For I completely agree with this statement: "The Valar could not force
Feanor to give up the Silmarils, but Feanor was undoubtedly wrong to refuse
them. Having a right and being right are two different things."
That latter sentence is well-put and a principle all too often ignored.
Penthe should certainly correct me if I'm misrepresenting his theory, but I see
it as a rule utilitarian explanation of the moral imperative for
generosity. I don't see "utilitarian" and "pragmatic" as necessarily bad
things. And I don't read Penthe's theory as being based solely on
self-interest, but in recognizing the connection between self-interest and the
community interest.
From Penthe: "The evil act is to not give of it generously. Not because
selfishness is intrinsically wrong, but because it undermines the structure of
the society, and the place of the individual in the kinship networks. The value
of ‘good’ is to belong to your group, and to belong in the right place. Giving
symbolises this position of ‘rightness’."
Finally, I think the personal sacrifice of Frodo is different. For
example, I don't think Frodo would be blameworthy if he did not volunteer to
take up the Ring at the Council of Elrond (whereas Feanor WAS blameworthy for
not agreeing to give up the Silmarils). The duty of charity is not a duty
of
martyrdom.
