Search This Blog

Sunday, April 27, 2014

War: The Real Villain?

Sauron.  He makes for an excellent villain.  He wants to destroy the whole world.  One can hardly get worse than that.  He wants to consume everything that is good.  It's pretty simple.

But Sauron, I think, is not truly the villain.  Sauron is not much of a character, really.  He's just..... evil.  And that's sort of all we know about him.  For such a well known story, Sauron is a very underdeveloped antagonist.  Darth Vader, Count Dracula, Harvey Dent, Cersei Lannister, and countless other villains are remembered because they have a depth of character, and sometimes we even sympathize with them.  They were more than just "evil."

All we really know about Sauron is that he loves power, and that this affects his whole worldview.  Sauron assumes if anyone finds the Ring that they'll come to his gates to confront him - not that they'd try to destroy it.  This is the only reason the Quest has a chance.

While what I just stated could, in fact, be considered the "depth of character" I just mentioned was lacking, I don't quite think it is.  Vader does not obey the emperor out of love and reverence - he does it out of fear.  Harvey Dent becomes evil because he sees all his best efforts thwarted and falls into despair.  Sauron is evil because..... Sauron is evil.  (The Silmarillion does actually go into some detail about this - but our text does not reference it at all, and therefore it's kind of irrelevant to most readers)

Sauron is only a destroyer.  He only wrecks things.  There's no complication about him and no caveat.  There's no wrong he's trying to avenge or spurned lover he's angry about.  Sauron just destroys.

If Sauron destroys, perhaps destruction, the idea, is the villain and not Sauron, the character.  It is referenced several times that Sauron rejoices when his enemies argue.  This is partially because it weakens their alliance, but it is also because they do his work for him.  He wants to destroy everything good.  Friendship is good.  Therefore, when friends argue, Sauron is happy.

How could the Creative Wizard (Tolkien) be satisfied with such a one-dimensional villain when so much else of Middle Earth is filled to the brim with detail?

Let's take a closer look at the Creative Wizard's life.  He fought in World War I, a war which tore Europe apart.  Not only did it politically and economically ruin the continent but it also did so demographically.  16 million people died, and 21 more million were wounded.  Slightly under half of those were civilians.  World War II, which Tolkien was a civilian during, had even more horrific numbers.  Over 60 million were killed - and over half of them were civilians (I'm not even sure if this graph includes victims of the Holocaust).  To say Europe was scarred by these wars is an understatement.

Tolkien represents those who are tired of war.  Tired of destruction.  He would hear "It is well that war is so terrible, or else we should grow too fond of it," and wonder what there is to be fond of.

Sauron, then, represents that destruction.  Sauron, more broadly, represents war.  And war destroys.  From what our Creative Wizard had seen, war is useless because, even if you win, much has been destroyed.  And who wants to be king of the ashes?

This week is another double portion.  "Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbits" & "Window on the West."  In these chapters, Frodo and Sam and Gollum continue their journey towards Gollum's "Other way" into Mordor.  However, they are discovered by a band of men. They turn out to be men of Gondor, and in fact their captain, Faramir, is Boromir's brother!

We begin to worry.  Will Faramir also seek to take the Ring?  Frodo takes care not to reveal his errand, or the Ring.  But we soon see that Faramir is a different kind of man then Boromir.  Boromir excelled in war and glory.  He tries to take the Ring precisely because he wants to be the savior of Minas Tirith.  Faramir, however, is far more grim.  He does not love war.  As he says, "War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory.  I love only that which they defend."

There is another great line, examining the cost of war, which in the books is a thought that passes through Sam's mind.  Sam has just witnessed his first battle between men.  He sees the body of a Southron (A race of men which have aligned themselves with Mordor)  "He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace."  In the films this line is given to Faramir, to great effect.

