Nietzche and Tolkien

External Since: Oct 25, 2004 Posts: 384

Yesterday I read a few excerpts from one of Nietzche's later works, 'The
Geneology of Morals'.

Nietzche offered a rather novel, intriguing idea, about the subversion of
the value-system of the warrior-caste, by the priestly-caste, in millenia
past. Given that the priestly-caste were, almost by definition, impotent and
weak, they began a rather clever campaign against those more potent, daring,
and vigorous than themselves.

When warriors were able to take revenge upon their enemies, but priests were
not, this quality of inaction, of inability, was called patience, or mercy.
When warriors enjoyed their wealth and prosperity of their labours, but
priests lived in poverty, it was called greed on the part of the warriors;
modesty on the part of priests. Not only that, but the ascetic lifestyle of
the priests was considered but a tiny morsel of discomfort in comparison to
the eternity of bliss that awaited them in heaven.

This subversion of values is never mentioned, these days, precisely because
of how successful it was. Basically, Nietzche says that the subversion began
with the priestly-caste having four-letters, the first being a 'J', and was
inherited by the Christian church, which has obviously been a dominant, if
not *the* dominant institution, in Western civilization.

Those sorts of ideas are just a scratch on the surface of what Nietzche
wrote, and I wish I could remember more.

This immediately brought to mind Lord of the Rings, where there's an awful
lot of mercy and impotence going around, in fact is it is mercy and
impotence which saves the day (Bilbo and Frodo each sparing Gollum, Gollum's
own impotence in not falling into molten lava).

External Since: Apr 18, 2004 Posts: 9

"Chris Wright" <cjwright79.TakeThisOut@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:<ksJwc.687415$Ig.461493@pd7tw2no>...

> Nietzche offered a rather novel, intriguing idea, about the subversion of
> the value-system of the warrior-caste, by the priestly-caste, in millenia
> past. Given that the priestly-caste were, almost by definition, impotent and
> weak, they began a rather clever campaign against those more potent, daring,
> and vigorous than themselves.
>
> When warriors were able to take revenge upon their enemies, but priests were
> not, this quality of inaction, of inability, was called patience, or mercy.

"But morality in [Chris Wright's] world (where evil does not exist, a
la Nietszche) seems to mean strength, rather than virtuousness. True,
Boromir seems to have led a life in which he has accepted a demanding
code of honor and has had the strength to live up to it. Until he
encounters the ring.

At first he makes reasoned and courageous arguments about how the ring
might be wielded in defense of the West (and I agree with you that the
film's Boromir brings believable passion to that pitch at the Council
of Elrond -- it is the best acting in the movie trilogy). But then
comes the lie about resisting Galadriel's temptation, the
rationalization about why he deserved possession of the ring, the
fantasies about becoming a king by conquest, the breaking of his oath,
and the attempt to assault and rob Frodo. By this time, the ring has
shown Boromir to be the weakest member of the Company morally; the
first to succumb to the ring's poison because he began with the most
hubris." Charles Stewart, rec.arts.books.tolkien, 18 April 2004.

See: <http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=d6e20427.0404180023.698c4e5c%40posting.google.com&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26q%3Dnietszche%2Bstewart%26btnG%3DSearch%26meta%3Dgroup%253Drec.arts.books.tolkien>

Charles Stewart