On contempt

This week we read "The Shadow of the Past," in which Gandalf tells Frodo a lot about the Ring and it's history and how it came to him.  As part of this history Gandalf tells Frodo Gollum is "hobbit-kind" (in the Creative Wizard's style, this to say Gollum's race is related to hobbits, not that he is a kind of hobbit).  The text tells us Frodo's reaction, 

"Gollum!" cried Frodo.  "Gollum?  Do you mean that this is the very
Gollum-creature that Bilbo met?  How loathsome!"

"I think it is a sad story," said the wizard, "and it might
have happened to others, even to some hobbits that I have known."
"I can't believe that Gollum was connected with hobbits,
however distantly," said Frodo with some heat.  "What an abominable notion!"

"Why does Frodo exclaim Gollum's name and then ask it?"
"Because Frodo is familiar with Gollum, but not in this context.  Gollum has been some far-away evil of otherkind.  But now he has become something closer.  He shouts at the horror, and then he asks at the closeness."
"But he is not yet sure - his next sentence is to ask Gandalf to confirm he has understood."
"It is not a true question.  His next sentence conveys disgust.  He already knows the answer."
"Why is Frodo disgusted?"
"Frodo has always seen the Shire as something apart.  Bilbo went into the world and found evil, and he brought it back with him in the form of the Ring, but still it remained separate.  Bilbo and the Shire remained good.  To know Gollum, an important villain in Bilbo's story, is of the Shire - or at least related to it - demonstrates the Shire may not be as apart as he believed."
"But why should that matter?  Gandalf tells Frodo of Isildur and of Sauron and of the Rings of Power.  Why is Gollum what disgusts him?  What about that drives him to at last respond "with some heat"?"
"We expect the world to disappoint us, at least in some way.  But our world, whatever that means, is safe.  Isildur is a man, not a hobbit.  The Rings of Power are from ages ago.  Sauron is a distant enemy.  These are all others.  Of course they will fall."
"So Frodo is disgusted at Gollum because he shows the Shire may fall?"
"Exactly."
"Is Frodo right to have such a response?"
"Right and wrong are not the correct frame.  Rather, he cares more because Gollum is closer to him.  Men, powerful rings and Sauron are all the other.  Frodo can ignore them when he wants - as the rest of the Shire often does.  He has contempt for them because they are not like him.  He doesn't bother to understand - they are too different.  Consider the bar talk in the Shire.  No one is worried the outside world is going to crush them - they just complain when the outside ecroaches on their plans. They should be more worried, but they are not.  But an evil within?  That's not possible to ignore.  So Frodo responds more strongly."
"Frodo exclaims Gollum's name first, then asks it?  Why not ask, then exclaim?"
"Because Gollum is not the answer.  All consideration of Gollum leads only to more questions.  As should be the case.  When we find a selfkind which disgusts us it should elicit curiosity, not exclaimed dismissal.  It is disturbing to see someone like us has fallen short because it means we could fall short.  But it is an opportunity to learn.  It is also, perhaps, an opportunity to help.  Gollum, we know, will have moments of growth.  Even though his life ends with evil, he is given opportunities to be less evil in the text and he takes some of them.  Good is not a purity to be protected against all encroachment, but a road we strive to remain on, or return to when we stray."
"Gandalf says it is a sad story, but Frodo disagrees.  Who is right?"
"Gandalf, obviously.  His response is more empathetic, which we should assume is correct."
"But they know the same story.  Why does Gandalf have more empathy?"
"Gandalf has been around longer and has seen and knows more of good people falling short.  He knows it is not fair to pin the blame on Gollum for what was ultimately the Ring's corruption of him."
"So empathy is gained through age?"
"Not exclusively, but there are some perspectives we would not expect children to have."
"What perspective is that?"
"Frodo seems to believe the Shire is distinct from the rest of the world in its capacity to withstand evil.  To learn it is just as susceptible is a hard lesson, and requires to a radical new understanding of the world.  Frodo could, and initially does, hold Gollum in the same contempt as the rest of the world.  Actually in worse contempt, as Gollum's fall chips away at the Shire's separateness.  But Frodo later learns everyone is vulnerable to the Ring.  The Ring does not seek out only the weak, avoiding those it could not corrupt.  The Ring seeks out the weakness of everyone it encounters, and everyone has a weakness, so it can corrupt everyone (maybe not).  But at this moment Frodo seems to believe the Shire, and thus him by extension. has some innate ability to withstand the Ring.  The Shire would have to be defeated by evil - but everyone else can only fail to withstand it.  Notice the subtle shift in responsibility.  But that is wrong.  Similarly, it is childish to believe they would fall for evil but I and my community would never!
"We are all vulnerable."
"And because we are all vulnerable it's better to ask why they fell to evil, and take the opportunity to gird that weakness in oneself.  Gandalf's response is better because he does not blame those for falling to the power of the Ring, just as it would be silly to blame someone for falling to the power of fear.  Even if we believe someone is too easily scared the ultimate fault lies with the thing which scared them.  Even if we can say we would have withstood that fright, there is some level of fright which would overcome us, and it would be extremely arbitrary to say anything below our threshold is to be dismissed, anything above is to be cowered at."
"Gandalf knows we should judge people based on their own threshold."
"No - that leads us to say "Of course they failed, how could we expect them not to?" or "Of course they resisted - why would you worry they wouldn't?"'
"So then what?"
"Gandalf knows that everybody has a threshold, and we should not judge the differences.  Rather when someone falls to evil (or anything which they had tried to resist) we should respond not as if they have failed, but instead that they have been defeated.  Not to wonder how we could have done better but to step into their fray and help them rise back up.  It is never too late."

