# Evil Orcs:  Products of Nature or Nurture?



## baragund (Jul 15, 2009)

Hey Gang,

Here is another take on the continuing discussion of the nature of orcs. I got to thinking about this after reading the excellent thread "Orcs / Uruk-hai Lifespan" and then reading through the passages of LOTR where there are glimpses of orc society. One of the interesting points in the thread is the idea that there are at least two different kinds, or levels, of orcs: One kind is sort of bestial in nature and are little more than dumb brutes that are bent to the will of their masters: the _Snagas or slaves. The other kind is truly “evil”. They are the lesser Maia spirits that can be considered to be the middle management in Morgoth’s and Sauron’s bureaucracy. Azog, Bolg, the Goblin-king from The Hobbit, and Ugluk and Grishnak from The Two Towers may be considered middle management while the rest of their “lads” would be the dumb brutes. But are these beings really rotten to the core or were they just brought up that way? Is it possible for an orc to have any redeeming qualities?

Consider the following dialogue between Shagrat and Gorbag in “The Choices of Master Samwise” at the end of The Two Towers where Sam is following the orcs who are carrying Frodo into Cirith Ungol:




“ `No, I don't know,' said Gorbag's voice. `The messages go through quicker than anything could fly, as a rule. But I don't enquire how it's done. Safest not to. 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.’ ”

Click to expand...

Gorbag is an orc leader from Minas Morgul and Shagrat is the commander of the garrison of Cirith Ungol. Not exactly grunts, they could be considered to be of a high enough rank to be one of the lesser Maia spirits. They have no love for their overseers: Gorbag is terrified of the Nazgul while Shagrat feels the same about the “Big Bosses” of Barad-dur, referred to by the orcs as “Lugburz”. Shagrat also doesn’t much care for being stationed at Shelob’s doorstep being well aware that part of the duty of his command is to provide a reliable source of victims for her dining pleasure. Both seem to understand that their folk get all the lousy jobs and there are little if any reward for it. 

The tone of this conversation struck me as being quite human in tone. Change the names around, clean up the grammar and one could imagine a very similar conversation taking place between two captains of Gondor while patrolling the walls of Minas Tirith. So what do you think these two senior-level orcs would want out of life? It seems to me they would like nothing more than to live unmolested by oppressive masters as they see fit. Not too much different from the aspirations of the Free Peoples of the West when you stop and think about it. 

When people realize they have similar goals, a basis can be formed for mutual benefit and cooperation. It makes one wonder if someone took the time to show these two how to “set up on their own” without looting, and if someone showed them how to make a living and resolve differences without chopping off the other guy’s head, could they learn? Would they learn?_


----------



## Illuin (Jul 15, 2009)

Hello Umiak-master,

I've always enjoyed those Orc conversations. I usually reread them a few times when I'm reading the book. As far as some Orcs _"turning over a new leaf"_ if given the opportunity and proper setting, I don't know. My guess is that they would probably live exactly the same way, and commit the same atrocities. The only difference is they wouldn't have to deal with someone else telling them what to do (i.e. go kill people - now!); they could do it when and how they wanted; on their own terms; and take all the credit (and loot) for themselves. Here's a little quote:



> *Morgoth's Ring - HoME Volume X - Myths Transformed
> *
> *But the Orcs were not of this kind. They were certainly dominated by their Master, but his dominion was by fear, and they were aware of this fear and hated him. They were indeed so corrupted that they were pitiless, and there was no cruelty or wickedness that they would not commit; but this was the corruption of independent wills, and they took pleasure in their deeds. They were capable of acting on their own, doing evil deeds unbidden for their own sport; or if Morgoth and his agents were far away, they might neglect his commands. They sometimes fought [They hated each other and often fought] among themselves, to the detriment of Morgoth's plans. *


----------



## YayGollum (Jul 16, 2009)

Even if you aren't going with the version of Orcs that I prefer (purely corrupted elves), what is so unbelievable about the idea of some mutant Orcs devolving back to when they had morals? The Uruk-Hai should be especially vulnerable to such mutants showing up, especially since the evil Saruman wouldn't be around to brainwash later generations. Either way, corruption, no matter how powerfully as well as magically imbued, can always be fixed. Towards the two types of Orcs mentioned, I was under the impression that the Ainur type Orcs were rather rare, so I never thought of Shagrat, Gorbag, or even that Goblin King dude to be any of them. Should I have known that those dudes were actually the Ainur types?


----------



## Illuin (Jul 17, 2009)

I don't know Yay; I think Bugburz might be the only one that could possibly turn from the dark side . Anyway, if I bought into (or _'liked'_ rather) the _Orc/Maia_ scenario, maybe the Goblin King would qualify simply because of his unusual size, but not Shagrat and Gorbag.


