|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
noWizardme
Gondolin
Sep 1 2024, 10:22am
Post #1 of 3
(2063 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Those Wicked Orcs (Part 4) - "The Poor Brutes"
|
Can't Post
|
|
[This is part of a sequence of posts. I’ve made it a sequence simply for reading convenience, but it is one sequence of thought. So this part is not intended to be read as a standalone and I won’t repeat or precis what has gone before, or it will go on forever.]
We’ve looked at a 1967 review of LOTR by WH Auden, in which Auden dislikes the idea that whole groups of beings - orcs and trolls – seem to be irredeemably wicked, when it seems they can speak, think and reason.
I’d like now to quote Paul Kocher (author of Master of Middle-earth, 1972, Del Rey/ Ballantine). For Kocher, LOTR is a story featuring the use and abuse of free will (following the ideas of , e.g. St Augustine and leading on nicely from Auden’s article). This leads Kocher to agree with Auden – and to go on to say that intelligent creatures who lacked free will would be an anomaly in the world LOTR conjures up.
So he offers this solution:
The explanation or orc behavior, then, seems to be that Sauron (and Saruman) has carefully trained them to be what they are, continuing the training begun by Morgoth. Close under his thumb in Mordor, they have been educated to brutality and their social patterns set in a mold which will perpetuate it and its cognate qualities in the generations to come. They have acquired the same delight in torture that Sauron feels, and he has added a nice taste in cannibalism. Yet he seems also to have inculcated in these coarse combative creatures a firm loyalty to himself that they never question, a loyalty that would be reckoned a virtue if turned in a better direction. They have evidently been taught also that the elves are rebels — against Sauron as their rightful lord, of course. The Uruk-hai at Helm's Deep are courageous fighters, and even have achieved considerable esprit de corps. In short, there is an orc point of view about things it is possible to understand, even to pity. The brutes are so plainly the toys of a mightier will than theirs. They have been conditioned to will whatever Sauron wills. "And for me," exclaims Gandalf, I pity even his slaves." Aragorn at Helm's Deep includes them in his warning against the Fangorn huorns, which are marching to crush them, but the orcs do not listen. Never in Tolkien's tale are any orcs redeemed, but it would go against the grain of the whole to dismiss them as ultimately irredeemable.
Master of Middle-earth by Paul H Kocher 1972 (Del Rey/ Ballantine)
Ch IV Sauron and the Nature of Evil
I have several points to pick out here. - Kocher’s suggestion is that what has been done to the orcs is training to affect their culture and values -- rather than, say, “genetic” (if there is such a thing as genetics in Middle-earth and we are not being rash to assume it works much as in the primary world). I’ll argue that it’s hard not to see some form of magical compulsion as well, but that this does not undermine Kocher’s fundamental point.
- “The brutes are so plainly the toys of a mightier will than theirs. They have been conditioned to will whatever Sauron wills.” I’ll discuss that there are many examples of interference with someone else’s free will in Middle-earth (which requires us to widen the scope beyond orcs, but with the idea that what a Dark Lord can do to a Man or hobbit, they could probably do to an orc).
- He suggests that Sauron has “inculcated in these coarse combative creatures a firm loyalty to himself that they never question.” The idea of orc ‘Loyalty’ surprised me – initially. I’ll discuss how I came partly to agree with the idea.
- “there is an orc point of view about things it is possible to understand, even to pity.” (Note that you can pity something without approving of it or being willing to tolerate it.)
I want to look at these points in more detail.
Cultural corruption
I think it’s worth exploring the idea that Sauron (and Saruman) have corrupted the orcs culturally. And if the problem is that it ought not to be able to remove free will from any intelligent creature, then this idea side-steps that problem. Perhaps it doesn’t usually occur to any orc to do something so original as be good; just as it is quite difficult for most of us to do things that are wildly eccentric or considered insane in our own cultures.
