Queen_Beruthiel wrote:My take on this is that, in creating the orcs, Tolkien tried to reconcile two very different approaches to story-telling.
The first is the ancient mode, in which the enemy of Man is the Other, a monster, usually a mythical critter like the Minotaur, or a troll. The Other is a soulless beast, so no need for the story-teller to fret about the morality of the hero killing said beastie (think: Beowulf).
The second, humanistic, mode has a real human antagonist, not a monster but a man, who commits evil through free will and has a soul to lose (think one of Dostoyevsky's villains).
The orcs fit into the first category and Gollum and Saruman into the second.
I'm not sure that I've explained that very well......
I think you explained it very well. This makes perfect sense - from a literary perspective. But it still does not explain the nature of orcs within the world of Middle Earth, basically, how they got how they are. You might be missing the point of the thread
I tend to take the story very literally and try to put the orcs into a historical/sociological context in Middle Earth, rather than getting too esoteric about it.
Should we do so still today?
I see orcs as humanoid primates with conscious thought and an awareness of right and wrong.
I definitely do not see orcs in this way. I see them as goblins, evil creatures.
The problem is in who created them. I'm not sure I see the difficulty with Voronwë's proposition.
But even leaving V's proposition aside, Melkor was the most powerful of the Valar. So one only need imagine he found a way to overstep his authority to some extent and either create beings with a limited sort of independent life, animated by his thought as Aulë's dwarves, but in a less direct way; or perhaps he found a way to instill greater intelligence in some of Yavanna's beasts, corrupting them over time and then breeding them. It doesn't present that much of a problem to me. Chapter III of the Sil says Melkor was breeding monsters through those long ages when the Valar were living in bliss.
What I can't cope with in the context of Tolkien's world is the idea that Orcs started out as Elves.
Queen B: I agree. There is a blending of the mead hall and the trenches in JRRT's villians, of the dehumanized and the all-too-human. In a way, though he would probably hate me saying so, it's a very modern look at which evils we can stomach being in human form and which we can't...or can we? What are the half-orcs but the meeting point of Grendel and gatling gun?
I keep coming back to to the different, sometimes incompatible needs of storytelling and theology. And I think while writing, JRRT leaned (as is certainly desirable) towards the former...and then tried to repent at leisure, as it were.
Should we do so still today?
I see orcs as humanoid primates with conscious thought and an awareness of right and wrong.
I definitely do not see orcs in this way. I see them as goblins, evil creatures.
But the orcs are certainly portrayed in LOTR as having conscious thought. They have quite rational debates. They also show some kind of moral awareness. The orcs that Sam overhears in Cirith Ungol talk about concepts of treachery and betrayal ... that alone shows they have some sort of moral sense. And yet they are clearly prone to evil. Nonetheless, they are not quite the same as the fairytale goblins who appear in The Hobbit.
What I can't cope with in the context of Tolkien's world is the idea that Orcs started out as Elves.
Why's that, Cerin?
It's a horrific concept, I agree. But then quite a few things in Tolkien's world are horrific (the fate of the men who turned into the Nazgûl
comes to mind ... they are literally the Living Dead.)
The idea that Morgoth can't create anything of his own, but only corrupt that which Eru Ilúvatar made, is in keeping with Tolkien's portrayal of evil, is it not?
-edit-
Axordil, as ever a great post.
"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246, The Collected Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien Avatar by goldlighticons on Live Journal
But PearlyD, the Nazgûl had a choice in their own destiny. They desired power and accepted the Rings.
The idea of newly wakened Elves innocently wandering and gazing at the new world they find themselves in, captured and turned through long ages of cruelty into something evil, without fault and without chance for healing or redemption -- that's just intolerable to me.
Yes, Melkor could corrupt, but if Melkor can corrupt and eternally destroy innocent beings with souls who then have no chance to be redeemed, then good is not the victor, and that is inconsistent for me with Tolkien's world.
I think Tolkien's mistake was in the overly human Orc dialogue he put into LoTR. I agree, that is inconsistent with the concept of the beasty Orc.
That's the appeal of Voronwë's theory for me: no souls are destroyed. Bodies are defiled, but the souls are safe, and the millions of Orcs bred from those bodies never had them.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Cerin wrote:I think Tolkien's mistake was in the overly human Orc dialogue he put into LoTR. I agree, that is inconsistent with the concept of the beasty Orc.
But that is not the only mention of beasts being overly human. In The Hobbit William seems to show some sense of pity for bilbo calling him a 'Poor little blighter'. That severely contradicts any theory of Trolls not having fëar. I stole the idea from a post from Alatar
Cerin, Tolkien had a hard time with the idea of Elves becoming Orcs too. In fact in margin next to the passage in the Annals of Aman that became the section in the published Silmarillion where the origin of the Orcs is described he made a hand-written note saying "Orcs can't be Elvish". But he never came up with a satisfactory alternative, either.
I keep coming back to to the different, sometimes incompatible needs of storytelling and theology. And I think while writing, JRRT leaned (as is certainly desirable) towards the former...and then tried to repent at leisure, as it were.
