This week's chapter is called "The Rider's of Rohan." Aragon, Legolas and Gimli follow the trail of the orcs who captured Merry and Pippin for many miles, eventually leading them to Rohan. We've heard of this realm before, but know little of it. Perhaps suspiciously, none from Rohan were present at the Council of Elrond. They do not know of the Quest.
While following the trail, the three hunters are surprised to see a large group of horsemen coming directly towards them - away from the orcs. Are they fleeing? Are they following orders? Our text tells us that Aragorn says, "We will wait... We may get news from them." Gimli responds by saying, "Or spears." Aragorn speaks again, "I did not say that we should hear good news. But evil or good we will await it here."
The horsemen reach them and we meet their leader, Eomer. Eomer is a man of Rohan, the King's nephew. Aragorn actually knew his father, Eomund. ("Eo" is an important phoneme in Rohirric, the language of the people of Rohan). Though there is much initial distrust, and even threats of violence, they eventually untangle their differences and realize they are on the same side.
Eomer does not have any news about the fate of Merry and Pippin. He says they attacked the orcs and destroyed them, leaving none alive. But of course, the battle was chaotic and Eomer only has one set of eyes. He admits its possible some escaped, Orc or otherwise. Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli take their leave of Eomer who asks them to go to Edoras, King's seat in Rohan, when they are done looking for their friends.
This week I want to take a closer look at what Aragorn said to Gimli.
"I did not say that we should hear good news. But evil or good we will await it here."
In January there was an episode at the Capitol between a group of Black Hebrew Israelites, a mostly white group of students and chaperones from a Catholic high school, and a lone Omaha Nation Elder who is also a US Military Veteran. We all know the story, and the story about the story. It was a mess, and it seems impossible to not be outraged, no matter your point of view. And outrage sells and drives shares. It is to the benefit of social media companies and news organizations.
Nevermind that the story kept changing and that new videos were released. Everyone on my social media (myself included) felt the need to get a word in. Silence can be interpreted as complicity, and we all want to avoid the wrath of the online mob.
But as new information came out, people were finding themselves backtracking. Oh, the Omaha Elder walked into the crowd, they did not walk and surround him. Oh, the students were waiting for a school bus to pick them up when the Black Hebrew Israelites began yelling at them. Someone did indeed use a racial slur - but it was the Black Hebrew Israelites who called a student who was black the N word. And what about that damn smile? Is he being arrogant or calm or simply frozen in an overwhelming moment?
It was dizzying.
This is not the first time media has jumped to the wrong conclusions in an effort to be first. When Obamacare was first challenged in the Supreme Court, both CNN and Fox wrongly reported the law had been struck down. This was based on what they read at the beginning of the decision. They ran the headline and figured they'd fill in the details later. Everyone wants to be the first news organization to publish a story. No one wants to get scooped. But CNN and Fox, essentially, scooped themselves...
The problem now is with social media, everyone feels the pressure CNN and Fox felt. We all want our opinions heard, and we want people to know we are up to date. Hell, I have some social media connections whom I view as legitimate news sources. I shouldn't, but they have shown themselves to be reliable and thoughtful, time and time again. But this pressure probably adds to the trouble. They have shown themselves to be both fast and reliable, and they will want to maintain that reputation. Inevitably, mistakes will happen.
And while news organizations can offer corrections, it is much harder for people on social media to. "Yeah ok maybe those kids weren't chanting 'build the wall' but doesn't it seem like they could have been?" Traditional media has a long tradition of "we regret the error." Social media does not. Being wrong online isn't just a momentary error. It's deemed a personal failure.
Currently the breaking news stories are about Liam Neeson and Virginia's top state officials. Liam Neeson admitted he spent about a week and a half hoping to avenge his friend's rape by a black man by attacking another black man. In Virginia, The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General are each caught up in their own scandal. All of what these four men are accused of / have confessed to range from bad to terrible. They may lose their positions and/or reputation. And maybe they deserve to. That's not my point. The point is we shouldn't be so eager to jump on the shaming band-wagon.
