# Redemption in Middle Earth?



## baragund (Jun 27, 2003)

Have you ever wondered why you hardly ever see someone who has fallen into Shadow become redeemed? The history of ME is full of Men, Elves and Dwarves who have fallen into shadow or had their best intentions twisted to evil purposes. The best anyone can do seems to be resisting the tempation of evil, but once you have fallen, there seems to be little opportunity to "rise again" so to speak.

Does anybody have insight on this rather pessimistic view JRRT seems to have had in his writings?


----------



## Feanorian (Jun 28, 2003)

Well all of the living/willing Noldor were allowed back in Valinor. They were redeemed even after being put under a curse. Melkor was redeemed if not for a little while even though he was still evil. Turin fell under the shadow of the dragon but in the end he vanquished him however he still eventually killed himself because of grief.


----------



## Beleg (Jun 28, 2003)

In the earlier versions of Quenta, the Swarthy Men of Hithlum repented and fought against Morgoth at the coming of the host of Aman.


----------



## BlackCaptain (Jun 28, 2003)

And weren't the Dunlandings who fought at Helm's Deep against the Rohhirim forgived? And then they stopped doing bad?


----------



## baragund (Jun 28, 2003)

I think Feanorian's and BC's examples were more descriptive of basically good people who have been misled by evil people (in the case of the Dunlandings) or who have been misled by someone whose motives were twisted to evil purposes (in the case of the Noldor). 

I can't really see Melkor as ever having been redeemed. He did a super job of pulling the wool over the eyes of Manwe but he was always pretty much rotten to the core.

As for Beleg's example of the swarthy men of Hithlum, was this version of the Quenta an early version that was intended to be replaced (like a lot of the stuff in The Book of Lost Tales) or was this a refined concept that just didn't happen to make it into the Published Silmarillion?

What I'm talking about is there just aren't any examples of someone who was just awful (like a Grima Wormtongue, a Black Numenorean, or one of Morgoth's creatures), but then "saw the light".


----------



## BlackCaptain (Jun 28, 2003)

Hmm.... Well Saruman "Saw the Dark", but that's not what you're looking for, so why'd I say that?! Haha...

Uhmmm....

Gollum a little bit, but he was a special character... 

I'll look into it... wonderful question...


----------



## Feanorian (Jun 28, 2003)

I guess if you think about it you cannot really take that big of a 180....Osama Bin Laden could never become a New York city talk show host.....


----------



## BlackCaptain (Jun 28, 2003)

But that's like saying Sauron becomes the head advisor of the king of Numenor. WAIT A MINUTE!!! AGH!! WHAT HAS MIDDLE EARTH COME TO!?

You should say it would be impossible for Osama Bin Laden to host a NYC talk show and do it sincerely... er somethin like that


----------



## Beleg (Jun 29, 2003)

> _originally posted by Baragund_
> As for Beleg's example of the swarthy men of Hithlum, was this version of the Quenta an early version that was intended to be replaced (like a lot of the stuff in The Book of Lost Tales) or was this a refined concept that just didn't happen to make it into the Published Silmarillion?



Not in lost tales. 




> *The early History of the legend, HOME#V, The Lost Road and other Writings*
> And it is said that all that were left of the three Houses of the Fathersof Men fought for Fionwe, and to them were joined some of the Men of Hithlum who repenting of their evil servitude did deeds ofvalour... But most Men, and especially those new come out of the East, were on the side of the Enemy



However later the term "Men of Hithlum" is ommitted.


----------



## Nenya Evenstar (Jul 7, 2003)

Hmm . . . I'm going to attempt to make some sense here, but I can't promise anything substantial. This may help, but it may not. I have an answer to this question, but I'm not sure if I can say it out in words. I'll do my best.

Throughout Tolkien's works there is a deep sense of what is truly good and what is truly bad. In other words, there is a defined "good" and a defined "evil." When a person does wrong, even in the smallest way as in deceit or hate, the reader immediately knows this and catches on that the motion or action being commited is wrong.

So basically you have a few catagories that the people (Men, Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, everyone) can fit into. These catagories are from the readers perspective, not from the perspective of one inside the story. As the reader we are informed of many things, and this, I believe is the key to understanding Tolkien's underlying themes he has woven throughout his stories.

- Good
This catagory consists of people like Aragorn, Theoden, Luthien, Pippin, etc. These people truly strive to live good, wonderful lives. Sure, they sometimes fail and make mistakes, but they usually end up knowing that they have made a mistake and they repent. As the reader we know when they make mistakes and we follow them through to repentance.

