Can we not have peace? (Lord of the Rings)

[Talakeal]

In the Lord of the Rings trilogy, does anyone ever suggest dealing with Sauron diplomatically? I don't believe they do.

Why does no one ever even consider signing a treaty with Sauron? The free peoples have his ring, which is certainly a major bargaining chip, especially if they can convince him that they have found a way to either use it to overthrow him or to destroy it (which they believe they have). It seems to me like it would be possible to trade the ring in an exchange for a cessation of hostilities against the free peoples of the West.

Is it because Sauron is too treacherous? He seems to have plenty of allies and offers plenty of deals, I remember he offers Rohan status as a tributary state, offers to trade the dwarves of Erebor their ring back in exchange for information about Bilbo, has an alliance with Sarumon (in which Sarumon thinks he will be the one who betrays Sauron one day) and the mouth of Sauron even offers the free people all land West of the Anduin. Is Sauron simply the type who will break his treaties and Middle Earth the sort of setting where such agreements have no higher authority upon a being such as high?

Or do they simply believe that Sauron is too imperious and proud to accept such a bargain? I doubt it, as he has surrendered many times in the First and Second age to Numenoreon, Valar, and Eldar forces.

On a deeper level I think it says a lot about the high fantasy genre that making peace with the "dark lord" is simply unacceptable. In the trilogy any time there is talk of peace it is always the evil person doing the talking, and the "good guys" always reject them out of hand in favor of more violence. {Scrubbed}

[Spiryt]

They knew that bargaining with him would be a catastrophe, and would end just like with Numenor, and other places... I mean, Gandalf, Elrond, and other people who knew about those events.

Letting him know that they have a ring would be a huge mistake too - he would know, much more precisely where to seek now.


if they can convince him that they have found a way to either use it to overthrow him or to destroy it (which they believe they have)

Except that Sauron himself made The One Ring, and he knew perfectly well, better than anyone else, that it can only be destroyed in one way.

As far as using it, he would fear it without doubt, so would likely do everything to take the Ring away.


Generally the whole concept is that Sauron was growing too powerful already, so he had no use in making any long term bargains with people who he would eventually crush anyway.

[Traab]

Its because he is an ancient being of treachery and evil. He has no reason to seek peace. He has a massive army ten times larger than anything the free people of middle earth could ever hope to defeat. Using the ring is a nonstarter. At best you would replace sauron with an equally powerful and evil dark lord. At worst? The idiot trying to use the ring would be consumed. Enslaved, and endlessly tormented by sauron after being forced to crawl back to mordor and turn it over by the unrelenting malice contained within it. They cant announce they will destroy it. There is only one way to do that and it revolves around walking into saurons home turf. If he had even the SLIGHTEST clue that destroying the ring had entered their minds, he would have sealed off mt doom and it would become impossible to do without invading mordor, which they CANT because they dont have enough people.

Peace could only be achieved through destroying sauron, or surrendering to him for eternal slavery. Like all the other people who obey him. Perhaps they could have accepted the terms. That would have only delayed the inevitable. A couple generations later and their grandkids would have been the ones dealing with an even more massive invasion coming for them.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

On a deeper level I think it says a lot about the high fantasy genre, and human nature in general, that making peace with the "dark lord" is simply unacceptable. In the trilogy any time there is talk of peace it is always the evil person doing the talking, and the "good guys" always reject them out of hand in favor of more violence. It seems a strange and somewhat sad commentary on the human condition.
I think it's not a commentary on the human condition, but rather a very straightforward aftereffect of high fantasy: in The Lord of the Rings, evil is something that is palpable and even physical. Sauron is literally a being of evil who desires to crush goodness and beauty.

He's not even a psychopath. He's something beyond that, something that does not exist in the modern realistic worldview. He is literally irredeemably evil. You don't and can't bargain with that.

It falls apart when we try to analyze it as though it were a story from our modern world, because it's not operating under the paradigm of our world. It doesn't make sense in our world; it's an impossibility under our rules. High fantasy is a genre where it's possible to have a being who is actually fully evil like that.

[Spiryt]

I think it's not a commentary on the human condition, but rather a very straightforward aftereffect of high fantasy: in The Lord of the Rings, evil is something that is palpable and even physical. Sauron is literally a being of evil who desires to crush goodness and beauty.

He's not even a psychopath. He's something beyond that, something that does not exist in the modern realistic worldview. He is literally irredeemably evil. You don't and can't bargain with that.


He was good, or at least not evil being, long time ago.

So it's probably redeem-ably evil as very intelligent being and all, but there's just not a power to make it happen, not anyone being able to just say 'Let him be, he got better'.




It falls apart when we try to analyze it as though it were a story from our modern world, because it's not operating under the paradigm of our world. It doesn't make sense in our world; it's an impossibility under our rules. High fantasy is a genre where it's possible to have a being who is actually fully evil like that.


There are plenty of people in 'our world' that are quite like that, child murderers and torturers who, at most, plainly admit that they won't stop if returned to freedom.

Not nearly Sauron like, but enough of plain, not fantasy equivalent - mind warped beyond help, desires intolerable, uncontrollable, and unmanageable. Close enough, you only have to bring the scale up.

