Comments on: 1/(Tolkien) || Tolkien*(-1) http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/ a celebration of science fiction, anime, and geek culture Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:23:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Sephiroth http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-85 Sephiroth Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:58:54 +0000 http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-85 Hey Razib, "De gustibus non est disputandum" and all that, but as a horrible hobbit fanboy I have to quibble a bit with the assignment of the fundamental attribution error to the Rings stuff. Looking at the Wiki link it seems to me that you are suggesting Carey's work (which I have not read) lets us see how reasonable Sauron would be if only we looked at the context he was operating in, looked at things from his point of view, as it were. That seems a bit unreasonable since he was trying to conquer the world and enslave its peoples. He didn't cut Aragorn off in the supermarket line, after all, or simply try to give people fire. Also, and this goes to the characterization of the Rings stuff as "Catholic" as well, Sauron, Saruman, Gollum, etc., all started out as "good guys" and made "bad" choices. They became evil, but were not essentially so, and could possibly be redeemed, if Frodo's little speech to Saruman at the end of the last book has any weight. When the Rings is called "Catholic" by Tolkien and others I think what they mean is it's not "Manichean" with evil an independent force from good. Evil is always only something "good" which has fallen away from ideal "goodness". Anyway, I'm late to the thread, and it's only a personal opinion. Hey Razib,

“De gustibus non est disputandum” and all that, but as a horrible hobbit fanboy I have to quibble a bit with the assignment of the fundamental attribution error to the Rings stuff. Looking at the Wiki link it seems to me that you are suggesting Carey’s work (which I have not read) lets us see how reasonable Sauron would be if only we looked at the context he was operating in, looked at things from his point of view, as it were. That seems a bit unreasonable since he was trying to conquer the world and enslave its peoples. He didn’t cut Aragorn off in the supermarket line, after all, or simply try to give people fire.

Also, and this goes to the characterization of the Rings stuff as “Catholic” as well, Sauron, Saruman, Gollum, etc., all started out as “good guys” and made “bad” choices. They became evil, but were not essentially so, and could possibly be redeemed, if Frodo’s little speech to Saruman at the end of the last book has any weight. When the Rings is called “Catholic” by Tolkien and others I think what they mean is it’s not “Manichean” with evil an independent force from good. Evil is always only something “good” which has fallen away from ideal “goodness”.

Anyway, I’m late to the thread, and it’s only a personal opinion.

]]> By: Aliens in This World » Blog Archive » Tolkien Considered as a Meanie http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-19 Aliens in This World » Blog Archive » Tolkien Considered as a Meanie Sun, 09 Apr 2006 11:18:29 +0000 http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-19 [...] Now, haibane.info is probably not meaning to bash Tolkien. (He apparently does mean to bash Catholicism.) But he's just wrong when he says, "….the Fundamental Attribution Error which crops up in the work of Tolkien and his children, evil is essentialistic in a character, not a function of their circumstance. In some ways Carey’s work has a closer affinity with Greek mythology, with its Prometheus-like Sauron equivalent. In contrast Tolkien might not have been totally delusional when he stated that LotR was “fundamentally a Catholic work” in that his cycle did not explore the messy shades of gray which comprise such a vast arc of human experience." [...] [...] Now, haibane.info is probably not meaning to bash Tolkien. (He apparently does mean to bash Catholicism.) But he's just wrong when he says, "….the Fundamental Attribution Error which crops up in the work of Tolkien and his children, evil is essentialistic in a character, not a function of their circumstance. In some ways Carey’s work has a closer affinity with Greek mythology, with its Prometheus-like Sauron equivalent. In contrast Tolkien might not have been totally delusional when he stated that LotR was “fundamentally a Catholic work” in that his cycle did not explore the messy shades of gray which comprise such a vast arc of human experience." [...]

]]> By: matoko http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-14 matoko Tue, 04 Apr 2006 17:19:28 +0000 http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-14 aziz-habiibi asked me to clarify my cryptic comment--razib and i have had some discussion of the Pythagorean Society, and he sent me this email-- <blockquote>if you read fantasy, you should check out THE PRINCE OF NOTHING series. the last 50 pages of book 3 have a lot which intersects with some of your ideas of pythogoreans....</blockquote> so, i am intrigued and want badly to read it. ;) i will try to be more intelligible in the future. aziz-habiibi asked me to clarify my cryptic comment–razib and i have had some discussion of the Pythagorean Society, and he sent me this email–

if you read fantasy, you should check out THE PRINCE OF NOTHING
series. the last 50 pages of book 3 have a lot which intersects with
some of your ideas of pythogoreans….

so, i am intrigued and want badly to read it. ;)
i will try to be more intelligible in the future.

]]> By: matoko http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-13 matoko Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:26:14 +0000 http://www.haibane.info/2006/03/31/1tolkien-tolkien-1/#comment-13 Do you promise i will see pythagoreans in Prince of Nothing? Do you promise i will see pythagoreans in Prince of Nothing?

]]>