What follows are thoughts shaken loose during reflections on the readable and fascinating book, recommended by Mike Russell over at Lord of the Kingdom. The book is Following Gandalf, and if you’re interested, toss me a few nickles and obtain it by the link below. Under “the fold” you can find some preliminary reflections. I have a few chapters to go, but it’s been … interesting.
Battle and conflict are a big part of the Lord of the Rings trilogy not to speak of the full Silmarillion mythic tapestry. Conflict for Aragorn, Gandalf and the leaders of the West is as much concentrated on the spiritual as the physical. Examples of this abound in the story but can this be translated to the “real” world as well? It seems it might. In our global politics, we might ask, is our country now strong enough that we might fight our battles primarily in the spiritual and plane of ideas first while still acting resulutely in the here and now. In fact, having set our house in order in the plane of ideas, our determination to act firmly and swiftly might be more in line and done more confidently. If, half of what Ed Morriessey writes in this post is true, and my doubts mostly lie in the ability of any presentation of “truth” in the fog of disinformation disseminating from Iraq and the beltway, then our media or MSM might have been doing us a great disservice. If our enemy admits the only battle they are winning is the hearts and minds of the American press, the question should be … why were the hearts ond minds of those gentlemen and ladies for sale so cheaply?
As well, if our focus is (was?) on the spiritual battle in ascendence over the physical, then the prisoner abuses, and questions of torture might not have been asked. Using those methods is akin to Boromir’s concentration on the physical aspects of the battle, which for him, opened him to the temptations of that “one great weapon”, i.e., the ring. Setting aside questions of whether torture might be effective is the question of is it righteous. As I’ve written long ago, it very well might be and relatively simple survey of (classified) intelligence gathering might clear that up, However, it is clear that “torture” is not. While torture might have differing cultural and persoonal definitions, torture from the point of view of the interrogator is more clear.
Free will and it’s consequences come into this discussion, as well as the fact that Tolkein viewed both the immortality of the Eleven folk and the mortality of Men were viewed as gifts. In fact, all three (free will, mortallity and immortality) were the Creator’s great gifts. As some proponents of technologically based immortality or at least greatly prolonged life, e.g., Mr Reynolds and others, fail to examine (in print at the very least) the deeper impactd this might have on human society, at the same time we often do fail to view our mortailty as a great and positive gift. Free will is a slippery thing, and it is a thing which Tolkein postively affirms strongly. As Karl Barth was imputed to say (and I’m quoting from memory), “I don’t care if the serpent spoke, what’s important is what he said”. Free will likewise, it doesn’t matter if free will is rejected on “scientific” or philosophical grounds, the important thing is that we must act as if we have it (and for that matter I think we do). Accepting free will comes hand in hand with accepting moral responsibility for our actions. And if I might be so bold, denying moral responsibility for your actions is the action of a person who should not call himself Man (or as it is said in Narnia, “a son of Adam”).
One Response
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
Continuing the Discussion