[Yora]

So it's probably redeem-ably evil as very intelligent being and all, but there's just not a power to make it happen, not anyone being able to just say 'Let him be, he got better'.

To quote a different fantasy story about opposing superhuman evil: "The avalanche has already started. It's too late for the pebbles to vote."

[Avloren]

It falls apart when we try to analyze it as though it were a story from our modern world, because it's not operating under the paradigm of our world. It doesn't make sense in our world; it's an impossibility under our rules. High fantasy is a genre where it's possible to have a being who is actually fully evil like that.

But to me it does make perfect sense when analyzed with real world logic, without making any fantastical assumptions about Sauron being irredeemably evil, the very embodiment of lies and treachery, etc. As an aside I don't believe his actions within the books support that characterization, anyway - as the OP notes, he does seem perfectly capable of negotiating and maintaining alliances, the only problem is he's become simply too powerful to be held to any agreement by force.

Say for the sake of argument that he behaves like an average human leader, possibly arrogant and ambitious but not unusually evil or untrustworthy. This human leader has (via immense personal power/charisma) absolute unquestioned control over a superpower with more military strength of all his rivals allied together. He's in the process of crushing the last few, weak enemies that foolishly oppose his rule. His only cause for concern is a certain lost item, which if found and secretly brought to a certain point in the heart of his nation, could destroy him - or, if we believe Boromir, it could be used directly against him militarily. Either way, it's the only thing that could defeat him at this point.

You would take this item - your one and only bargaining chip that could possibly stand between him and utter world domination -and you would trade this back to him, for a promise that he'll be nice going forward? He doesn't need to be irredeemably evil for that to be a bad idea: even an average human might succumb to the temptation to simply do what he wants, if he has absolute power and the only thing holding him back was a promise made to a hated enemy. All real world treaties are enforced by military power, and the ring is the only thing that gives Sauron's enemies any semblance of military parity.

To paraphrase the ancient Athenians: "The concept of right and wrong is only important between equals in power; otherwise the strong do what they want and the weak suffer what they must." Sauron has no equals in power, so if he gets the ring then no treaty or diplomacy can stop him from simply doing what he wants.

[hamishspence]

I remember he offers Rohan status as a tributary state, offers to trade the dwarves of Erebor their ring back in exchange for information about Bilbo, has an alliance with Sarumon (in which Sarumon thinks he will be the one who betrays Sauron one day) and the mouth of Sauron even offers the free people all land West of the Anduin.

He offers the dwarves all three rings surviving of the Seven, and the kingdom of Moria, for the One - but only "friendship" and "great reward" for information:


"Moria! Moria! Wonder of the Northern world! Too deep we delved there, and woke the nameless fear. Long have its vast mansions lain empty since the children of Durin fled. But now we spoke of it again with longing, and yet with dread; for no dwarf has dared to pass the doors of Khazad-dûm for many lives of kings, save Thrór only, and he perished. At last, however, Balin listened to the whispers, and resolved to go; and though Dáin did not give leave willingly, he took with him Ori and Óin and many of our folk, and they went away south.

That was nigh on thirty years ago. For a while we had news and it seemed good: messages reported that Moria had been entered and a great work begun there. Then there was silence, and no word has ever come from Moria since.

Then about a year ago a messenger came to Dáin, but not from Moria - from Mordor: a horseman in the night, who called Dáin to his gate. The Lord Sauron the Great, so he said, wished for our friendship. Rings he would give for it, such as he gave of old. And he asked urgently concerning hobbits, of what kind they were, and where they dwelt. "For Sauron knows," said he, "that one of these was known to you on a time."

At this we were greatly troubled, and we gave no answer. And then his fell voice was lowered, and he would have sweetened it if he could. "As a small token only of your friendship Sauron asks this," he said: "that you should find this thief," such was his word, "and get from him, willing or no, a little ring, the least of rings, that once he stole. It is but a trifle that Sauron fancies, and an earnest of your good will. Find it, and three rings that the Dwarf sires possessed of old shall be returned to you, and the realm of Moria shall be yours for ever. Find only news of the thief, whether he still lives and where, and you shall have great reward and lasting friendship from the Lord. Refuse, and things will not seem so well. Do you refuse?"

At that his breath came like the hiss of snakes, and all who stood by shuddered, but Dáin said: "I say neither yea nor nay. I must consider this message and what it means under its fair cloak."

"Consider well, but not too long," said he.

"The time of my thought is my own to spend," answered Dáin.

"For the present," said he, and rode into the darkness.

Heavy have the hearts of our chieftains been since that night. We needed not the fell voice of the messenger to warn us that his words held both menace and deceit; for we knew already that the power that has re-entered Mordor has not changed, and ever it betrayed us of old. Twice the messenger has returned, and has gone unanswered. The third and last time, so he says, is soon to come, before the ending of the year.

