplessly confused.  It is why children who are bored or frustrated act out.  In a sense, crime can be explained this way.  If there’s no other way to acquire food (or money for food), theft becomes an option.  If legal routes do not exist, illegal ones will be found.

I don’t mean to excuse this behavior – merely to explain it.  Often, the issue isn’t that rational options don’t exist, but rather that they are not seen, (or are ignored).  There is a large gap between being angry someone refused to repay a debt and murdering them over it.

“A wild beast cornered is not safe to approach,” but sometimes an angry person must be approached.  How can we make things more safe?  We can bring shields and swords and cell phones set to call 911, but these only protect us from the “beast.”  They don’t tend to the needs of the angry person at all.  If they throw a punch and we deflect it, they will only throw another one.  Increasing our own security doesn't defuse the situation.

To do that, we must reduce their level of helplessness.  Show them alternative routes.  Give them back some degree of autonomy.  Help them ‘save face,’ as it were.  Machiavelli (or was it Caesar?) said that while one must be ruthless in battle, one should be merciful in victory.  It is how one makes friends out of enemies.  Acknowledge their valor, and give them the chance to lay down their arms on their own terms (Or pledge to follow you).  And this applies far beyond the battlefield.

I once had a very serious conflict with a colleague.  It got to the point where we were called to sit before our director and state our cases.  The director sided with me, and my colleague left the meeting very frustrated.  I had won – but what good did that do if it caused a schism in our staff?  I wondered what to do.

A few days later that colleague found me in the break room and asked if she could speak to me.  She apologized for the way she had acted and asked if I could forgive her and if we could move on.  No acknowledgment I had been right at all - she just wanted to move forward.

I could have been angry – I could have cornered her.  I could have insisted she admit I was right, or at least apologize for causing such a fuss.  But here was a chance to exercise some mercy.  I apologized for the vitriol our argument had caused and pointed out that we had worked together before, and that we could easily continue to work together.

I had won the battle.  No need to rub it in.  And there’s no need for acknowledgment from her, either.  The director had agreed with me – my job now was to get back to work.

The above situation resolved amicably because, even in defeat, my colleague had autonomy.  A cornered beast has none, or rather, a cornered beast can only display autonomy through acts of tremendous destruction, which only increase the need to keep it cornered it.  Like a balloon you are squeezing: Even if there’s a small hole, if you squeeze it too tightly, it may still burst.  Yet another hole might be needed.

Victory over someone, or something, is useless if it uses its death throes to destroy you.  The point of victory is not to defeat something – it is to enable something else.  The Roman Empire (It was Caesar, definitely Caesar) did not squash foreign provinces for sport, nor even to deny their enemies resources.  They mostly wanted use of its land or wealth.  Provinces could capitulate and the Romans would be just as happy – perhaps even happier, now that their men don’t need to risk their lives.

A war with the Romans was much like a business transaction.  If you won, you could keep your goods (Though you’d probably be attacked again and again until you lost).  If (when) you lost, you were expected to give up some of your goods, but your way of life was generally kept intact (The story about Carthage is a legend created in the 1800s).  They didn’t particularly care how you made the money, just as long as you paid.  Only refusal to pay would lead to complete obliteration.  A cornered beast is not safe to approach, but if it insists on being cornered, if it refuses to take the options open to it, then if you hope to defeat it, you must be willing to act just as irrationally as it will.  The Romans gained very little from obliterating their enemies.  While it may make them a more feared empire, it undercuts the reputation they were trying to cultivate:  One of a powerful, but reasonable, empire.  It was more profitable to deal with defeated enemies.

Such as it is with us.  While obliterating our enemies into dust may feel good, there is little to be gained, and much to lose.  While a reputation of destroying those who get in our way may scare people into giving us our way, it breeds resentment, and many may plot to bring you down.  It is better to, upon victory, enlist defeated enemies in your cause.  Give them something productive to do.

In this, you not only recognize the ability of people to change, but enforce that the difference is ideological, not personal.  This encourages others to consider, in defeat, to submit to your way.  The longer you fight, the more they will lose.  Further, getting others truly on your side increases your ranks.  You might be able to win based on numbers.  Let your opponent become part of the winning team (your team!)

A wild beast cornered is not safe to approach.  But the solution is not to defend yourself.  Do not bring weapons and armor or overwhelming force.  Instead, bring escape routes and provide ways to save face.  Let your opponent have some autonomy, and you may be surprised where they choose to go.