Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
We see their armor in the films, picturing Peter Jackson's orcs. Not Tolkien's orcs. The text of The Hobbit is explicit that they are inventive in the creation of devices.
Last edited:
The text of The Hobbit is explicit that they are inventive in the creation of devices.
One, the Goblins of the Hobbit don't have a master at that point in time. They merely serve leaders from among their own. But this could be the "giving them a little autonomy" idea you suggest.
Two, the orcs of the two towers (Cirith Ungol) wants to leave the service of the Dark Tower to set up with a gang of their own in the mountain. Which does not seem productive in an algorithm designed to serve the Dark Tower. Nor a useful form of autonomy.
Orcs may be soulless. They certainy are, as portrayed by Tolkien, evil (though some of the texts in the Silm imply, likely unintentionally, that this may not be universal). But mindless is not a suitable book-based characterization. It's more the clichés post-Tolkien writers and fans created from a superficial reading of his work.
Two, the orcs of the two towers (Cirith Ungol) wants to leave the service of the Dark Tower to set up with a gang of their own in the mountain. Which does not seem productive in an algorithm designed to serve the Dark Tower. Nor a useful form of autonomy.
Orcs may be soulless. They certainy are, as portrayed by Tolkien, evil
The remote influence is definitely a thing; but the same sentence clarifies that ALL the hosts of Mordor feel the loss of that driving power. This would include assorted Easterlings and Southrons, which is to say, men. They were less affected than Orcs by the fall of Sauron a little later (which stands to reason: orcs have been under that powe muuuuuch longer), but even so many of them had the same reaction as many of the orcs, which is to say throw down their weapons and run.
Huffpost today has an article on racism in high fantasy, esp. Dungeons & Dragons.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dungeons-and-dragons-diversity-evil-races_n_5ef3b7cac5b643f5b22eb22a
Exerpt:
Being brought up in a world of white privilege, I blithely skipped over all of this. I accepted that in fantasies elves are good, and orcs are bad. My first two novels are a bit better, being set in a multi-racial city. Still my craftsmen are gnomes, my elves are musical & beautiful, my orcs are irritable, etc.
It wasn't until I introduced my drows that I realized something was terribly wrong. Drows are black skinned, evil, subterranean elves. In real life, black skins are because of melanin which protects skin against the sun's rays. Subterranean creatures should be white, not black. Making drows black is racist, no doubt about it. Thus my evil elves are albinos.
The Huffpost article and the planned direction of D&D contends that someone's morals and abilities should not be based upon the race into which they are born. If so, how will this change fantasies?
Morality and Intelligence are separate concept, and we gsin nothing by gauging one on the basis of the other.
Across the length and breadth of the saga, when do we see orcs acting for themselves commit acts of reckless, gratuitous evil?
I mean they could have just had the moldy bread. It's not like they're pure carnivores because clearly it was sustaining them for the majority of the march. Yet the orc who chose to fight the orc commander just proves their mindless need to commit violence when it's totally disadvantageous. Just look at what happened to him!
Again he didn't have to kill himself. Also the debris from the explosion killed many of his own comrades. Now sure humans have done this before, but surely this doesn't look promising.
Again: These are Peter Jackson's orcs, not Tolkien's orcs. Not a diss against Jacksonks, whose movie adaptation I love, but it is a different version of the story, and universe, as told by a different creator with his own vision. It is not a valid source in discussions of the nature of Tolkien's vision.
Refer to what Tolkien wrote, or don't pretend you're discussing Tolkien's orcs.
(Tolkien's orcs aren't cannibals, for one thing - they canonicaly view it badly enough to use it as a slur against their enemies. And for another, sacrificing some troops to undermine the enemy fortifications is...hell-o, have you ever read anything at all on the history of warfare?)
Let's not forget, this was endorsed by the Tolkien estate.But CT's dismissive attitude toward the very notion ofadaptations as a thing with value in its own right (though separate from the canon) is at once intelectually indefensible, at at odds with the views expressed by his father (who had a grasp of how legends form snd grow through retelling) himself.
Honestly, I've seen Joij21 in OT and you're not gonna get much more out of this conversation. He's one of the "Decide, Announce, Defend" types, and given he's basing his argument in rigid moral determinism, I doubt he's here to change his mind.That's a fairly uncritical answer, making generic assumption with very little effort that combine and confuse a wide variety of extremely different portrayals and lob them under the same label, despite the obvious differences between them (even Lord of the Rings Book Orcs and Lord of the Rings Movies Orcs are noticeably different, for crying out loud).
One might also point out that it seems that your answer is deeply stuck in the past, attached to older representation and ignoring countless more recent representation such as are found in the Warcraft (ever-so-slightly noticeable) or Elder Scrolls Universe. ...
Honestly, I've seen Joij21 in OT and you're not gonna get much more out of this conversation. He's one of the "Decide, Announce, Defend" types, and given he's basing his argument in rigid moral determinism, I doubt he's here to change his mind.