![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
chestnut_pod left an intriguing comment on
my post here in terms of racial purity/elitism in regard to Gondor c. LOTR and the characterization of contemporary Gondor by other characters, most glaringly Elrond. I started to reply more concisely, but the rant grew, so I'm just posting it here:
I always struggle with the reality that much of what Elrond says about Gondor at the Council is objectively wrong as well as repugnant, but the narrative doesn't really frame any of it as incorrect or morally dubious or a reflection on his character at all (despite the semi-corrections made by Faramir later, which somewhat ameliorates this, but only somewhat). In fact, the person who is framed as suspect in the Council interactions is
Boromir for being offended and "rudely" outspoken about it (both on behalf of Gondor and Rohan) in addition to being ambivalent (not even especially negative! just unsure!) about the practical significance of Aragorn's pure royal blood.
Elrond also glorifies Gondor's former imperial power through comparison with Númenor's. His regret over Gondor's decay is tied to ideas of racial impurity (which in Gondor is a direct consequence of Númenórean and Gondorian imperialism, and which in any case is a bizarre characterization choice for him specifically) and to Gondor's inability to sustain its empire. I feel like all these sentiments are treated in the text as pretty understandable and sympathetic and right-thinking, even if Elrond turns out to be mistaken about some specific things.
Basically, it feels like the general perspective is that the Stewards
were wise to move towards a more diverse and integrated Gondorian society, to recruit outsiders, to do what was necessary to keep Gondor standing and opposing Sauron where multiple purer and more insular factions failed. They were wise to relinquish imperial holdings they didn't have the power or inclination to control. But this stuff also seems to be treated as a
regrettable necessity. All this is tragic and everyone who cares is kind of sad about it. As a result, Elrond's melancholy over modern Gondor, while mistaken on specific points, seems somewhat validated by the narrative framework.
For instance, in the description of the (100% heroic) people of Lebennin, we can see that element of reservation about modern Gondor with regard to race and racial mixing:
the most part of the people of Gondor lived in the seven circles of the City, or in the high vales of the mountain-borders, in Lossarnach, or further south in fair Lebennin with its five swift streams. There dwelt a hardy folk between the mountains and the sea. They were reckoned men of Gondor, yet their blood was mingled, and there were short and swarthy folk among them whose sires came more from the forgotten men who housed in the shadow of the hills in the Dark Years ere the coming of the kings. But beyond, in the great fief of Belfalas, dwelt Prince Imrahil in his castle of Dol Amroth by the sea, and he was of high blood, and his folk also, tall men and proud with sea-grey eyes.
And I think Aragorn and his royal purebloodedness are deeply bound up in this. To an extent, this framework also validates the Northern Dúnedain's prioritization of Númenórean purity above all else. The negative extreme of their position is mediated through Gondor (in the Kinstrife) and then (~sadly but necessarily) becomes less of a priority over time. Thus Gondor survives through "hard" choices like "sustaining the population through interracial marriage" and "including local indigenous people as full citizens." So there's still a substantial polity left for the ultimate result of the Northern Dúnedain's blood purity—Aragorn—to rule over and "restore". But the Northern Dúnedain themselves don't have to compromise their valuation of purity for this to occur, and in fact, the purity they so carefully maintained in the royal line only makes it all the more natural for Aragorn to rule over the racially and culturally "impure" Gondorians and to forge their nation into a new, kinder and gentler(...) empire.
Further tangent: It's unsurprising that Tolkien struggled a bit with figuring out who would be suitable for Aragorn to marry and thus whose blood would mingle with his into the next generation. If I recall correctly, Arwen was created pretty specifically to be Aragorn's queen and to reinforce his bloodline (this was done in a fairly evocative way, but still). I do get why Tolkien felt Éowyn was too young etc for Aragorn, and I prefer Faramir/Éowyn by a mile, but I am not convinced that Éowyn's "lesser" racial status (in-world) was not also part of the calculus.
Anyway, I guess Aragorn's rule is the intended compromise between Faramir's explicit "a king would be nice but not dominating other people" and the various awful imperial legacies at play. But it feels to me like the suggestion here is that the problem is doing empire
wrong rather than doing empire at all.
I do think that Tolkien had pretty messy feelings about this and you can see him trying to complicate various aspects in some of his post-LOTR writings. LOTR frames early Númenórean imperialism as uncomplicated benevolence towards, I think he said, "lesser" races of men; over a very long time, their dominance in Middle-earth becomes corrupted and nightmarish. But by "The Mariner's Wife," it's evident that their involvement was morally compromised and horrific from day 1, yet Tolkien also tries to complicate
that with Aldarion's mixed motives (partly it's straightforward empire-building for its own sake, but partly he's trying to prepare for a very real threat and Ancalimë's refusal to continue his policies in Middle-earth is not exactly bad but certainly not good). Tolkien even argues in
Peoples of Middle-earth that the High Men/Middle Men/Wild (or Dark!) Men distinction in LOTR is entirely about cultural affinity for "The West" rather than race as such (I doubt this was quite the intention in LOTR itself), and moreover adds that plenty of people had pretty good reasons for cultural opposition to "The West" because of devastation previously wreaked by Western powers like Númenor. (The subtext is not subtle.)
But I think there's always this partly-aesthetic, partly just racist appeal of the "good" empire ruled by a(n ideally pureblooded & superior) racial elite for him, alongside his ever-increasing skepticism about what this entails and what it can lead to and if it will inevitably be corrupted and how that interacts with (in his view) the intrinsically fallen nature of humanity. So it's a mess and there are these points of reservation and skepticism and outright criticism of things like racism and empire and the interrelationship between them embedded within his work that can give us some room to maneuver, I guess? But the overarching trends voiced by characters like Elrond and Aragorn are still really present and unavoidable.