----------



## childoferu (Jul 17, 2009)

YayGollum said:


> Even if you aren't going with the version of Orcs that I prefer (purely corrupted elves), what is so unbelievable about the idea of some mutant Orcs devolving back to when they had morals? The Uruk-Hai should be especially vulnerable to such mutants showing up, especially since the evil Saruman wouldn't be around to brainwash later generations. Either way, corruption, no matter how powerfully as well as magically imbued, can always be fixed. Towards the two types of Orcs mentioned, I was under the impression that the Ainur type Orcs were rather rare, so I never thought of Shagrat, Gorbag, or even that Goblin King dude to be any of them. Should I have known that those dudes were actually the Ainur types?


 
wait, what version of Orc Origin Theory are you going with? And with the statement: "Either way, corruption, no matter how powerfully as well as magically imbued, can always be fixed." Can you elaborate, please? Thx.


----------



## baragund (Jul 17, 2009)

C of E,
Tolkien's thoughts on the origins of orcs evolved over the years. At the time LOTR was published, his thinking was that in the wayyyy Elder Days, when the Elves first awoke at Lake Cuivienen, Melkor captured some of them. He then tortured, corrupted, mutated and did all other kinds of nasty things to them to create the race of orcs.

The thought of an Elf's "soul" being completely and irrevocably corrupted never completely sat well with him. Also, the Elves' immortality and the implied finite supply of this particular race of beings did not quite fit with the orc's ability to "breed like flies". Therefore in his later writings, Tolkien's ideas of the nature of orcs changed to the idea that they adapted from various kinds of animals or even from stone, like the trolls.

As to Yay's (and my) thought that an orc can be redeemed, it is usually to create let alone maintain an absolute in nature. Just like a being that is 100%wholesome, like a newborn elf, can be corrupted into something evil, why can't a 100% evil being be enlightened? 

As to which orcs would "rate" being one of the lesser Maia spirits, perhaps those only like an Azog or a Bolg met the standard. I recall both of them proved to be super difficult to kill.


----------



## Illuin (Jul 17, 2009)

> Originally posted by *Baragund*
> _As to Yay's (and my) thought that an orc can be redeemed, it is usually to create let alone maintain an absolute in nature. Just like a being that is 100%wholesome, like a newborn elf, can be corrupted into something evil, why can't a 100% evil being be enlightened?_


 
Hmmm. That may be wishful thinking. Tolkien's quote from _Morgoth's Ring_ seems to contradict that idea. 

_



As to which orcs would "rate" being one of the lesser Maia spirits, perhaps those only like an Azog or a Bolg met the standard. I recall both of them proved to be super difficult to kill.

Click to expand...

_ 
Yes, but don't forget who it was _(*Gandalf*)_ and what sword _(*Glamdring*)_ was used to kill the *Great Goblin* (as well as the Balrog of Moria). How _super difficult_ would he have been to kill if it wasn't for a Maia wielding a legendary sword?


----------



## YayGollum (Jul 18, 2009)

Eh. That particular evil Maia was merely in the form of an old man, and that particular sword cut through flesh in the same manner as plenty of less famous swords. Whether the Great Goblin was a Maiar type thing or not, if they have a physical form, they go down just as mundanely. 

Towards the quote that seems to inform that Orcs cannot be redeemed ---> Craziness. Pitiless doesn't equal evil. A pitiless person has more clarity than elsewhom. No cruelty or wickedness that they wouldn't commit? This just means that they are very open-minded. Unfortunately, it doesn't give us the numbers on how many nice things they're capable of. And this answers the childoferu person's question ---> Check out the magic in that Tolkien person's writings. It always fades. Mel unnaturally forced evilness onto Orcs, and those lesser Ainur unnaturally forced superpowers into elves. The elves get less impressive. Why shouldn't the Orcs get less evil?


----------



## childoferu (Jul 18, 2009)

YayGollum said:


> Eh. That particular evil Maia was merely in the form of an old man, and that particular sword cut through flesh in the same manner as plenty of less famous swords. Whether the Great Goblin was a Maiar type thing or not, if they have a physical form, they go down just as mundanely.
> 
> Towards the quote that seems to inform that Orcs cannot be redeemed ---> Craziness. Pitiless doesn't equal evil. A pitiless person has more clarity than elsewhom. No cruelty or wickedness that they wouldn't commit? This just means that they are very open-minded. Unfortunately, it doesn't give us the numbers on how many nice things they're capable of. And this answers the childoferu person's question ---> Check out the magic in that Tolkien person's writings. It always fades. Mel unnaturally forced evilness onto Orcs, and those lesser Ainur unnaturally forced superpowers into elves. The elves get less impressive. Why shouldn't the Orcs get less evil?


 
hmmm...point made, maybe if Tolkien had finished or at least expanded upon _The New Shadown_, we would some of those "redeemed" orcs, ah if only


----------



## baragund (Jul 20, 2009)

The trouble with making an argument that an orc can be redeemed or even that there may still exist some "good" elements in an orc's nature is that there is virtually no hint of it in any of Tolkien's writings. The closest thing I can find is Shagrat and Gorbag's conversation that I referenced above where, for a while anyway, they acted like _friends_ and they showed a certain level of sentimentality for "old times" and a longing for being freed from their Bosses. (This argument certainly is not helped by the fact they wind up trying to kill each other in the tower of Cirith Ungol in their quarrel over Frodo's mithril shirt.)