But I don’t think cultural corruption can be the whole story. Consider this passage of LOTR, at the point when the Ring is destroyed, and Sauron neutralised:
“As when death smites the swollen brooding thing that inhabits their crawling hill and holds them all in sway, ants will wander witless and purposeless and then feebly die, so the creatures of Sauron, orc or troll or beast spell-enslaved, ran hither and thither mindless; and some slew themselves, or cast themselves in pits, or fled wailing back to hide in holes and dark lightless places far from hope. But the Men of Rhûn and of Harad, Easterling and Southron, saw the ruin of their war and the great majesty and glory of the Captains of the West. And those that were deepest and longest in evil servitude, hating the West, and yet were men proud and bold, in their turn now gathered themselves for a last stand of desperate battle. But the most part fled eastward as they could; and some cast their weapons down and sued for mercy.”
It seems plain enough that some sort of magical compulsion has been in force (though only on “the creatures of Sauron, orc or troll or beast spell-enslaved” – it has not affected the Men). I don’t think we have any other information on what has been done or how. It sounds a bit like Saruman’s voice, but that may be co-incidence, and Tolkien may not have had any clear ideas about how this was all supposed to have worked. Or maybe it is like the temptations and suggestions that the Ring can seem to broadcast. Or maybe it is something else again – who knows! But if there is a compulsion then clearly it is not irreversible – it stops when Sauron can no longer do it.
Here are some cases where a talking, thinking creature has its free will tampered with or corrupted (it is not clear whether similar things could be done to control orcs) :
The Nazgul are talking, thinking creatures who are now total slaves to Sauron’s will. They gave away their free will in a Faustian bargain – into which I assume they foolishly entered of their own accord, rather than being forced into it. But maybe there is no foreseeable way back now.
Frodo and the Ring. In encounters with Black Riders, Frodo feels a strange urge to put it on. Sometimes he resists, and when he fails at Weathertop he realises that the urge comes from without. After this he no longer confuses it with his own will, but still, it’s a struggle not to obey its promptings. And at the last moment Frodo cannot throw the Ring into Mount Doom.
Pippin works himself up to take the Palantir from Gandalf, finding that he can’t sleep for thinking about it. The description of his theft of it is all the more disturbing because he seems simultaneously eager to get it and reluctant (‘you knew you were behaving wrongly and foolishly; and you told yourself so, though you did not listen’ Gandalf tells him later). It seems that an outside force is trying to operate covertly, disguising itself as Pippin’s own wishes and exploiting his natural curiosity (and resentment that Gandalf didn’t thank him for saving the Palantir when it fell).
It would be arguable that Boromir, when trying to seize the Ring by force, is in a similar position (‘you knew you were behaving wrongly and foolishly; and you told yourself so, though you did not listen’). Whether that’s a useful thought or not, Boromir too recovers, and is able to decide to protect Merry and Pippin, rather than try and track Frodo for another attempt on the Ring.
Saruman’s Voice is another example of interference with the thinking of others. Tolkien explains some of how it works in Letter 210:
“Saruman’s voice was not hypnotic but persuasive. Those who listened to him were not in danger of falling into a trance, but of agreeing with his arguments, while fully awake. It was always open to one to reject, by free will and reason, both his voice while speaking and its after-impressions. Saruman corrupted the reasoning powers.”
The recurring theme is that outside tampering with one’s free will is easier to counter if one sees it for what it is (and makes that discovery in time).
Loyalty
I mentioned that I was at first puzzled by Kocher’s idea that orcs are loyal.
If you’d asked me to pick an example of loyalty in LOTR I would have chosen (off the top of my head) the Crickhollow conspirators helping Frodo rather than leaving him and Sam to get on with their quest. This is clearly loyalty because they are deciding to do something for Frodo that they wouldn’t have done otherwise. In fact, they are perhaps going to do, for friendship, something they’d rather not do because it is frightening and dangerous! And they are under no compulsion, except friendship, to do it. I don’t think orcs are like that.
When I looked up ‘loyal’ in dictionaries though, I got variants on ‘giving or showing firm and constant allegiance to a person or institution.’ So that covers only the observed behaviour, not the motivation behind it. According to such a definition, a slave could be loyal not because of love of the Master but for as long as it would be foolish or insane to risk the Master’s retaliation by being disloyal.