This had been a patreon-supported project, but that proved too annoying to maintain.  If you would like to financially support this project, drop $1.11 (or any amount, I suppose) into my Venmo!

ChatGPT contributed about 5% to this post's final version.

On reputation

We begin our adventure all over again with A Long-Expected Party.  The party in question is Bilbo's 111th as well as Frodo's 33rd, which is the hobbit age of adulthood.  This chapter is very much about Frodo's entry into adulthood, a transition he is ready for in Shire terms.  Bilbo is leaving and Frodo inherits a great deal of his things.  But some things Bilbo is leaving behind come with much more baggage than Frodo is prepared to deal with.  Namely, the One Ring.  I want to highlight two quotes before moving into our Talmudic-style dialgoue.

The first is when Gandalf is telling Bilbo to leave the One Ring, something Bilbo apparently had already agreed to but is now resisting.  Bilbo responds:  "It is mine, I tell you.  My own.  My Precious.  Yes, my Precious."

The second quote is when Frodo comes home and finds Bilbo has indeed left.  

"You'll find his will and all the other documents in there, I

think," said the wizard.  "You are the master of Bag End now.

And also, I fancy, you'll find a golden ring."

"The ring!" exclaimed Frodo.  Has he left me that? 

I wonder why.  Still, it may be useful."

"Why is the word ring, which refers to The One Ring, not capitalized?"
"Because Frodo does not know it is that particular ring."
"But it is also not capitalized when Gandalf says it."
"Gandalf does not know either, though he suspects."
"Why does the Creative Wizard* not capitalize it anyway?  The written conversation is for the audience, not the characters."
"But the audience may not yet know and could see the capitalization as an error and thus be distracted."
"And why should this not be the case with Precious?"
"Precious is repeated and capitalized both times, so a new reader would be less likely to conclude it's just an error.  Further, Gandalf remarks it "has been called that before," thus demonstrating it has special import. One could say it is distracting enough even for the characters notice. 
"Does The One Ring lose power if merely called a ring?"
"No - the Ring is powerful nonetheless. Bilbo and Frodo both become invisible with it without knowing its full story.  That, alone, shows its power is inherent."

"As true as that is, throughout our studies we know knowledge of the Ring's power has a power of its own. If knowledge of its power makes it more dangerous, then ignorance of its power must make it less dangerous."
"Why not differently dangerous?"
"Because Gollum hangs onto it for hundreds of years and is quite unaware of its connection to Sauron, who in turn is unable to find it during that time.  If Gollum was constantly worried about Sauron, Sauron may have been more clued into its whereabouts."
"But Sauron was also weak during that time, and we know the Ring conspired to escape Gollum."
"Bilbo holds onto the ring for many years, unaware of its power."
"Not completely unaware - the text says he often carried it with him and wanted to know where it was at all times, or else his thoughts became obsessed with it.  And note the priority.  The Ring insists on being on the person or on the mind."

"Had it remained in the riverbed before Deagol and Smeagol found it, could this all have been averted?"

"Delayed.  Differently done, likely.  But as long as it remained, its power would have endured."

"So it has some power nonetheless, but its power is magnified by acknowledgement it is The One Ring."

"Well, even while missing it's existence was known.  No one believed it had been destroyed."