But on a gut level it's just hard to accept that out of the multitude of orcs and other creatures bred through the ages to serve Morgoth, Sauron or Saruman that every last one of them were 100% pure evil with absolutely nothing redeemable.


----------



## Withywindle (Jul 20, 2009)

Surely our best moral guide in this as in everything is Gandalf. He would always stay his hand where he thought there was some hope for redemption, as he showed in his attitude toward gollum. However, he shows no signs of mercy regarding orcs at any point, and seems only too "trigger-happy" when it comes to dealing with these and other truly evil adversaries, both in the Hobbit and in the LotR.

The only contradictory point is when he states "for myself, I pity even his slaves" (I forget in which chapter), but then it is not clear whether he considers slaves to include orcs (I think not), or whether he refers to Men in Sauron's service.

At other points, Tolkien transmits a total disregard for orc-life, e.g. when Treebeard, a basically moral character, states that had he not first heard Merry and Pippin speak, he would have crushed them, taking them for young orcs. In this and in many other instances, Tolkien makes clear that his own attitude was that the only good orc is a dead orc.

In other words, I see no evidence that Tolkien felt that orcs were anything other than pure evil and that their total eradication was the only solution.


----------



## Prince of Cats (Jul 21, 2009)

Withywindle said:


> At other points, Tolkien transmits a total disregard for orc-life, e.g. when Treebeard, a basically moral character, states that had he not first heard Merry and Pippin speak, he would have crushed them, taking them for young orcs. In this and in many other instances, Tolkien makes clear that his own attitude was that the only good orc is a dead orc.


 That example's a bit out of context, those ents were already so enraged about the logging that they were willing to walk. It's not like it shows ents have an innate hatred of orcs nor that the thought of ents = thought of tolkien

My question is, what would ol Tom Bombadil have thought of an orc that wandered into his land (without felling trees etc), would he have bee invited in for yellow cream and honeycomb?


----------



## childoferu (Jul 21, 2009)

Prince of Cats said:


> That example's a bit out of context, those ents were already so enraged about the logging that they were willing to walk. It's not like it shows ents have an innate hatred of orcs nor that the thought of ents = thought of tolkien
> 
> My question is, what would ol Tom Bombadil have thought of an orc that wandered into his land (without felling trees etc), would he have bee invited in for yellow cream and honeycomb?


 
what if indeed, but once again, 'ol Tom is so mysterious to us that we can't be sure what he what he would have done, even though it seems he pick sides(i.e. the side of the free peoples) but I guess its likely that Tom would have done something magical to him like...maybe teleport him, BUT DEFINITELY NOT KILL, I always thought of Mr. B as incapable of murder in spirit


----------



## baragund (Jul 21, 2009)

Withywindle said:


> ...orcs were anything other than pure evil and that their total eradication was the only solution.



Good points here by Withywindle.

Something that supports this is what happens at the Black Gate when Frodo destroys the Ringe (With Gollum's help, of course. A preventive acknowledgement here to minimize the inevitable diatribe by Yay)

This is one of the favorite passages of the story where Tolkien describes the orcs, trolls and other fell beasts wandering about "witless", slaying themselves, throwing themselves into pits, etc. But don't you get the impression that they kind of disappear? That without Sauron's will, they actually turn into nothingness? Otherwise, Aragorn and company would have had tens of thousands of prisoners to deal with...

Tolkien describes how the Captains of the West still had to fight the Easterlings and Southrons longest in Sauron's service while others sued for peace. But nothing about the orcs. If they really did just disintegrate and blow away in the wind like Sauron and the Nazgul, then that would support the argument that they were indeed rotten to the core.


----------



## childoferu (Jul 21, 2009)

hmm...baragund, you bring up an interesting sidepoint with the orcs vanishing into nothingness, well if thats true, it would also support the origin theory of them coming from stone...hmm...

however, if they didn't, I suppose maybe they tried to flee to the eastern and southern regions of ME where they were not only waylaid by animals/monsters, but maybe even some Avari, without a Dark Lord pushing them, there was most likely in-fighting between them, and probably when they tried to find shelter Men of the South/East


----------



## baragund (Jul 22, 2009)

Yes, the book describes a lot of fleeing and hiding but that is rather hard to do with 50,000 or so "witless" orcs.


----------