Let’s look at the conversation that Sam overhears at Cirith Ungol, between Shagrat and Gorbag. Gorbag is speaking when we join it:
“Grr! Those Nazgûl give me the creeps. And they skin the body off you as soon as look at you, and leave you all cold in the dark on the other side. But He likes ’em; they’re His favourites nowadays, so it’s no use grumbling. I tell you, it’s no game serving down in the city.’
‘You should try being up here with Shelob for company,’ said Shagrat.
‘I’d like to try somewhere where there’s none of ’em. But the war’s on now, and when that’s over things may be easier.’
‘It’s going well, they say.’
‘They would,’ grunted Gorbag. ‘We’ll see. But anyway, if it does go well, there should be a lot more room. What d’you say?–if we get a chance, you and me’ll slip off and set up somewhere on our own with a few trusty lads, somewhere where there’s good loot nice and handy, and no big bosses.’
‘Ah!’ said Shagrat. ‘Like old times.’
‘Yes,’ said Gorbag. ‘But don’t count on it. I’m not easy in my mind. As I said, the Big Bosses, ay,’ his voice sank almost to a whisper, ‘ay, even the Biggest, can make mistakes. Something nearly slipped, you say. I say, something has slipped. And we’ve got to look out. Always the poor Uruks to put slips right, and small thanks. But don’t forget: the enemies don’t love us any more than they love Him, and if they get topsides on Him, we’re done too.”
I can’t imagine, having read this, that Shagrat and Gorbag are zealous Sauron-worshippers. (I can imagine Ugluk as a devotee of Saruman, though.) Clearly Shagrat and Gorbag are cynical and suspicious of Sauron and his Nazgul (as well as terrified by them). So this fits the slave-loyalty idea. They would rather be doing something else that better suits their own selfish purposes. But they will have to wait for an opportunity. And they must be careful because as they say (elsewhere in their conversation) there are spies everywhere waiting to report any disloyal ideas or behaviour.
And anyway, their opportunity to set up together doesn’t ever come, not only because “the enemies … get topsides on Him” but because well before that, they and their respective troops will fight each other to the death over Frodo’s mithril shirt.
I think it would be far too much to imagine orcs as virtuous creatures under duress. Shagrat and Gorbag ‘s idea of a better life is about being bandits. But I can easily imagine them as brutal creatures only being loyal to Sauron and the Witch King because they are in the service of far more brutal beings. In fact, how I end up seeing orc culture is as a pyramid of brutality in which you fear and obey those above you in the pecking order and take it out on anyone weaker. Furthermore, orcs realise they are stuck with Sauron because all they expect from other creatures is revenge.
And this might suit Sauron very well. Auden has an idea about Sauron that I think is wonderful:
the kind of evil which Sauron embodies, the lust for domination, will always be irrationally cruel, for such a lust is not satisfied unless others not only obey but obey against their will.
Auden, ibid
And if that is true, then Sauron would find eager zealots much less satisfying than followers willing enough to be unlikely to rebel, but still under some level of duress.
This pyramid of brutality idea fits nicely with Kocher’s idea that Sauron has [set the orcs’] social patterns set in a mold which will perpetuate it and its cognate qualities in the generations to come. (I mean that the two ideas are consistent. I don’t mean that one of them proves the other must be true – and certainly not that two speculative ideas can each be the other’s proof!). The sorts of orcs that would prosper in such a society would include:
- Those who were big and dominant (Ugluk)
- Those who were scarily aggressive, sadistic or psychopathic, even by orc standards
- Those who were Machiavellian. I’m thinking of Grishnákh here. He seems to judge nicely who to support or undermine; and when to be seen and heard to be doing the right thing. But he’s also able to fade into the background when it suits him. And when the right moment comes, he’s ruthless and treacherous.
I suppose orcs who were not particularly ‘blessed’ with size and aggression, sadism or Machiavellianism would have to ‘fake-it-till-you-make-it’ as a matter of self-preservation. As a result, I can imagine a feedback loop in which orc culture got nastier over time.
To repeat, none of this proves that Dark Lords ‘improved’ their orcs only by fostering a nasty culture. Anyone who wants to imagine the use selective breeding etc. can just add those. But I’ve convinced myself that cultural degradation could achieve a lot.