And so I have been sent at last by Dáin to warn Bilbo that he is sought by the Enemy, and to learn, if may be, why he desires this ring, this least of rings. Also we crave the advice of Elrond. For the Shadow grows and draws nearer. We discover that messengers have come also to King Brand in Dale, and that he is afraid. We fear that he may yield. Already war is gathering on his eastern borders. If we make no answer, the Enemy may move Men of his rule to assail King Brand, and Dáin also."

The dwarves don't trust him, because of past betrayals.

[Traab]

He offers the dwarves all three rings surviving of the Seven, and the kingdom of Moria, for the One - but only "friendship" and "great reward" for information:



The dwarves don't trust him, because of past betrayals.

The elves dont trust him, due to past betrayals. Im pretty sure the kingdoms of men, those who know their history, dont trust him, due to past betrayals. The only beings in middle earth that DONT have a long betrayal filled history with sauron are the hobbits. And thats due to lack of opportunity, not him being a nice guy.

[Aotrs Commander]

Because not acknowledgeing actual inherent Evil is Evil is incredibly stupid and will get you killed?

'Cos, yeah Sauron would have gone for that deal, totally he would, though it might take a while for him to stop crying with laughter. He gets his Ring back, he can give himself plenty of time to build his forces and then stomp the idiots flat, probably from a pre-emptive strike, just to ensure that he kills them all.

Assuming he wasn't then just so much more powerful by that point than anyone else, he couldn't just literally walk up and down Middle Earth batting Men, Elves, Dwarves and Hobbits around like HE invented golf, while laughing.

Seriously.

Sauron wanted to rule the entire world. Why would he even the heck CONSIDER keeping his side of the bargain when the idiots just GIVE him the one thing stopping him?

(Nevermind Sauron, it's exactly what I would do.)


{Scrubbed}

Diplomacy only works if the other guy gives a crap about what you can offer. And if some people/things want what you don't want them to want, you're kinda crap out of luck, unless you can actually straight-out force them.

[Divayth Fyr]

But to me it does make perfect sense when analyzed with real world logic, without making any fantastical assumptions about Sauron being irredeemably evil, the very embodiment of lies and treachery, etc. As an aside I don't believe his actions within the books support that characterization, anyway - as the OP notes, he does seem perfectly capable of negotiating and maintaining alliances, the only problem is he's become simply too powerful to be held to any agreement by force.
Let me see... Teaching the Elves how to make Rings of Power only to forge the One Ring in secret wanting to dominate the other ring-bearers. Giving the Nine Rings to men to enslave them for eternity. Giving the Seven to Dwarves, leading to the downfall of many of their rulers (since the rings made them greedy to the point of obsession). The whole plot that lead to Númenor's destruction. Yes, nothing supports the characterization...


The only beings in middle earth that DONT have a long betrayal filled history with sauron are the hobbits. And thats due to lack of opportunity, not him being a nice guy.
I wouldn't say he beayed orcs, trolls and such ;P Now, if you were talking about the "good" races, that would be true ;)

[runeghost]

I think it's not a commentary on the human condition, but rather a very straightforward aftereffect of high fantasy: in The Lord of the Rings, evil is something that is palpable and even physical. Sauron is literally a being of evil who desires to crush goodness and beauty.

He's not even a psychopath. He's something beyond that, something that does not exist in the modern realistic worldview. He is literally irredeemably evil. You don't and can't bargain with that.

It falls apart when we try to analyze it as though it were a story from our modern world, because it's not operating under the paradigm of our world. It doesn't make sense in our world; it's an impossibility under our rules. High fantasy is a genre where it's possible to have a being who is actually fully evil like that.

And that's where most of Tolkien's imitators fall down, and maybe where the OPs confusion comes from. Sauron is, like you pointed out, literally evil incarnate - he can't do anything good, at all, ever. All that remains of the being he once was is the direction it shaped his evil.

Most "imitation Saurons" are just bad people (not always bad humans) with bad intentions. {Scrubbed}

[Yora]

The orcs are what happened to the elves he betrayed.

[Spiryt]

{Scrubbed}

[Divayth Fyr]

The orcs are what happened to the elves he betrayed.
Wasn't that particular thing his master's doing? Sauron just made use of the available resource.

[Avloren]

Let me see... Teaching the Elves how to make Rings of Power only to forge the One Ring in secret wanting to dominate the other ring-bearers. Giving the Nine Rings to men to enslave them for eternity. Giving the Seven to Dwarves, leading to the downfall of many of their rulers (since the rings made them greedy to the point of obsession). The whole plot that lead to Númenor's destruction. Yes, nothing supports the characterization...

Hey, I'm not saying I'd buy a used car from the guy. My point is that, on the scale of diplomacy between nations, he's proven capable of negotiating with other powers and respecting alliances/treaties about as well as real nations do (which is to say, they respect treaties so as long as it's in their own interest to do so). The problem - both during the second age before his original defeat, and again at the time of the LotR trilogy - is that he's become so powerful that there's no longer any force in Middle Earth that could make him stick to a treaty. Under those conditions diplomacy can not work, either in fantasy or reality.

[Grim Portent]

The orcs are what happened to the elves he betrayed.

Orcs were made by Morgoth, not Sauron. Sauron made none of the evil forces that serve him, with the possible exception of the Fellbeasts. He did improve on Morgoth's creations though after inheriting his mentor's lordship over the dark forces of the world.