Very well said, Ax.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Cerin wrote:But PearlyD, the Nazgûl had a choice in their own destiny. They desired power and accepted the Rings.
The idea of newly wakened Elves innocently wandering and gazing at the new world they find themselves in, captured and turned through long ages of cruelty into something evil, without fault and without chance for healing or redemption -- that's just intolerable to me.
Yes, Melkor could corrupt, but if Melkor can corrupt and eternally destroy innocent beings with souls who then have no chance to be redeemed, then good is not the victor, and that is inconsistent for me with Tolkien's world.
Oh, I see what you mean. Yes, the concept troubles me greatly too ...
I think Tolkien's mistake was in the overly human Orc dialogue he put into LoTR. I agree, that is inconsistent with the concept of the beasty Orc.
Yes, it is ... and yet it makes the orcs far more interesting.
"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246, The Collected Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien Avatar by goldlighticons on Live Journal
Now I must ask, is it possible that all the heroes in the story carried one critical fall? Is it possible that they all violently killed poor creatures that were not beyond redemtion? I can't accept that idea personally. But if you say it is not true then you must agree that The Orcs and The Trolls had no soul. I find that very very difficult to believe especially because we see an actuall Troll feel sorry for a hobbit (Bilbo). I guess I just have to live with this inconsistency...
I don't quite see the trouble with the killing of orcs, even if they have redeemable souls. The orcs are always killed in the context of battles. The orcs are never innocent bystanders, are they, minding their own business and suddenly set upon? It's kill or be killed when it comes to orcs, isn't it? In any case, sometimes the heroes fight and kill men as well, and they have redeemable souls.
I am trying to think of any possible "unjust" killing of orcs.
Some orcs are ambushed and killed near Lórien by elves, are they not? Would this have been unacceptable if they had been men? Perhaps.
axordil wrote:Queen B: I agree. There is a blending of the mead hall and the trenches in JRRT's villians, of the dehumanized and the all-too-human. In a way, though he would probably hate me saying so, it's a very modern look at which evils we can stomach being in human form and which we can't...or can we? What are the half-orcs but the meeting point of Grendel and gatling gun?
I keep coming back to to the different, sometimes incompatible needs of storytelling and theology. And I think while writing, JRRT leaned (as is certainly desirable) towards the former...and then tried to repent at leisure, as it were.
Perfectly put!
I don't see the orcs as mindless; far from it. Ugluk and Grishnak are startlingly individuated. Ugluk, brutish but with a sort of dogged loyalty to his boss and comrades, relishing in the harsh rep of the Uruk-hai. Grishnak, more intelligent, luxuriating in the thought of torture: a secret policeman. And the moment when Shagrat and Gorbag look forward to getting away from the big bugs and setting up on their own is only too human.
The Orcs do not have souls, and they have no free will. They are animated by the spirit of Morgoth.
In response to the usual issues:
Evil cannot create sentient beings
Well, the dwarves are intelligent enough for Aulë to teach them speech before Eru ‘adopts’ them.
In addition, the trolls and dragons have shown signs of intelligence, and yet we have no explanation for their origin – it seems that people will accept Morgoth creating trolls and dragons, but not Orcs.
What evil cannot make is rational souls, and beings that possess free will.
The Orcs show signs of free will – they aren’t simply puppets
I said that Orcs are animated by the spirit or Morgoth, not his will. The spirit of Morgoth is one of violence, hatred and chaos, underlined by fear (‘for he alone of the Valar knew fear…’). This is why the Orcs can fear and hate their masters and each other.
The Orcs are part of Morgoth’s ring. He sank a lot of his own innate power into them, just as he sank a lot of his innate power into corrupting Arda. They are a part of this corruption.
The Orcs are intelligent – they’re not simply beasts
We’ve already established that intelligence is no indicator of having a rational soul (rational soul = the ability to choose between good and evil). The Orcs are intelligent because Morgoth was.
***
Personally, I like the idea of Melkor bringing forth Orcs from pits of subterranean heat and slime and trolls from stone because he sees the Elves, is jealous and wants children of his own, just like Eru. Whether any Elves were corrupted or actually used in the process is unclear, but not totally necessary IMHO.
Tolkien never resolved these issues - this is the resolution I prefer.
Lord M, I know you have thought a lot about this subject, so I'm glad to see you share your views here. Personally, I have mixed views. I see why you like that resolution of the question: I think it is probably the "cleanest" and least full of holes. However, there is something that is just so chilling about Morgoth taking captured Elves (and/or Men) and so twisting and corrupting them.
But either way, I agree with your basic premise: Orcs do not have souls and animated by Morgoth's will (and later Sauron's, as his stand-in). Either they never had souls in the first place, or in the twisting and corrupting process they were forever separated from their souls.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Faramond wrote:It was Semprini who always advocated seeing the orcs as metaphorical, as embodiments of man's capacity for evil and brutality, I think.
I always thought the orcs where the embodiement of all the evil man could create... Although it would be interesting to see a world where there were sometype of empathetic orcs helping the oppressed.
This makes perfect sense - from a literary perspective. But it still does not explain the nature of orcs within the world of Middle Earth, basically, how they got how they are. You might be missing the point of the thread 