I don’t want to leave the discussion of ‘training’ without thinking about The Scouring of the Shire. This is a painful episode for our returning quest hobbits, especially because it reminds Frodo and Sam of Mordor: the petty rules, the fear of ‘sneaks’, the pointless vandalism. But, as far as I can see, the bad situation in the Shire has been achieved without the use of much magic and certainly without breeding programmes or similar. All that has been required is the spending of money and later the hiring of the Ruffians as hired muscle. That has been enough to impose increasing amounts of tyranny. But the scary thing is that the hobbits are adapting to this new culture. Clearly they have not lost free will, because they are easily raised into counter-revolution by our returning heroes. But they are making do within the new system until it is clear that counter-revolution is ‘on’. Give it a few years and, it would be easy to imagine some Shagrat and Gorbag- like hobbits quietly plotting an escape to ‘somewhere where there’s good land nice and handy, and no big bosses’.
At one point Sam imagines his quest with Frodo as a Tale (presumably quite like one of our favourite books…). He wonders whether Gollum thinks of himself as a hero or a villain. In the next part, I'll ask that question about the orcs.
~~~~~~
"I am not made for querulous pests." Frodo 'Spooner' Baggins.
|
|
|
oliphaunt
Menegroth
Oct 23 2024, 11:38pm
Post #2 of 3
(871 views)
Shortcut
|
‘They would,’ grunted Gorbag. ‘We’ll see. But anyway, if it does go well, there should be a lot more room. What d’you say?–if we get a chance, you and me’ll slip off and set up somewhere on our own with a few trusty lads, somewhere where there’s good loot nice and handy, and no big bosses.’
‘Ah!’ said Shagrat. ‘Like old times.’
‘Yes,’ said Gorbag. ‘But don’t count on it. I’m not easy in my mind. As I said, the Big Bosses, ay,’ his voice sank almost to a whisper, ‘ay, even the Biggest, can make mistakes. Something nearly slipped, you say. I say, something has slipped. And we’ve got to look out. Always the poor Uruks to put slips right, and small thanks. But don’t forget: the enemies don’t love us any more than they love Him, and if they get topsides on Him, we’re done too.”
This sound almost like dialogue for an alt-Goodfellas. They had a code of honor, loyalty and family.
*** Middle Earth Inexpert ***
|
|
|
noWizardme
Gondolin
Oct 24 2024, 11:34am
Post #3 of 3
(848 views)
Shortcut
|
|
More complex than the trope it gave rise to, isn't it?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I suspect the useful and amusing TVTropes is the place to go for a good summary of what orcs have become as a trope:
Orcs. Ever since Tolkien, the worlds of fantasy literature and video games have been overrun with gangs of these ugly, bellicose humanoids, whose main purpose in life is to serve as Mooks for the Forces of Evil. Trolls, goblins and/or hobgoblins are usually closely associated with them, or may just be different names for the same thing.... ... In modern fiction, Orcs come in two general flavors: the original model developed by J. R. R. Tolkien who borrowed the word from Beowulf and used it for his version of goblins, and a revisionist model best exemplified ( but far from invented) by Blizzard Entertainment's Warcraft series. There are also orcs IN SPACE!!! Tolkienesque or "traditional" orcs: - Are Always Chaotic Evil.
- Are dumb [US English meaning], either using only primitive technology or with an affinity for industrialized production, lacking craftsmanship and having Creative Sterility.
- ...
- If these orcs use any magic at all, it would be Black Magic.
- Have little or no culture outside of raiding/war parties and worshiping a War God or Evil Overlord.
- Usually have oppressive, patriarchal societies, with females being treated as property (if female orcs are even shown or mentioned).
- Are oftentimes made as artificial creatures rather than reproducing naturally (since Creating Life Is Bad), thus explaining the aforementioned lack of females and making the dehumanization and extermination of these creatures less morally questionable.
- Are of variable strength and size, but usually shorter than humans or elves but taller than dwarves.
- Are often hunched or stooped in build or posture, with awkward musculature and proportions, and may lope like a great ape when running.