[Gnoman]

The essence of Sauron - and thus the essence of the One Ring- is the desire to enslave and dominate all that exists. Gandalf makes a point of explaining this in the first book - Sauron would conquer the Shire and enslave the hobbits despite them being completely useless to him -he has much more useful slaves- because the thought of hobbits -of any creature- living free was a torture to him.

[TheThan]

Not everyone is willing to negotiate.

See when you negotiate, you make compromise. Compromise is giving up something you want or have in favor of something else you want that they have.

Sauron is not the sort of being that would be willing to compromise. There is nothing the others have that they can offer him in exchange for him not invading.

So they have the ring. Ok that ring is designed to come back to him eventually anyway. It doesn’t matter what they try to do with it (except destroy it obviously) he’ll get it back. So why compromise? Aside from the ring, which he doesn’t really need to have in his possession, what do the others offer him in exchange for him not invading? Nothing really.

[Cuthalion]

It's also not completely fair to say that they rejected his terms offhand, because they were absolutely ridiculous. I would rather hope Frodo is still alive, if he isn't, die then, rather than be under the rule of Sauron.

[Thrudd]

Even ignoring the cosmic good/evil aspect and all the history, they know that treating for peace with Sauron would be nothing but a delaying action. Sauron wants peace so he can stop focusing on his armies and put the nazgul and his full attention on finding the ring and defending his borders from exactly the thing that eventually defeated him. Gandalf and the Wise know this. His power will only continue grow, so long as the ring is still out there, and the free peoples become weaker and further outnumbered. So any peace would almost certainly be temporary.

Even if Sauron kept his word, living in the world mostly ruled by Sauron is not a nice place. This isn't just a kingdom like any other, this is a place that spews out black smoke to blot out the sun, spawns bloodthirsty monsters, enslaves people, and generally ruins everything for everyone else. So sure, you can end the war and stop fighting, if you're willing to turn a blind eye to this nightmare world and live in constant fear of Sauron's armies being turned on you.

There really was only one way to save the world, and they were willing to risk it or die trying. The alternative was a place nobody wanted to live.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Hey, I'm not saying I'd buy a used car from the guy. My point is that, on the scale of diplomacy between nations, he's proven capable of negotiating with other powers and respecting alliances/treaties about as well as real nations do (which is to say, they respect treaties so as long as it's in their own interest to do so). The problem - both during the second age before his original defeat, and again at the time of the LotR trilogy - is that he's become so powerful that there's no longer any force in Middle Earth that could make him stick to a treaty. Under those conditions diplomacy can not work, either in fantasy or reality.
I would not exactly call his subversion and corruption of Rhun and Harad "negotiation".

[Legato Endless]

On a deeper level I think it says a lot about the high fantasy genre, and human nature in general, that making peace with the "dark lord" is simply unacceptable. In the trilogy any time there is talk of peace it is always the evil person doing the talking, and the "good guys" always reject them out of hand in favor of more violence. It seems a strange and somewhat sad commentary on the human condition.

The point you may be missing, and that which a lot of criticisms of the supposed adolescent nature of any moral conflict which invokes an irredeemably antagonistic faction/individual is that Sauron is not meant to be a character you can plot in the real world. He's a literary device. His purpose is thematic. That's partially why he isn't a featured character we get any real screen time with. Arguing about how Sauron has been fundamentally 'Other-ed' is to miss the points he was created to make. While that's a reasonable point about how humans can create dichotomies and how we modulate our sympathy, it's not really applicable here. Don't blame Tolkien that a host of imitators thoughtlessly aped his work later without considering the reasons why he did what he did.

[veti]

The Mouth of Sauron offers peace terms to Aragorn and his army at the Black Gate. I can't quote the passage, but the gist of it included:

Demilitarisation for everyone but Sauron
Strategic strongpoints, such as Isengard, turned over to Sauron (and rebuilt, in the case of Isengard)

You don't need to invoke supernatural or irredeemable evil to understand why accepting terms such as these, to say nothing of the rest which I can't remember well enough to summarise, would have branded Aragorn as Too Stupid To Live. Just read up on some 20th century history. (Or any century before that, really, but 20th was what would have been freshest in Tolkien's mind as he wrote it.)

[Traab]

The Mouth of Sauron offers peace terms to Aragorn and his army at the Black Gate. I can't quote the passage, but the gist of it included:

Demilitarisation for everyone but Sauron
Strategic strongpoints, such as Isengard, turned over to Sauron (and rebuilt, in the case of Isengard)

You don't need to invoke supernatural or irredeemable evil to understand why accepting terms such as these, to say nothing of the rest which I can't remember well enough to summarise, would have branded Aragorn as Too Stupid To Live. Just read up on some 20th century history. (Or any century before that, really, but 20th was what would have been freshest in Tolkien's mind as he wrote it.)

Those werent peace terms, they were terms of surrender. Basically, "Give up pretty much everything you have, and I will let you continue to live till I feel the need to hunt you down and finish you off." It was a very short step above, "Fall down upon your swords now, and we wont have you tortured to death for the next 6 months."