- Disobedient
In this catagory can be found people like Feanor and the Noldor. These people have good intentions at heart, but they stray from the path of wisdom because of the lies of Melkor (the evil force). Once they stray from that path, they reject some of the Truth of Iluvatar (the true good). These people, however, continue to try to live good lives, though they are cursed because of their disobedience. It is understood as the reader that they are wrong, thus keeping the standard of a "perfect good" in the world, a good that is not corrupted by lies or deceit, for all such things come from Melkor.

- Evil
This catagory is summed up by people like Melkor, the orcs, Saruman, Sauron, the Ringwraiths, etc. These are people who have completely forsaken the truth and have completely sworn their lives to evil. As the reader we are informed that these people are evil to the core. These people are those who truly know what the good is but who have rejected it completely and corrupted all their ways, following Melkor completely.

Remember that these catagories are from the reader's perspective, not from inside the story. I believe that Tolkien created a true good that runs in the heart of all his stories, and in this true good there is no place to falter or find a "separate truth." There is one truth in Tolkien, and that to me is what makes his works powerful.

The people who do repent seem to fall under the "Disobedient" catagory. They are people who have been either deceived or are rebellious, but who are not rotten to the core. Once they can see clearly, they are reconciled with the truth in true repentance.

Those that do not repent are those that fall into the "Evil" catagory. The reason they do not repent is simple: They have seen the Truth but have completely rejected it on all bounds. Since they have completely rejected all of the Truth they turn completely evil in all ways and become more and more sucked into the destruction that they have woven for themselves.


----------



## baragund (Jul 8, 2003)

Thanks, Nenya, for your thoughts on this. It strikes directly at what I was asking about and it gets to the root of JRRT's outlook as he created his mythology.

I agree that JRRT separates good from evil much more clearly in his writings than what we see in real life. His world is more black and white with far fewer shades of grey than there are in our world. That is the nature of writing fiction and writing drama; you have to have a protagonist and and antagonist and if they are too intermingled then your story starts to lose it's point.

But the lack of examples in his mythology where even "disobedient" people, let alone "evil" people who have redeemed themselves, seen the error of their ways and embraced the "good" is interesting to me, given Tolkien's devotion to his real life Roman Catholic faith. Take it one step further, as far as I know, there is absolutely no _mechanism_ identified in his writings for a disobedient or an evil person to redeem himself, like there are in all of the major religions of the world. In Middle Earth, if you have the misforturne of being born in Mordor, Harad, Rhun (present company excepted  ) or Khand then you are evil, all of your ancestors were evil and all of your descendents will be evil. And at the risk of sounding silly, who ever heard of a "good" orc? Meanwhile, there is alway the risk for "good" people to fall into evil.

[To be continued. I need to get to work. ]


----------



## Beleg (Jul 8, 2003)

Well...all you have said makes sense, although I can recall Sauron, at the end of the first age, showing signs of Repentance. 
Also, I don't think really think that all people of Khand, Rhun or Harad can be regarded as Evil. You have to remember that these people are bred in an enviornment which is hostile to the Western Countries and which is religiously dominated by cults worshipping Sauron or in earlier cases the Numenorean's. 
These people are culturally backwards and their civilazation and community isn't as developed as the Western one. 
You also have to gather their isn't much chance of any of them repenting, since most of the Men and Elves, specially Noldor and Numenorean's of Second and Third age, held them in kind of a scorn; meaning they never thought of them as equal but sub-ordinate. This would breed an air of mustual dislike between the two types. 
I guess clasification is pretty predominant in Tolkien's lengendarium and It is so prominent that we automatically take, anyone who hates, grudges the Western People, as evil. 
[as in the case of Dunelandings and some of the Eastern Rhun people] 
Also the Western, civilized people, [who think of themselves as torchbearers of truth] has little or no interaction with Eastern tribes. 
And also since the Eastern or Southern culture is Sauron centered, an attempt to renounce it would not exactly be appreciate and would definately be bullied. 
I don't suppose thier is any semblence of Free-will in areas under the dictatorship of Sauron, so It is not easy for any person to 'repent'. 

But that was only in the case of the Third age easterlings and Haradrim. 

[Also, as a point, these tales are Elf-centered or Mannish affairs, and It might happen that Men of a kind would be prejudiced against other types of Men because of some hostileness between them] 

Another major repentece that comes to mind is that of Osse, who was reinstated by the efforts of Uinen. 
Many reference towards temporary repenteces due to some reason can be found.