- May or may not have a Cockney accent (Tolkien's orcs tended to speak like general English lowlives, but the heavy accent was popularized by Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000).
- Are almost always likely to be Faceless Goons whose only role in the story is as villains to fight.
- If half-orcs exist, they're likely the products of war atrocities or specialized breeding programs by your local Evil Overlord.
Blizzard-style or "revisionist" orcs: - Have a Proud Warrior Race culture partially inspired by various real-world "tribal" or "warrior" societies (though they are unlikely to be a direct counterpart of one culture.) Likely have a strong sense of honor; may or may not apply it to dealings with non-orcs. They've been referred to as "green Klingons".
- Have intelligence equal to humans and other races (though other races might still consider them barbaric and stupid). Their technology and magic might even be on par with such, though their magic will be more spiritual than scholastic, and their technology will be more "earthy".
- ...
[I've edited two long bullet lists and direct folks to the article for any more. And now, the comparison bit is interesting...] Although the two interpretations differ significantly, they broadly share both a monstrous, primitive appearance and conflict with humanity and the other Standard Fantasy Races. The author's choice of which model to emulate usually depends on whose perspective the story is written from, the story's relative position on the Sliding Scale of Idealism Versus Cynicism, and whether or not the author intends to explore the ramifications of killing sentient beings. In any case, expect humans to treat revisionist orcs as if they were Tolkienesque ones, at least initially. TVTropes article - Our Orcs Are Different
So that is (probably) what Orcs have become: first, other creators and fans finding a Tolkien idea useful and running with the bits they remembered, understood or found applicable to their own story, game, film etc. And then a reaction.
If orcs stick around in popular culture for longer, they may undergo several further 'cycles' of meaning. Compare TVTropes' analysis of how vampired have been written up over the ages:
Modern vampire treatment in popular culture is usually divided into cycles. - The Malignant Cycle (1931-1948): The vampire is treated as a creature of pure horror, as popular in the early films like Nosferatu and Universal films.
- The Erotic Cycle (1950-1985): The vampire is considered evil but alluring, like in the Hammer Horror films.
- The Sympathetic Cycle (1987-2001): The vampire is seen as a tragic monster to be pitied, but still feared, though they can sometimes be redeemed, usually by becoming human once more.
- The Individualist Cycle (2003-present day): The vampire can be bad, good, or in between, much like humans, and their transformation to vampirism does not imply a change in morality.
The sheer number of different and contradictory myths that have built up around vampires over the years have made it difficult to explore all of them in great detail. To deal with this, writers have started putting multiple types of vampire into their setting, with the explanation that different myths describe different types of vampire. These are often referred to as "bloodlines", although any term suggesting shared descent or culture may also be used. TVTropes article - Our Vampires Are Different
I think it is interesting how ideas are inventd or popularised (by Tolkien, say or by Stoker) and then run around on their own, mutating , evolving and showing adaptive radiation as they find themselves in different fictional environments.
I also think it's an interesting point that Tolkien's ideas were more complicated and conflicted than what one might expect from popular culture. And I think it was quite likely to do with the issues around killing sentient beings, or of "identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests." This quote is from an essay by George Orwell that I quoted extensively in our discussion of Saruman.
I did consider relating orcs to some thoughts Tolkien might have had based on the times through which he (and Auden and Orwell) had lived. But - gracious - the essay was long enough already! And Orwell's Notes on Nationalism or Auden's poem September 1, 1939 can, in certain moods, seem all too worryingly applicable to our modern circumstances.
Probably obvious, but the link to Orwell in my mind is seeing orcs as a group who are in effect mass-produced with minimal or unimportant individual variation, and so can be good or bad en masse.
I don't think that is exactly what one gets from a careful reading of Tolkien's text.
But of course I accept (as I do specifically in the essay) an argument that fantasy could explore worlds in which all members of a group really are basically the same. Then such groups might all be loved or loathed (or exterminated) alike, whatever Auden or Orwell would think about that.
Clearly that is what orcs have become for various entertainment - evil mooks it is good and manly to kill.
~~~~~~
"I am not made for querulous pests." Frodo 'Spooner' Baggins.
|
|
|
|
|