[hamishspence]

The Mouth of Sauron offers peace terms to Aragorn and his army at the Black Gate. I can't quote the passage, but the gist of it included:

Demilitarisation for everyone but Sauron
Strategic strongpoints, such as Isengard, turned over to Sauron (and rebuilt, in the case of Isengard)

You don't need to invoke supernatural or irredeemable evil to understand why accepting terms such as these, to say nothing of the rest which I can't remember well enough to summarise, would have branded Aragorn as Too Stupid To Live.

Yup. They can guess what Sauron has in mind:


'These are the terms,' said the Messenger, and smiled as he eyed them one by one. 'The rabble of Gondor and its deluded allies shall withdraw at once beyond the Anduin, first taking oaths never again to assail Sauron the Great in arms, open or secret. All lands east of Anduin shall be Sauron's for ever, solely. West of the Anduin as far as the Misty Mountains and the Gap of Rohan shall be tributary to Mordor, and men there shall bear no weapons, but shall have leave to govern their own affairs. But they shall help to rebuild Isengard which they have wantonly destroyed, and that shall be Sauron's, and there his lieutenant shall dwell: not Saruman, but one more worthy of trust.'

Looking in the Messenger's eyes they read his thought. He was to be that lieutenant, and gather all that remained of the West under his sway; he would be their tyrant and they his slaves.

But Gandalf said: 'This is much to demand for the delivery of one servant: that your Master should receive in exchange what he must else fight many a war to gain! Or has the field of Gondor destroyed his hope in war, so that he falls to haggling? And if indeed we rated this prisoner so high, what surety have we that Sauron the Base Master of Treachery, will keep his part? Where is this prisoner? Let him be brought forth and yielded to us, and then we will consider these demands.'

[An Enemy Spy]

As a general rule, peace treaties occur when both sides have a strong incentive not to fight. Two basic examples are when you have forces of near or equal strength and fighting would be highly risky and costly for both sides, or when one side is more powerful but doesn't want to throw lives and resources away in a war when a diplomatic solution is much easier.
Sauron is interested in conquest, pure and simple. He has the armies and the power to sweep over all of Middle Earth and claim it as his dominion. The only negotiating he does is simply to make this conquest faster and easier. He has no incentive for peace.
The Free Peoples know this, and they also know that simply bending the knee and suing for peace won't help them, which leaves fighting as their only option. They have no incentive for peace.

[Bulldog Psion]

Even speaking "realistically," there was no reason for Sauron to negotiate.

He possessed too much military force to be defeated in the long run. He would win; sooner or later, his forces would overwhelm the other powers. So why negotiate a permanent peace with them? Unless that peace is a surrender on their part?

It's a simple cost/benefit analysis, really. Here are Sauron's choices:

1. Use armed force to crush his opponents. Cost: a few years' time (nothing to an immortal) and the lives of some of his followers. Benefit: gaining the entire world.

2. Negotiate a peace with his opponents. Cost: remain master of just part of the world. Benefit: save time and the lives of followers.

In order to take choice #2, he would have to value a few years and the lives of some orcs more than dominion over, say, half the planet. I think he'd be quite willing to trade a little time, plus even a few armies, in order to secure his eternal rule from pole to pole rather than a partial victory that gives him little more than he already has.

And he was sure of winning; even Gandalf was sure he would win. It would be like the Soviets suddenly deciding to negotiate with Hitler after his armies were broken and they were closing in on the Fuhrer Bunker. Why bother negotiating when you are 100% certain of being able to take what you want without the other guy's agreement anyway?

[warty goblin]

A treaty is based on both sides getting something they are interested in. Sauron has only one interest; ordering all the world to his wishes. Unless you have an abiding desire to be enslaved, you cannot negotiate with that.

And I'm not sure that I see it as sad that resisting evil - which Sauron is by any sane standard no matter how post-modernist you want to get - is thought of as a virtuous thing.

[Bulldog Psion]

And I'm not sure that I see it as sad that resisting evil - which Sauron is by any sane standard no matter how post-modernist you want to get - is thought of as a virtuous thing.

Agreed. It's one thing to remain open to the possibility of peace with those prepared to offer it in return, and to attempt to limit damage; it's another entirely to indulge in useless mea culpas over fighting against someone who wants to enslave or destroy your people, simply because of some "fighting is bad even if we do it to prevent the orcs from eating our children" notion.

[Tengu_temp]

I'd like to point out that there was a peace treaty between Mordor and the free kingdoms - after Sauron was destroyed.

[Talakeal]

I'd like to point out that there was a peace treaty between Mordor and the free kingdoms - after Sauron was destroyed.

Was there really? I was under the impression that the orcs continued raiding and resisting for several centuries until the humans finally drove them (more or less) to extinction.

[GloatingSwine]

People tried "negotiating" with Sauron once.

To see how well it turned out look up "The Fall of Numenor".

