On eucatastrophe

I got married last weekend, so I've missed posting the past two weeks.  Totally worth it, but time to play some catch-up!

This week we read The Old Forest, following Frodo and his friends finally leave the Shire.  But the Old Forest is dangerous.  The trees have had a history of attacking the Shire, and the hobbits have needed to defend themselves with fire.  There's bad blood between them.

Once very deep into the first the hobbits suddenly feel very tired.  Sam suspects something and is able to resist, but the other three fall asleep.  While asleep, Merry and Pippin get sucked into a large willow tree's trunk, which closes again around them.  Frodo collapses into a brook, and Sam has to save him from drowning.  Afterwards, Sam points to Merry and Pippin's feet sticking out of the willow tree.  Frodo responds:

"What a foul thing to happen!  cried Frodo wildly.
Why did we ever come into this dreadful Forest?
I wish we were all back at Crickhollow!"

And after some futile efforts to free them...

But Frodo, without any clear idea of why he did so,
or what he hoped for, ran along the path crying help! help! help!

As it happens, Tom Bombadil is in the area, and responds to their cries for help.

"Frodo sure has lost his resolve quickly."
"How silly his pronouncements of 'what must be done' seem now.  How foolish he must feel - his will thwarted not by Black Riders but by trees."
"Sam does not regret coming though.  In fact, his purpose may have been proven by this bad turn of events.  When Frodo and the others are in danger he does not flee, as Frodo does."
"It is easier to protect friends nearby than complete a Task that is out there."
"This is not the only time in our text that friendship and a Task collide."
"Do go on."
"This parallels the incident at Mount Doom quite nicely.  There, Frodo gives up the Quest.  There, Sam's friendship endures.  There, all hope is lost.   And there an unlikely source saves the day."
"Getting one's finger bitten off is hardly a cause for celebration."
"When the alternative is certain capture by Nazgûl?  Small price to pay."
"So the Ring overpowers Frodo in the end.  Are the trees as powerful as the Ring?"
"Frodo is not nearly as hardened as he becomes - they do not need to be so powerful."
"And yet here the Creative Wizard sets up the structure for his climax.  Frodo gives up his senses.   Even hope fails.  But good prevails.
"It is eucatastrophic."
"And those are not the only two eucatastrophes of our text.  Helm's Deep is rescued from defeat by Erkenbrand's last-minute return*.  Gandalf's defeat at the hand's of the Witch King is interrupted by the ride of the Rohirrim.  The battle of Pellenor Fields is turned by the arrival of the army of the dead.  And then there's Saruman's death."
"But eucatastrophes are difficult to predict, and dangerous to depend on.  What ethics can be borne of "sometimes things just work out"?""
"To keep holding on."
"Hope is not a strategy."
"But perserverance is.  Nothing happens in a vacuum.  While one toils at a Task the world continues to turn.  That turning may make things easier or may make them harder."
"So then perseverance may not be a good strategy at all, if delay will only increase the Task's difficulty."
"This is true.  If you can finish a task, you ought to.  Delaying your own victory is gratuitous, revealing you don't want the prize but merely to relish in its taking - or to be seen taking it.  But if failure seems imminent, hold on.  If defeat is coming at you, delay.  Eucatastrophes are not a strategy, but they are possible.  Instead of running around shouting Frodo could have buried his face in the grass.  Instead he makes a ruckus, and eventually this got Tom's attention.  Helm's Deep held off the Uruk-Hai for 3 days.  Gandalf stands his ground.  The Rohirrim at Pellenor Fields fought fiercely as long as they were able.  Surrender is the surest defeat."
"As a counter-example, the Witch-King is gratuitous in victory.  He enters Gondor and faces off with Gandalf.  He says "Do you not know Death when you see it?"  His sword ignites in flames.  But suddenly, the Rohirrim announce their arrival with their warhorns.  The Witch-King leaves to deal with the new threat.  But he appears to have Gandalf at his mercy - or at least he thinks he does.  Why not dispatch with Gandalf first, before he can recover?  He simply gloats, confident victory is his whenever he wishes it.  It doesn't occur to him someone else may rob him of it."
"Is holding on ethical?  Isn't that the imperative of all life?  If ethics is doing the harder thing, how can our recommendation be to just do what the body does anyway?"
"The body wants to endure simply to endure.  What we are recommending is to endure and remain loyal to the Task.  It is not to survive and remember the Task.  It is to survive, to speak and rally others to the Task - or to give other elements of the Task time to catch up.  The Task may be appointed to you, but you need not do it alone.  In fact, it is probably akin to the gloating we were speaking of earlier to believe you, alone, can do it."
"So: Hope is not a strategy, but perseverance is.  Don't just hope things go your way.  But as you hang on, look for new opportunities.  As the world turns, seek out new options.  When the world gets hard hold on and keep your eyes open.  Eucatasrophes come in many forms, and we should not depend on them, but they will not happen without our attention.  Helm's Deep, the Rohirrim at Pellenor field, and Gandalf are saved by reinforcements.  They came later than expected - but they came."
"Well, hold on.  This doesn't align with THE eucatasrophe of the text.  Gollum, was thought to be dead, and he certainly is not their reinforcements.  And when he was noticed nobody let him bite the Ring off Frodo's fingers.  Nor did anybody expect Grima to turn."
"This is a good point."
"How can you reconcile?"
"An inherent property of good is cooperation.  The free peoples are brought together by common cause, but only as much as they wish.  Sauron's side is compelled by his will, but he shares rule with no one.  The Ring gives people the hope they may overthrow him, necessarily leading to conflict.  Therefore, when facing evil, if you are able to delay, even with no clear plan, you allow for their petty squabbles to surface."
"Yes!  That is what happened in both cases.  Saruman taunts Grima one too many times, and he kills him.  Gollum and Sauron both seek the Ring, but separately.  The Nazgûl would have turned it over to him, but not Gollum.  But it still doesn't explain Gollum's fall.  I can't justify anyone waiting around for a foe to simply misstep."
"Me neither."
*Silence*
"Pipeweed?"
"Please."