----------



## baragund (Jul 8, 2003)

You're right, Beleg. There sure seems to be a mutual wall of non-communication between the peoples of the east and peoples of the west. It would be very reasonable to think that there are people who are perfectly "good" and honorable in the east who just happen to have been born and raised under the shadow. 

This makes me wonder why nobody before the War of the Ring reached out to the peoples of the east and try to peacefully coexist with them as opposed to century after century of on again off again warfare. Well, I take that back to a degree. The Numenoreans of the second age started out like that but they degenerated into domination and oppression. And your point about certain Noldor holding the eastern races in scorn is a valid one. But all through the third age, there seemed to be no effort at reconciliation or even merely peaceful coexistence.

Here is another observation. Maybe it's a little different from the Redemption thing but it illustrates what seems to be a one-sided and continuous degradation of Tolkien's world.

It seems to me that Tolkien's mythology is charaterized by huge singular events by the forces of good to set things right followed by long periods of decline and degradation to evil. This decline could be barely perceptible for centuries or it could be marked by major catastrophes. Look at the events that mark the transition from one age to the next. These are cataclysmic events (The Chaining of Melkor, The War of Wrath, The Last Alliance, The War of the Ring) that sends a hope the "evil has been vanquished". But inevitably, it creeps back and infiltrates everything. Each time the cycle repeats, the world is a little more diminished than what it was before. 

Am I just being a huge downer or was JRRT intentional in this pessimistic arc of his Middle Earth history?


----------



## Captain (Jul 9, 2003)

Ang, guys, It's Dunlendings, not Dunlandings.


----------



## Elfarmari (Oct 5, 2003)

I've always wondered about this, mostly about whether Orcs are so evil that they are inherently unable to be redeemed. Here's some other peoples thoughts on the subject: Orcs: Inherently evil? 

Even in our world, I define true evil as knowing what is right, good, and true and completely and freely rejecting it. With this definition, I do not think there are many truly evil characters. Orcs don't have much of a choice; Melkor corrupted many of his minions with lies and false promises; Sauron and other spirits were 'seduced' by Melkor; the Dead Men of Dunharrow failed to fight with the Last Alliance out of fear, not evil, and when given a second chance, redeemed themselves. Melkor was pure evil. He had been with Illuvatar, who was good, and rejected him utterly, wishing to set himself as the King of Arda, knowing that Illuvatar had not given him this right.

One elf who I see as evil is Maeglin. While he was under the Curse resulting from the Kinslaying of Alqualonde, he did nothing to resist its influence. When captured and threatened, he betrayed his own people, knowing they would be destroyed. Even Maeglin, however, would return to Mandos (unless he disobeyed the summons) and ultimately be pardoned.

sorry for the rambling. . .


----------



## Beleg (Oct 5, 2003)

Meaglin I believe was not inherently evil: there was mark difference in his and other Eldar's bearing and he just couldn't adjust himself [Physcology] to the customs of the Eldar: thus his love and desire of marrige to Idril Celebrindal, his close kin.


----------



## Arvedui (Apr 20, 2004)

This thread has been moved out of the Guild of Scholar's Hall, and will hopefully be filled with the thoughts of more members.


----------



## Starbrow (May 6, 2004)

I think the category of evil creatures can be divided into sbucategories.

First, you have those beings which are "monsters", i.e. orcs, dragons, balrogs, that are inherently evil and have no option to change their ways.
Secondly, are those who chose to be part of the evil. This would include, Saruman, Sauron, Mim, Bill Ferny, the Witch King, numerous men, and others. I think these people would have a chance of redemption. Frodo talks about Saruman in "The Scouring of the Shire." "He is fallen, and his cure is beyond us; but I would still spare him, in the hope that he may find it." I am not sure what this cure might be. Maybe some community service.  It seems to me that redemption would be the result of the actions and intentions of the individual. There is no involvement of a diety like in the Christian faith. It does seem pessimistic that Tolkien doesn't have any characters make such a turn-around in his works.


----------



## Starflower (May 7, 2004)

Gollum almost repented when he was faced with Frodo's kindness... though I have never thought of GOllum as being 'evil', just wretched and ensnared by the Ring. Morgoth's legacy was such an absolute evil that there was no hope of redemption for those who followed in his footsteps. Look at Sauron or the Nazgul, Ungoliant and Shelob...I don't think there was any hope for them


----------