Faramir, understanding that war is a requirement, does not enjoy it.  As Frodo pleads with Faramir to let them return to his "errand," Sam interrupts them both and tells Faramir "Let's come to the point before all the Orcs of Mordor come down on us!... It's a pity that folk as talk about fighting the Enemy can't let others do their bit in their own way without interfering.  He'd be mighty pleased, if he could see you now.  Think he's got a new friend, he would."  (There it is again - Sauron rejoicing in discord)

Faramir responds,  "I spare a brief time, in order to judge justly in a hard matter.  Were I as hasty as you, I might have slain you long ago.  For I am commanded to slay all whom I find in this land without the leave of the Lord of Gondor.  But I do not slay man or beast needlessly, and not gladly even when it is needed."

Later, in Faramir's hideout, he is lamenting the fall of Gondor from what he calls a 'High People' to a 'Middle People.'  He says,  "We esteem a warrior above men of other crafts."  This strikes him as, if not dishonorable, then certainly less honorable than the alternative.  What is the alternative?  I'll turn to Mister Rogers for that one:  "It's very dramatic when two people come together to work something out. It's easy to take a gun and annihilate your opposition, but what is really exciting to me is to see people with differing views come together and finally respect each other."  While this isn't necessarily what Faramir means, one can see he would prefer cooperation and compromise over war.  He sees war as deriving its value from its goal.  In his world, there would be no knightly tournaments, where warriors during peacetime fight for sport. There should be no joy in fighting, nor watching people fight.  It is done only because "War must be."

And yet we, as readers, are guilty of 'esteeming a warrior above men of other crafts.'  Wormtoungue seems cowardly in his treachery, and we can imagine saying to Saruman, when he speaks to Gandalf from Orthanc, that he should "come down and fight."  We cheer at Helm's Deep and at the battles in Moria, and when the Ent's decide to march to war.  And we don't do it because we "love only that which they defend."  We cheer because battles are interesting and dramatic.  We have fallen into the same trap that Gondor has.  We love war, or at least admire those who do it.

There's a Cracked article that I think says it best:  "'I wish I were a battle-hardened soldier,' thinks the frustrated barista, as disgruntled customers whip room temperature coffee in his face -- not because he wants to shoot people, necessarily, but because soldiers hold the highest societal value to us."

The article goes on to say that one of our cultural stumbling blocks is that "Heroes hurt bad guys."  Van Helsing hurts Dracula, Batman hurts Harvey Dent,  Everyone in Game of Thrones hurts everyone else (and if they don't they are seen as fools).   The only villain I've listed whose counterpart transcends this pattern in Darth Vader, who is in fact saved by Luke Skywalker.  For the most part, our heroes are violent.  And since we are all the hero in our own story, we feel culturally entitled to be violent against "bad guys."  But what is a bad guy?  Well, if we are good, then anyone who opposes us must be bad.  "War must be," because look at how overwhelmed we are!

But if we don't take a step back and wonder what it is we're fighting for, we simply become a force of destruction.  Maybe we only destroy evil - but what happens when evil has been eliminated?  No force of destruction will be necessary then.  We must be able to provide something positive - not just destruction.

The Creative Wizard, as I mentioned, had seen two terrible wars.  For him it is war, itself, that was the enemy.  The more I think about it, the more I think Faramir represents the kind of soldier Tolkien hoped for in the future.  Strong and forceful, but cautious and hesitant.  Grim, not glorious.  "I do not slay man or beast needlessly, and not gladly even when it is needed."  This is very unlike Boromir, who represents a very different kind of soldier - the one that goes to war amid trumpets and thrown flowers, and who dreams either of a triumphant return or a glorious end.  That kind of soldier only leads to one thing:  More war.  How else can they show their valor?

The true enemy in Middle Earth (Or, perhaps more precisely, the true enemy that Tolkien saw) is war.  Destruction.  Desolation.  Death.  Frodo's Quest is not just to defeat Sauron.  If the Ring is destroyed, and Sauron the Devourer destroyed with it, Middle Earth can finally have peace.

No comments:

Post a Comment