Aragorn tells Gimli that they will wait for the riders to come to them, even though it may bode ill for them. What "new information" would bode ill for us? Anything exculpatory. As long as Neeson and those Virginia politicians commit only wrongs, it is easy to stand up for what's right. It would bode ill for us if new information told us they weren't only wrong. It feels good to condemn the Attorney General for admitting he once donned blackface. It feels good to find someone doing something shitty and proudly say "Not I!" Further, understanding their point of view decidedly does not feel good, especially when expressions of sympathy may cause the online wrath be to turned on you.
The Attorney General of Virginia, Mark Herring, did don black face. He did it as part of a costume when he was 19. He was dressing up as a rapper. That's also bad, but we can understand how a 19-year-old can rationalize the blackface - especially when we remember he was 19 in 1980. Times change. It's still very bad (blackface has been considered offensive SINCE ALWAYS), but let's compare this to what the governor did.
The governor, Ralph Northam, also wore blackface. He did it in 1984, when he was 25. The differences we can expect in judgment between a 19-year-old and a 25-year-old are significant. Also, the Northam wore blackface and then posed in a picture next to someone dressed in a KKK outfit. ALSO Northam did not admit to this, as Herring did. Not that the Attorney General should be exonerated because he admitted what he did, but some distinction must be made between someone admitting to a past wrong and someone refusing to admit it.
We want to decry these things not just because they are bad, but so that people see us standing up for what's right. But when we learn new information that complicates the issue, where it is no longer capital R Right versus capital W Wrong, then we might feel caught between the social desire to decry them and the moral desire to be fair to them. What Liam Neeson did was horrible and reckless, and it is fortunate no one got hurt. However, he admitted to this event thoroughly unprovoked. He could have gone to his grave with this secret, and instead he decided to be honest and share a darker side of his life. That seems worthy to me, though it obviously does not redeem him.
The lieutenant governor, Justin Fairfax, is accused of sexual assault, and all the 'new information' I am finding is only more damning towards him. If you want to be uncomplicatedly mad, rail against him. But that's one out of four of this week's scandals. If you were equally mad about all four, you're in a difficult situation now. All four of these scandals are bad, but they are different and deserve closer scrutiny. But closer scrutiny sucks. It takes time and effort and it may put you in a difficult position if you care about fairness. It may put you in a difficult position socially.
The way we interact with news needs to change. Rather than chasing the breaking news stories, we should break our need to "be first" and allow the full picture to emerge before forming an opinion, because once that first opinion is formed, it looms large over our whole understanding of the story. There was still a lot of decry about the Covington Catholic Students once the whole story came out, even if they weren't chanting racist slurs. But initially believing they chanted racist slurs tilts the whole story. If you're still against them, you need to ratchet down your opposition, because chanting "Make America Great Again" is different than doing Tomahawk chops after asking for their teacher's permission. At the very least, the adults now deserve a good deal of the scorn. If you're in favor of the students, having been accused of chanting racist slurs helps your side, since now you can say they were unfairly accused. It's better to rightly accuse someone of something bad than to wrongly accuse them of an evil.
Of course, it isn't as easy as that. We aren't the problem. There are things we can do better, but as long as Facebook's algorithms remain what they are, we can only strive to better ourselves and maybe our close friends. Whatever the next outrage is, it will snowball once again, and we'll be in the same helpless position we are now, stuck between being morally right and socially right.
But our text is about these helplessly large challenges. The beginning of the Quest has Frodo accepting the burden while in the same sentence admitting he doesn't know how to get to Mordor. Failure of the Quest is ever-present and easy. Few mistakes can be allowed. However dominant Facebook is of our lives, Mordor's reach into Middle Earth is stronger and more ruthless. And yet Frodo knows it is the right thing to do. It is the only thing to do. Everything else is to accept defeat.