*Edited 3/10.  I'd wrongly said Eomer returned to Helm's deep, not Erkenbrand.

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 0% to this post's final version.  Mostly because I was rushing.

On dangers

 I got married this past weekend, so I've missed posting the past two weeks.  Totally worth it, but time to play some catch-up!

In this week's chapter, A Conspiracy Unmasked, Frodo is about to reveal his true purpose, to leave the Shire, to his friends (except Sam, who already knows).  As he does this, though, his friends reveal they already know, and they will not allow him to leave them.  Our text tells us...

"But I must go," said Frodo.  It cannot be helped, dear friends.
It is wretched for us all, but it is no use your trying to keep me.
Since you have guessed so much, please help me and do not hinder me!"
"You do not understand! said Pippin.  "You must go - and therefore we must, too."

"Why must Frodo go?"
"Because destroying the One Ring is very important.  It must be done.  Whether Frodo survives is not as important."
"The Ring must be destroyed.  But must Frodo go, given the dangers?"
"Who else could do it?"
"If the world is such only Frodo can save it, is Frodo obligated to carry the burden?"
"If Frodo can save it, he must possess the sense of responsibility required, too.  If he does not have that sense of responsibility, he could not save the world."
"Why be responsible, then, if your only reward is more work?"
"Joy is fleeting.  All delight and pleasure washes away in the night, blown away by the dawn.  What remains is what is built, which requires work."
"Are you saying all joy is meaningless?"
"No!  But joy is fleeting.  If joy so easily escapes we must find a constant source to replenish us.  Your responsibilities must bring you joy, or at least the fruits of your work.  Tragedy is inevitable.  Lives will end, loves will leave, bottles will empty.  When that happens, what use is joy?  If you aren't building, then when tragedy strikes you will have nothing to lean on."
"What does Frodo build by going?"
"A chance at a better world."
"Why must the others go?"
"Because their friend should not go alone."
"He is not going alone - Sam is already joining him."
"And should Merry and Pippin be denied?"
"Is Frodo not allowed to deny them, in order to protect them from danger?"
"Who compels them to join?"
"No one else - only themselves.  They possess the sense of responsibility over their friend."
"But destroying the One Ring is very important.  It must be done.  Whether Frodo survives is not as important."
"It is to them.  If Frodo goes and saves the world but dies their joy will be lessended.  Not only will they have not built something with their work, they will feel his absence - instead of nothing they will have worse: a hole.  Pippin and Merry, to this point, have embodied frivolity, all singing and joking.  But they realize without their friends - both Sam and Frodo - they will have lost something important to their lives, something they had not realized they had had.  To drink to the health with different strangers every night might seem wordly but the connections you make with them can only be so strong.  Better to drink and dance with a small few, over and over again.  To pile joys upon joys, so when tragedy strikes it is easier to recall, because you have so many to recall.  You can see what is built: this corner reminds me of the time... I recall making this piece... I forgot about that until I saw...  It is a source of depth and dependability - it becomes the constant source.  Those who seek joy without it will fail.
"Is Frodo right to want to keep his friends home and safe, or are his friends right to want to remain with him?"
"They are right, for danger is inevitable.  Better to face it with friends."