[warty goblin]

Agreed. It's one thing to remain open to the possibility of peace with those prepared to offer it in return, and to attempt to limit damage; it's another entirely to indulge in useless mea culpas over fighting against someone who wants to enslave or destroy your people, simply because of some "fighting is bad even if we do it to prevent the orcs from eating our children" notion.
It's not simply the whole orcs eating babies thing, it's that Sauron is inimical to any notion of freedom or self-determination. Even the orcs hate Mordor, because Mordor is ordered solely for Sauron and no one else. What is at stake in the War of the Ring is not just orcs conquering everything, it is the entire world and all its peoples being reduced to Sauron's chattel, to be ordered and disposed of only as he sees fit, just as he does with Mordor.

The Free Peoples cannot compromise with Sauron, because to compromise both sides must recognize either the strength or the legitimacy of the other. They lack the strength, and Sauron has no notion of the legitimacy of any being but himself; it is entirely against his nature to do so. This need for absolute mastery and the ordering of all things according to their own will of course being the primal crime of Melkor (and thus Sauron) in the beginning. Or as Theoden put it at Orthanc; "Even if your war on me was just - as it was not, for were you ten times as wise you would have no right to rule over me and mine for your own profit as you desired - even so, what will you say of your torches in the Westfold and the children that lie dead there?"

It is not only for the children of the Westfold that the West must stand against Sauron, but so that he does not rule over all other for his own profits and desires.

Was there really? I was under the impression that the orcs continued raiding and resisting for several centuries until the humans finally drove them (more or less) to extinction.

The orcs just kinda faded out, deprived of the animus of Sauron. Aragorn gave all the land about the Sea of Nurn - the breadbasket of Mordor - to the human slaves of Sauron after the destruction of the Ring however.

[Thanqol]

In the Lord of the Rings trilogy, does anyone ever suggest dealing with Sauron diplomatically? I don't believe they do.

Why does no one ever even consider signing a treaty with Sauron? The free peoples have his ring, which is certainly a major bargaining chip, especially if they can convince him that they have found a way to either use it to overthrow him or to destroy it (which they believe they have). It seems to me like it would be possible to trade the ring in an exchange for a cessation of hostilities against the free peoples of the West.

Is it because Sauron is too treacherous? He seems to have plenty of allies and offers plenty of deals, I remember he offers Rohan status as a tributary state, offers to trade the dwarves of Erebor their ring back in exchange for information about Bilbo, has an alliance with Sarumon (in which Sarumon thinks he will be the one who betrays Sauron one day) and the mouth of Sauron even offers the free people all land West of the Anduin. Is Sauron simply the type who will break his treaties and Middle Earth the sort of setting where such agreements have no higher authority upon a being such as high?

Or do they simply believe that Sauron is too imperious and proud to accept such a bargain? I doubt it, as he has surrendered many times in the First and Second age to Numenoreon, Valar, and Eldar forces.

On a deeper level I think it says a lot about the high fantasy genre, and human nature in general, that making peace with the "dark lord" is simply unacceptable. In the trilogy any time there is talk of peace it is always the evil person doing the talking, and the "good guys" always reject them out of hand in favor of more violence. It seems a strange and somewhat sad commentary on the human condition.

To Sauron, orcs are disposable people. The orcs can't vote to remove Sauron if they don't like him. Sauron doesn't get anything from keeping masses of orcs around in peacetime. There are no orc civilian industries. The orcs are not providing valuable rubber and engineering expertise to Sauron. Sauron does not possess a nation with civilian infrastructure. Sauron is not accountable to his lessers in any way and does not have to fear popular revolt if he commits them to a massive war.

So it is more accurate to say that Sauron possesses an immense, cannibalistic, barbaric army that is barely capable of sustaining itself inside the waste of Mordor. What do you expect that Mordor looks like after ten years of peace? Fifty? Did you say, a flourishing agricultural nexus with a rich scientific and cultural tradition? Or did you say, 'about the same, but with more orcs'.

Imagine you're playing Civilisation and you scroll across to look at Montezuma's territory and you just see an unending carpet of horse archers. "Purely for self defense, you understand" he says, and you just nod carefully while noting that you actually turned randomly spawning barbarians off for this game.

[Bulldog Psion]

People tried "negotiating" with Sauron once.

To see how well it turned out look up "The Fall of Numenor".

Exactly.

This is one of those situations when I wish that I could cite real life examples, too. As it is, I'll just say that even without immortal beings of profound evil, our world has seen a lot of situations where negotiation was impossible, and battle or surrender (or even extermination) were the only choices. It isn't "sad" that people chose to fight rather than yield as slaves or die; it's simply what needs to be done when faced by a certain type of adversary.

[Cuthalion]

Was there really? I was under the impression that the orcs continued raiding and resisting for several centuries until the humans finally drove them (more or less) to extinction.

I think they gave those that surrendered their own lands... I'll have to look it up.

[Grim Portent]

People tried "negotiating" with Sauron once.

To see how well it turned out look up "The Fall of Numenor".

To be fair they didn't so much negotiate with Sauron as take him home as a prisoner and let him wander around the palace like a stray cat.

[zimmerwald1915]

People tried "negotiating" with Sauron once.