And maybe that's where we are now. Do what you can while also knowing it isn't enough. Awaiting the full picture of an evolving news story before forming an opinion is the right thing to do. I'm not saying don't be outraged, nor am I saying every scandal should be approached with understanding and sympathy. There is a lot to be outraged about. But be careful with your outrage. Make sure your outrage is working for you, and not making you its slave.
Like this project? Want to learn more? Want exclusive access to behind-the-scenes content? Go to my Patreon site and see how you can become a part of the action!
Eomer does not have any news about the fate of Merry and Pippin. He says they attacked the orcs and destroyed them, leaving none alive. But of course, the battle was chaotic and Eomer only has one set of eyes. He admits its possible some escaped, Orc or otherwise. Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli take their leave of Eomer who asks them to go to Edoras, King's seat in Rohan, when they are done looking for their friends.
This week I want to take a closer look at what Aragorn said to Gimli.
"I did not say that we should hear good news. But evil or good we will await it here."
In January there was an episode at the Capitol between a group of Black Hebrew Israelites, a mostly white group of students and chaperones from a Catholic high school, and a lone Omaha Nation Elder who is also a US Military Veteran. We all know the story, and the story about the story. It was a mess, and it seems impossible to not be outraged, no matter your point of view. And outrage sells and drives shares. It is to the benefit of social media companies and news organizations.
Nevermind that the story kept changing and that new videos were released. Everyone on my social media (myself included) felt the need to get a word in. Silence can be interpreted as complicity, and we all want to avoid the wrath of the online mob.
But as new information came out, people were finding themselves backtracking. Oh, the Omaha Elder walked into the crowd, they did not walk and surround him. Oh, the students were waiting for a school bus to pick them up when the Black Hebrew Israelites began yelling at them. Someone did indeed use a racial slur - but it was the Black Hebrew Israelites who called a student who was black the N word. And what about that damn smile? Is he being arrogant or calm or simply frozen in an overwhelming moment?
It was dizzying.
This is not the first time media has jumped to the wrong conclusions in an effort to be first. When Obamacare was first challenged in the Supreme Court, both CNN and Fox wrongly reported the law had been struck down. This was based on what they read at the beginning of the decision. They ran the headline and figured they'd fill in the details later. Everyone wants to be the first news organization to publish a story. No one wants to get scooped. But CNN and Fox, essentially, scooped themselves...
The problem now is with social media, everyone feels the pressure CNN and Fox felt. We all want our opinions heard, and we want people to know we are up to date. Hell, I have some social media connections whom I view as legitimate news sources. I shouldn't, but they have shown themselves to be reliable and thoughtful, time and time again. But this pressure probably adds to the trouble. They have shown themselves to be both fast and reliable, and they will want to maintain that reputation. Inevitably, mistakes will happen.
And while news organizations can offer corrections, it is much harder for people on social media to. "Yeah ok maybe those kids weren't chanting 'build the wall' but doesn't it seem like they could have been?" Traditional media has a long tradition of "we regret the error." Social media does not. Being wrong online isn't just a momentary error. It's deemed a personal failure.
Currently the breaking news stories are about Liam Neeson and Virginia's top state officials. Liam Neeson admitted he spent about a week and a half hoping to avenge his friend's rape by a black man by attacking another black man. In Virginia, The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and Attorney General are each caught up in their own scandal. All of what these four men are accused of / have confessed to range from bad to terrible. They may lose their positions and/or reputation. And maybe they deserve to. That's not my point. The point is we shouldn't be so eager to jump on the shaming band-wagon.
Aragorn tells Gimli that they will wait for the riders to come to them, even though it may bode ill for them. What "new information" would bode ill for us? Anything exculpatory. As long as Neeson and those Virginia politicians commit only wrongs, it is easy to stand up for what's right. It would bode ill for us if new information told us they weren't only wrong. It feels good to condemn the Attorney General for admitting he once donned blackface. It feels good to find someone doing something shitty and proudly say "Not I!" Further, understanding their point of view decidedly does not feel good, especially when expressions of sympathy may cause the online wrath be to turned on you.