"So what does all this tell us?"
"In our world reputation magnifies power. Many people will find it difficult to have a normal conversation with a celebrity they like. But if that person were not recognized it would be easier to have a normal conversation."
"Or if a different person saw a celebrity and simply didn't recognize them in the first place."
"Exactly. Whatever charisma this person has is still theirs but the lack of reputation will mean they must depend purely on their own displays."
"This conversation is supposed to be about ethics."
"And yet we began about capitalizaitions!  OK, listen, we're discussing two types of power. Let us call them displayed power and reputational power. Displayed is what someone brings to the table. Charisma or cunning or intelligence or experience or kindness or sternness, etc."
"But if people believe you are cunning, they're going to be more easily cunned. (Cunned?  Anyway:) Even if you're not on your A-game people are very likely to get into their own heads and read triple entendres into every sentence you say. And God help them if you're actually trying. Reputation matters."
"Reputations can be used for good or ill."
"Aah, ethics, FINALLY!"
"If you develop a reputation..."
"How is that done, anyway?"
"By consistently displaying the same power. The One Ring has a well-known history in Middle Earth, as does Sauron, with whom it is closely connected. If you consistently show a strength or virtue (or weakness or vice), then you will not need to show it as much because people will know you have it. Thus, developing a good reputation allows you to get to work faster because you don't need to prove yourself to be X or Y.  Or it could be bad, as people could use knowledge of your weakness to undermine you."
"Are there benefits to not having a reputation you should deserve?"
"Yes, because this means you can keep your strengths (or weaknesses) hidden, the benefits of which are varied but obvious.  But there are other cases where keeping your strengths hidden are a hinderance, and you only feed your ego by suddenly announcing your strength."
"And are there benefits to having a reputation you do not deserve?"
"Rarely, because you will one day be revealed.  When that happens it'll cause people to then question every part of your reputation because how could they know when to stop doubting? You should establish a reputation you can maintain."

"Are there benefits to not having a reputation you do not deserve?"
"Yes, people will not expect you to be something you are not. That is one less pedastal from which you may fall."

"But what if one develops a reputation they did not intend to establish and have no interest in maintaining?"

"Then they must go out of their way to display the powers they wish to be reputed to have, and they must do so consistently and often - perhaps even performatively in some cases.  It is difficult to change a reputation.  Plus, reputations we do not intend to establish, in some way, are the most true."

"And how should we deal with the reputations of others, false or true?"
"If we see a friend with a reputation we don't think they can maintain we should tell them.  They may disagree, or see too much advantage in the deception, but as friends we should be willing to speak up."
"And of true reputations?"
"Reputations which our friends wish to have, which we can attest to truly, we should speak up for. In public we should extol their virtue or strength, perhaps also with a ready story to demonstrate. This increases their power, a core currency in our world."
"Didn't we just share a link about how power is the real villain?"
"Yes, but that post itself was inconclusive.  In Middle Earth power, at least as represented by the Ring, is a real source of evil that must be destroyed. Unfortunately, power doesn't have such physical manifestations in our world."
"Are you so sure?"
"Aah. Good point. All those have immense reputational power, which can increase the displayed power potential of anyone associated with them. But we are not such movers and shakers of the world. Our ethics is of a personal nature and to affect change we need power."
"And what if one accrues power and uses it for evil?"
"Then one isn't being ethical, you nit! But at least at this stage we should say build your reputation on something you can maintain, and beware of those whose reputations are built on fabrications, and know others will beware those whose reputations are built on fabrications, thus don't build your reputations on fabrications. It is a good unto itself to make your reputation based on truth."
"Throughout this conversation sometimes we have said ring and sometimes we have said Ring. Why?"
"Because this is all being written down and a choice of some kind had to be made."


*Throughout this project I have decided to refer to Tolkien in this way.  It's fun!

This had been a patreon-supported project, but that proved too annoying to maintain.  If you would like to financially support this project, drop $1.11 (or any amount, I suppose) into my Venmo!

ChatGPT contributed about 15% to this post's final version.

The third go-around!

Welcome back!  It seems I return to this idea every 4-5 years, and I'm glad to say we're getting back at it!  It's particularly interesting to see how what I find in the text changes at different stages in my life.  My first go-around on this was during a pretty tumultous period in my life when I suddenly my job suddenly got "restructured" out of existence.  The second year was during Trump's presidency, when ethical demands seemed to overwhelm many of the people I knew, including myself.  And now I own some property, am about to be married, and in a job that isn't going anywhere.  The politics of the moment feel less overwhelming, though as we're entering an election year it'll be interesting to see how that impacts this year's read.

I'm also eager to try some new approaches, so a few announcements first:

1.  I'm taking guest authors!  If you want to write about a chapter, let me know!
2.  I'm getting married late Oct and then we have a honeymoon the first half of Nov.  So the first few posts of this cycle will be shorter because I won't have the time and, for now, have no guest author dates set up.  I've decided to try a Talmudic format which will hopefully allow for insights even in a short amount of words.
3.  I'll be using ChatGPT quite a bit, partly due to reason #2 and partly cause I want to try to see how useful it can be.  I'll be putting rough estimates about how much of the final product was generated.

OK - see you all Sept 23rd, just a day after Bilbo and Frodo's big day!