To see how well it turned out look up "The Fall of Numenor".
For a better example, look to the end of the War of Wrath. Sauron cannot be held to terms of surrender by beings on par with or mightier than him. Can he be trusted to hold to terms less than his own surrender by beings less mighty than him?

[Yora]

What could you even offer him? Agreeing to give him everything he wants without putting on a fight? Because as far as he is concerned, it's currently looking very much as if he is going to get everything with just a relatively small fight.

[Tvtyrant]

More importantly, why would you want peace? Sauron killed your ancestors, destroyed your homes, and ended your civilizations. Not some rival nation led by men long dead, Sauron. And the Elves and Wizards at least were there to see it. He is mankinds enemy, the voice that mocks you in the dark, the hole in things.

[comicshorse]

I would not exactly call his subversion and corruption of Rhun and Harad "negotiation".

I've always wondered what life was like in the lands that had already fallen to Sauron ? Is there anywhere that say's ?

[Gnoman]

I've always wondered what life was like in the lands that had already fallen to Sauron ? Is there anywhere that say's ?

As far as I'm aware, the only depictions we get are Mordor itself and a mention of the "great slave worked fields" that provide his armies with food.

[Bulldog Psion]

I've always wondered what life was like in the lands that had already fallen to Sauron ? Is there anywhere that say's ?

The hints would indicate a brutal pseudo-police-state. For example, the Shire under Saruman was kind of at the softer end of police states; and Frodo described it as "Mordor, or one of its works."

[McStabbington]

The hints would indicate a brutal pseudo-police-state. For example, the Shire under Saruman was kind of at the softer end of police states; and Frodo described it as "Mordor, or one of its works."

IIRC, there was nothing explicitly stated about Rhun or Harad beyond the fact that they were sending men in support of Mordor and that the "stars were strange", which really isn't that surprising for a distant land of a different latitude. There is 3rd-person omniscient perspective that says that the area around the Sea of Nurn is slave-worked farmland, but that's about as far as Tolkien's description of the East's logistics went.

Although to be fair, it's not like Tolkien was that good at logistics for anyone. If he gave even five sentences in the LotR trilogy over to describing how the good guys of the West provisioned their armies, it would be four more than I remember. I do recall Hama mentioning something about them saving a great store of food in Helm's Deep, but no mention of where it came from. For all we know, food in Middle Earth is provisioned in the same way you get food in Gauntlet: by randomly ransacking barrels you come across.

Speaking of outdated game references, Sauron could not be negotiated with for much the same reason that you couldn't negotiate with Ghandhi in Civilization: due to a glitch in his programming, he was set at a default level of such insane hostility that about the only thing you could hope to do was to bottle him up in a small part of the continent and let the fool beat himself to death on your city walls. But the Men of the Second Age forsook the wisdom of their elders and let Sauron get a core of 15-18 cities and let him get to Industrialization first, and were astonished to find themselves needing Gandalf to god-mode mobs just to stay in the game.

[Lethologica]

But the Men of the Second Age forsook the wisdom of their elders and let Sauron get a core of 15-18 cities and let him get to Industrialization first, and were astonished to find themselves needing Gandalf to god-mode mobs just to stay in the game.
Sig-worthy. Have all the upturned thumbs.

[Ravens_cry]

Let me see... Teaching the Elves how to make Rings of Power only to forge the One Ring in secret wanting to dominate the other ring-bearers. Giving the Nine Rings to men to enslave them for eternity. Giving the Seven to Dwarves, leading to the downfall of many of their rulers (since the rings made them greedy to the point of obsession). The whole plot that lead to Númenor's destruction. Yes, nothing supports the characterization...


I wouldn't say he beayed orcs, trolls and such ;P Now, if you were talking about the "good" races, that would be true ;)
He created the former by debasing elves by most reports and it's possible the latter came from ents by the same logic.
Well, that solves where the Ent Wives went . . .:smalleek:

[Tvtyrant]

He created the former by debasing elves by most reports and it's possible the latter came from ents by the same logic.
Well, that solves where the Ent Wives went . . .:smalleek:

I'm pretty sure Trolls were basically bipedal elephants that were corrupted by Morgoth.

[Ravens_cry]

I'm pretty sure Trolls were basically bipedal elephants that were corrupted by Morgoth.
Where did that idea come from?

[SouthpawSoldier]

Exactly.

This is one of those situations when I wish that I could cite real life examples, too.

{Scrubbed}

Jim Butcher mentions this in one of his books, regarding negotiation with the Red Court; a treaty of appeasement with an entity that is either a) wholly evil or b) doesn't regard you as an equal* is inherently doomed, and only serves to weaken your position.

*Orson Scott Card touches on this a little, in his Hierarchy of Foreignness; there is no means of negotiation with varlese, because there is no method of communication. If one cannot communicate, one cannot negotiate. Until varlese become raman, peace is impossible.

[Talya]

{Scrubbed}

[BWR]

*Orson Scott Card touches on this a little, in his Hierarchy of Foreignness; there is no means of negotiation with varlese, because there is no method of communication. If one cannot communicate, one cannot negotiate. Until varlese become raman ramen, peace is impossible.

