I didn't say I was cynical, you did. I don't agree, so I used the term in
quotes to keep that clear. I said Tolkien was 'cynical' - quote/unquote - to
highlight that he agreed with my views - so characterized by you - on the
survivability of pacifists in the real world.
I guess I thought the connection between my statement:
"Again, like all real pacifists, [Frodo] exists in a world where he is
protected from harm by non-pacifists: Sam in Mordor, the other Hobbits in the
Shire during the Scouring. He chooses a role for himself of moral superiority,
dispensing pity and mercy, asserting that this has a value and a worth during
the conduct of a war that is equal to the physical superiority of the warriors
who accompany and guard him. As in any society that accepts the existence of
pacifists, the warriors honor this choice, which allows them to show
no mercy whatever."
and Tolkien's comments:
"[Tom's] is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there
is a war. But the view of Rivendell seems to be that this it is an excellent
thing to have represented, but that there are in fact things with which it
cannot cope; and upon which its existence nonetheless depends. Ultimately only
the victory of the West will allow Bombadil to continue, or even
survive. Nothing would be left for him in the world of Sauron."
was clear. The agreement is not exact - why should it be? - but it is much
closer than I had expected from your reference to
it.
"Wake up and smell the coffee."
squire online:
Footerama: "Tolkien would have LOVED it!" (improved!)
The Valaquenta discussion
