XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article <6onq3ahapjnrnp5i6ubps9ih3b91k03ulq@4ax.com>, Paul S. Person  wrote:   
      
   > > > Paul S. Person:   
   > > > So, does this leave us with "Men are more corruptible than   
   > > > Elves" because Men cannot detect the danger and take their rings   
   > > > off fast enough? That is, that "corruptibility" is, in effect, a   
   > > > lack of some ability that Elves possess and not Men?   
   > >   
   > > Bill O'Meally:   
   > > I don't think it was because Men could or could not detect the   
   > > danger. Tolkien makes it pretty clear that Men were more easily   
   > > corrupted than Elves.   
   >   
   > Corrupted in what sense?   
      
   > More likely to rob banks or embezzle funds?   
      
   > Easier to deceive?   
      
   Likely. Also easier to exploit the greed for wealth and power, as Tolkien   
   explains in LOTR: Appendix A. And if the Numenoreans could be corrupted by   
   their greed for power, surely normal men were even more likely to fall   
   victim of it as well.   
      
   And the lore is, according to Gandlaf in The Shadow of the past:   
      
   "Nine he gave to Mortal Men, proud and great, and so ensnared them"   
      
   They were "proud and great", "and so", i.e. "therefore" they were ensnared.   
   This in contrast to the seven and the three, who never ensnared anyone.   
      
   > That would seem to be the only way in which Men can be said to be more   
   > "corruptible" than Elves. But that is not a /moral/ difference, for Men   
   > cannot reasonably be blamed for it.   
      
   Well, morality is tricky. One could make a case out of the fact that men   
   are mortal, so with less time in Arda, they are more easily lured into   
   taking advantage of things to become powerful in the shortest amount of   
   time, or even be corrupted by things that could prolong their lives, which   
   is more likely the natural lure of the nine.   
      
   > Unless, of course, it is regarded as a result of something like   
   > Original Sin.   
      
   Well, the Gift of Men was something that was regarded a gift from the   
   start, men welcomed their death, or at least treated it as a gift. It was   
   Morgoth that ruined the gift, where they came to fear death rather than   
   cherish it. So if one were to accept that fear of death makes you easier to   
   corrupt while alive, you should blame Morgoth.   
      
   > If that is what "more corruptible" means, it is like saying that a   
   > common mutt is "less competent" than a retriever because it does not   
   > retrieve dead ducks as well as a retriever does.   
      
   That's a pretty flawed analogy.   
      
   I think it's more like saying that immigrants are more prone to crime. It's   
   a generalization, and the statistics that supposedly supports it only   
   support the outcome, not the cause. I.e. being an immigrant doesn't make   
   you a criminal in itself, but in some circumstances, the common environment   
   for an immigrant may be an environment that would make many people   
   criminals.   
      
   So, if we still toy with the idea that death itself was a leading reason   
   for why men became greedy for power, then it's fair to assume that if that   
   parameter would be inflicted on other races, the end result might have been   
   tha same.   
      
   I.e. make all elves mortal, and in X number of generations, their greed may   
   match that of men. Put the native population in the projects, and perhaps   
   they are as likely to turn to crime as well?   
      
   > And "more corruptible" is comparitive. If the fact is that 99.8% of   
   > Elves are corruptible and 99.9% of Men are corruptible, then Men are   
   > clearly "more corruptible" than Elves, but the reality is that the   
   > difference is of no importance at all.   
      
   How is that a "reality"?   
      
   When Isildur greedily took the ring for himself, both Elrond and Cirdan   
   told him to destroy it, which surely makes for a bigger difference than a   
   supposed 0.1% in corruptibility.   
      
   > And then there is Feanor. At one point, Feanor was asked to   
   > surrender his Silmarils to destruction in order to revive the Two   
   > Trees, and he refused. If refusing to toss the Ring into the fires   
   > of Orodruin make Isuldur "corrupt", then surely Feanor is just as   
   > "corrupt". And yet Feanor is a very high-level Elf, in many ways.   
      
   Also a flawed analogy. A part of Feanor's "essence" were put into the   
   Silmarils, and when asked he said that he could not give them up with his   
   own free will, since he thought that the only way to release the light was   
   to break the Silmarils. He also said that if he were to be forced to break   
   them, the Valar would be no better than Morgoth. But some thought that he   
   could have been persuaded.   
      
   Morgoth then stole the Silmarils, so even if Feanor could be persuaded,   
   nothing could be done.   
      
   The oath of Feanor, where he declares war on Morgoth and all who stands in   
   his way to recover the Silmarils, were made in light of his father being   
   murdered.   
      
   All that said, Feanor *were* influenced by Morgoth's lies and whispering   
   plans, and Feanor had been banished for believing and acting upon it, and   
   held a grudge against the Valar partly because of it.   
      
   But the difference is that the Silmarils had no influence over Feanor, they   
   didn't grant him any powers or domination over others. They were precious   
   to him because he made them and they were partly of him. They were sacred   
   stones not only to him.   
      
   Isildur was lured by the power of the one ring, what keeping it could mean   
   for his own future, and was thus corrupted by it.   
      
   In more modern terms - Isildur was given the chance to a shitload of money,   
   and Feanor was asked whether someone could use an organ, and possibly kill,   
   his firstborn child.   
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)