This tickles me.
The pseudo-Swedish annoys me, though.

[Talakeal]

{Scrubbed}

[HandofShadows]

{Scrubbed}

[Alent]

{Scrubbed}

Lord of the Rings is a classic example of the situation- As already demonstrated in this thread, the consequences of "peace" with Sauron is worse than the consequences of war with Sauron, therefore war is the correct choice no matter the horrors.

[Talakeal]

{Scrubbed}

Lord of the Rings is a classic example of the situation- As already demonstrated in this thread, the consequences of "peace" with Sauron is worse than the consequences of war with Sauron, therefore war is the correct choice no matter the horrors.

Keep in mind that they never actually try to win a war with Sauron. The only battles are defensive ones or diversions so that they can go through with their plan to assassinate him via volcano, they never have any illusions that they can defeat him militarily without first attempting to turn the ring to their own ends.

[tensai_oni]

{Scrubbed}

[Tengu_temp]

Was there really? I was under the impression that the orcs continued raiding and resisting for several centuries until the humans finally drove them (more or less) to extinction.

Tolkien said that after the war, Mordor's lands were given to its slaves, and didn't elaborate further. Considering that orcs were pretty much Sauron's slaves, I interpret this to mean that those of their ranks who gave up peacefully, instead of somehow still fighting for their fallen master, were among them. I know I'm not the only one who buys this interpretation; there's a series of books taking place in a post-LotR Middle Earth where orcs are some of the protagonists. They're not written by Tolkien so their canonicity is doubtful, but considering that Tolkien was a deeply religious man and he didn't consider anyone to be beyond redemption, I think he'd approve.

[Talakeal]

The difference between LotR and reality is that in real life, no nation is controlled by supernatural demigods whose all minions are Always Chaotic Evil.

Even in LoTR this is debatable. See, for example, Sam / Faramir's comment about the fallen Haradrim in Ithillien.


Tolkien said that after the war, Mordor's lands were given to its slaves, and didn't elaborate further. Considering that orcs were pretty much Sauron's slaves, I interpret this to mean that those of their ranks who gave up peacefully, instead of somehow still fighting for their fallen master, were among them. I know I'm not the only one who buys this interpretation; there's a series of books taking place in a post-LotR Middle Earth where orcs are some of the protagonists. They're not written by Tolkien so their canonicity is doubtful, but considering that Tolkien was a deeply religious man and he didn't consider anyone to be beyond redemption, I think he'd approve.

I seem to recall reading something about how Mount Gundabad remained an independent orc stronghold for centuries and it wasn't until the time of King Eldarion that the kingdom of Gondor finally purged it of orc kind. I can't find my source on this atm, but it seems to imply there were continued hostilities that only ended with eventual genocide.

[Tengu_temp]

I seem to recall reading something about how Mount Gundabad remained an independent orc stronghold for centuries and it wasn't until the time of King Eldarion that the kingdom of Gondor finally purged it of orc kind. I can't find my source on this atm, but it seems to imply there were continued hostilities that only ended with eventual genocide.

I think there was a split. Some of Mordor's surviving orcs surrendered peacefully and lived in Mordor after the war, while others became independent marauders and raiders not serving a supernatural master, like the Moria orcs before them.

[comicshorse]

]Tolkien said that after the war, Mordor's lands were given to its slaves,[/I] and didn't elaborate further. Considering that orcs were pretty much Sauron's slaves, I interpret this to mean that those of their ranks who gave up peacefully, instead of somehow still fighting for their fallen master, were among them. I know I'm not the only one who buys this interpretation; there's a series of books taking place in a post-LotR Middle Earth where orcs are some of the protagonists. They're not written by Tolkien so their canonicity is doubtful, but considering that Tolkien was a deeply religious man and he didn't consider anyone to be beyond redemption, I think he'd approve.

I always thought that meant it was given to the human slaves the Orcs kept to grow their food for them

[veti]

{Scrubbed}

[Wardog]

The other think to bear in mind, is that we're dealing with an empire ruled by an immortal demi-god facing off against (mostly) realms ruled by humans with human lifespans (or slightly better in the case of Numenorean descendents). (Obviously things were different for the elf and dwarf realms, but those were no longer great powers).

This isn't like a real-life war, where if you can negotiate a peace that lasts a couple of decades, then there is a good chance that the enemy ruler will be too old to start another war, and hopefully be replaced with someone weaker or more reasonable.

This is an (alternating hot and cold) war where the same guy has been in charge of the enemy since your ancient ancestors were screwed over by him. If you can negotiate a peace that lasts a couple of decades, that just means he has extra time to prepare to take advantage of you getting older or your realm changing rulers.

[Talya]

{Scrubbed}

[Tengu_temp]

I always thought that meant it was given to the human slaves the Orcs kept to grow their food for them

Like I said, it's open to interpretation. But I always felt like "some orcs eventually learned how to coexist with mankind" fits more within Tolkien's creed than "all orcs were 100% evil and were eventually driven to extinction".

{Scrubbed}

[Douglas]

The Mod Radiant: Locked for review.

Edit: Locked permanently, I don't see this going anywhere worthwhile.