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 10% to this post's final version.

On carrying

Switching back to the old format because I'm already a day late and the idea of this post has been bouncing around in my head in my voice for the past few days and I don't want to translate it into dialogue form.

This week is our first double portion and we read two chapters, "Three's Company" and "A Shortcut to Mushrooms."  In it we follow Frodo and Sam - now joined by Pippin - as they begin the journey to Frodo's new home in Crickhollow, in the east of the Shire.  We, as well as Frodo and Sam, know this is just a cover story.

The journey is a few days, and the three hobbits make it with packs on their back.  As they begin, Frodo complains about the weight.  He says,

"I pity snails, and all that carry their homes on their back."

Usually when discussing ethics it's best to focus on treatment of other people.  There's an argument that we, as autonomous human beings, can treat ourselves however we like.  No one should force me to go on a 5 mile run, but if someone else wants to push themselves to do that then who are we to judge?  Everyone should do what works for them.

On the other hand, just because someone does something doesn't mean it works for them; addiction is the most obvious example.  When can we intervene, even to the detriment of their autonomy?  When should we say "It is a greater good to stop you than it is to let you be free?"  After all, for ourselves, we'd say the bar is extremely high.  We wouldn't want to be stopped.

So while genereally these write-ups are meant as ethics for how we treat others, this one wll be about ourselves.  I think it will branch out to how we treat others, but I'm not certain.  Well, let's go!

I've been very busy the past few months.  I've been wedding planning (along with my fiancee and our parents) and we've bought a condo.  I've also been promoted to management at my job, a position which requires a lot more energy than my previous position.  A lot of people depend on me and I don't want to let them down.  As always, I worry I've Peter Principled myself, though that's not the point here.

All of the above involves a lot of work.  At work I've been so busy that most of the condo/wedding stuff gets pushed out of my mind.  At first that worried me - I wanted to be thinking about these things all the time.  But my job is so busy that it was unavoidable and I accepted it.  Eventually I began to see it as a good thing.  At work I focus on work.  Nothing about the condo or wedding is on fire - It can all wait until at least the afternoon.  After work, I can work on those other things.  I am fortunate in this regard that my job is quite strict about not working after hours.  Wedding/condo doesn't creep into my work and work doesn't creep into wedding/condo time.

In this way I am not like a snail, carrying everything around with me all at once.  I mean, I am, but I compartmentalize.  Compartmentalizing allows me to focus on certain things at certain times, and that seems to work pretty well for me.  It's certainly less overwhelming.

And when I am less overwhelmed I can both be more productive on each thing and will be more patient with others (and myself).  If I think of all I have to do at once it will be hard to prioritize and difficult to keep my cool when someone asks something of me that I'm not already thinking about - who are they to add to my stress?!  But if I keep work at work and these personal responsibilities at home - and even schedule separate time for wedding planning and condo stuff, to keep THOSE separate - then it's easier for people to know when to approach me about each thing.  And it means when I make time to relax I'm able to focus on that.

So I think compartmentalizing is an important stress-reducing (or at least stress management) strategy, which helps us be kinder to ourself and others.  Being kinder to others is obviously ethical, but being kinder to ourself should not be underestimated.  If being ethical were easy we wouldn't need to write guides for it.  There are few guides for breathing.  And if we need a guide, you need attention and focus to read and remember it - which are difficult to come by if we're stressed.  Kindness to ourselves is necessary if we are to be kind to others.

But also there are those who have a harder compartmentalizing.  Rather than telling them how they should do things, we should try not to take what we may see as overreactions personally, or as failings on their part.  Other people are always fighting a battle we know nothing about.  We can and should advise them about whether they are on the right side, or whether they are fighting the right way, or whether they should be involved at all.  But we don't need to tell them in that moment.  If they are carrying it all on their back at once they may believe all of their responsibilities are tied together.  They may not know how to separate them, or believe it impossible, or they may have forgotten they're carrying it at all and think whatever it is has become part of them, as if they themselves are snails, always destined to carry.  In that moment, kindness and patience is the best we can offer them.

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, but only because I was too lazy to use a regular thesaurus.