The Attorney General of Virginia, Mark Herring, did don black face. He did it as part of a costume when he was 19. He was dressing up as a rapper. That's also bad, but we can understand how a 19-year-old can rationalize the blackface - especially when we remember he was 19 in 1980. Times change. It's still very bad (blackface has been considered offensive SINCE ALWAYS), but let's compare this to what the governor did.
The governor, Ralph Northam, also wore blackface. He did it in 1984, when he was 25. The differences we can expect in judgment between a 19-year-old and a 25-year-old are significant. Also, the Northam wore blackface and then posed in a picture next to someone dressed in a KKK outfit. ALSO Northam did not admit to this, as Herring did. Not that the Attorney General should be exonerated because he admitted what he did, but some distinction must be made between someone admitting to a past wrong and someone refusing to admit it.
We want to decry these things not just because they are bad, but so that people see us standing up for what's right. But when we learn new information that complicates the issue, where it is no longer capital R Right versus capital W Wrong, then we might feel caught between the social desire to decry them and the moral desire to be fair to them. What Liam Neeson did was horrible and reckless, and it is fortunate no one got hurt. However, he admitted to this event thoroughly unprovoked. He could have gone to his grave with this secret, and instead he decided to be honest and share a darker side of his life. That seems worthy to me, though it obviously does not redeem him.
The lieutenant governor, Justin Fairfax, is accused of sexual assault, and all the 'new information' I am finding is only more damning towards him. If you want to be uncomplicatedly mad, rail against him. But that's one out of four of this week's scandals. If you were equally mad about all four, you're in a difficult situation now. All four of these scandals are bad, but they are different and deserve closer scrutiny. But closer scrutiny sucks. It takes time and effort and it may put you in a difficult position if you care about fairness. It may put you in a difficult position socially.
The way we interact with news needs to change. Rather than chasing the breaking news stories, we should break our need to "be first" and allow the full picture to emerge before forming an opinion, because once that first opinion is formed, it looms large over our whole understanding of the story. There was still a lot of decry about the Covington Catholic Students once the whole story came out, even if they weren't chanting racist slurs. But initially believing they chanted racist slurs tilts the whole story. If you're still against them, you need to ratchet down your opposition, because chanting "Make America Great Again" is different than doing Tomahawk chops after asking for their teacher's permission. At the very least, the adults now deserve a good deal of the scorn. If you're in favor of the students, having been accused of chanting racist slurs helps your side, since now you can say they were unfairly accused. It's better to rightly accuse someone of something bad than to wrongly accuse them of an evil.
Of course, it isn't as easy as that. We aren't the problem. There are things we can do better, but as long as Facebook's algorithms remain what they are, we can only strive to better ourselves and maybe our close friends. Whatever the next outrage is, it will snowball once again, and we'll be in the same helpless position we are now, stuck between being morally right and socially right.
But our text is about these helplessly large challenges. The beginning of the Quest has Frodo accepting the burden while in the same sentence admitting he doesn't know how to get to Mordor. Failure of the Quest is ever-present and easy. Few mistakes can be allowed. However dominant Facebook is of our lives, Mordor's reach into Middle Earth is stronger and more ruthless. And yet Frodo knows it is the right thing to do. It is the only thing to do. Everything else is to accept defeat.
And maybe that's where we are now. Do what you can while also knowing it isn't enough. Awaiting the full picture of an evolving news story before forming an opinion is the right thing to do. I'm not saying don't be outraged, nor am I saying every scandal should be approached with understanding and sympathy. There is a lot to be outraged about. But be careful with your outrage. Make sure your outrage is working for you, and not making you its slave.
The Lord of the Rings: An Ethical Guide is a Patreon-supported project. Thank you to all those who have contributed.
Like this project? Want to learn more? Want exclusive access to behind-the-scenes content? Go to my Patreon site and see how you can become a part of the action!
No comments:
Post a Comment