Perhaps evil is just the removal of a person's free will. That certainly seems to be suggested by the Black Rider's dagger-inflicted wound that would put Frodo under the Black Rider's command. Tolkien describes that, after Glorfindel cries out for Frodo to "Ride forward! Ride!", Frodo does not "obey at once, for a strange reluctance seized him. Checking the horse to awalk, he turned and looked back. The Riders seemed to sit upon their great steeds like threatening statues upon a hill, dark and solid, while all the woods and land about them receded as if into a mist. Suddenly he knew in his heart that they were commanding him to wait. [. . .] Hatred stirred in him, but he had no longer the strength to refuse."
Unlike Lucas's trilogy, which I might add apparently is getting three more movies, it seems that in this story anger is channeled as a means to resist evil, rather than a source of temptation. (E.g. "Hatred stirred within him.") This goes against the classic archetype of anger and revenge being a pathway to evil. But here, anger at evil itself is a energy source to compel action even when the odds seem long. Frodo becomes angry at the Riders, and brandishes his sword. Anger plays an important role in Frodo's resistance. From the language of the text, it seems that Frodo, without anger, would not have been able to resist the pull of the Riders, and Middle Earth would have been doomed.
From a Darwinian perspective, every emotion serves a useful purpose. So maybe anger shouldn't be looked at as such a bad thing, but something that people have cultivated over thousands of years, and can help people resist black riders of their own. Perhaps the very nature of anger, like all things is merely how is directed. Is it wrong to be angry at one who has cheated you? No. Or who has hurt you? No. Or towards ideas you find to be wrong? No. Anger is the great motivator that spurs people to action and that facilitates change. Without anger, there would be no motivator to make things better.
That's what seems to be at stake in this chapter. Will Frodo succumb to evil? The riders themselves certainly seem to think so. That's why we can assume they withdrew in the previous chapter, because once Frodo is pierced with evil the Riders assume no living being can resist. Evil is a lot like that. When you perform an act that is wrong over time, it no longer stings the conscience, because your viewpoints about that very act have shifted. What once was wrong now seems right. The power of the Riders is to twist Frodo's mind so he obeys a force he previously did not wish to obey.
So again, what are these Black Riders? We have posed the question before. Well, we know they are creatures that lurk in the shadows. They run when hobbits shout at them (e.g. Nob). In multiple instances, they have leaped out, struck quickly, then quickly withdrew. They fly before light and fire and those with strong hearts and will. Even Nob was able to scare a few Riders when he showed courage before them. Indeed, strength in battle might be irrelevant when fighting the Riders, but rather strength of heart is the key to defeating them. Eowyn certainly shows this strength of heart later on when killing their leader.
The Riders are hoping Frodo will procure the means of his own doom by giving in to the dagger. Perhaps that is merely all the Riders are: like the ring, creatures that draw out the potential for evil that already exist within ourselves. We all fight our own daggers, in a way, chased by death. Perhaps Flight to the Ford can be viewed as something more than just a simple escape into the woods. We all seek the peace of Rivendell. The question is, can we resist the dagger long enough to get there?
"Perhaps evil is just the removal of a person's free will." That would be LDS doctrine in a nutshell, particularly re: the plan of Lucifer, fascinating!
ReplyDeleteAlso, I appreciate your refusal to acknowledge the Prequel Star Wars trilogy.
ReplyDelete