Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

LOTR review

Expand Messages
  • Stolzi@aol.com
    Apologies for the formatting; I hope it turns out o.k. This appears to have come my way from http://biz.yahoo.com And here s more aggravation: note the guy
    Message 1 of 18 , Dec 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Apologies for the formatting; I hope it turns out o.k. This appears to have
      come my way from http://biz.yahoo.com

      And here's more aggravation: note the guy says he's sorry to have to wait a
      full year to see what happens next

      What, didn't his mother ever teach him to read?

      NEW YORK, Dec. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- After a three-hour screening of
      thesoon-to-be released ``The Lord of the Rings,'' Senior Editor and Movie
      Critic David Ansen writes that the first movie in the trilogy of fantasy
      films based on J.R.R. Tolkien's novels, ``works'' and he's sorry to have to
      wait a full year to see what happens next in Frodo Baggin's battle against
      the armies of the Dark Lord, Sauron. In the first look at the film, Ansen
      describes ``The Lord of the Rings'' as having ``real passion, real emotion,
      real terror, and a tactile sense of Evil that is missing in that other long
      current movie dealing with Wizards, wonders and wickedness.''

      Director Peter Jackson takes risks in his movie, writes Ansen.``The actors
      look into each other's eyes and swear oaths in quasi-Shakespearean language
      that could, were it not for the utter conviction with which it is played,
      topple over into the ludicrous.''Ansen praises Jackson's shooting of the
      movie, saying his camera ``literally flies like a hawk, swooping and plunging
      into breathtaking scenes of blood and destruction.'' In the December10 issue
      (on newsstands Monday, December 3), Newsweek reviews the movie and goes
      behind-the-scenes for a first look at the making of the epic trilogy.

      The movie's depiction of the architecture and the creatures of Evil is
      superb, but when it comes to the depiction of the Good, the movie tends to
      lapse into Art-Nouveau kitsch, he writes.``Cate Blanchett's appearance as a
      white-robed, golden-locked Elven queen is like mediocre pre-Raphealite
      calendar art.''However, he warns that the movie is a violent one, too violent
      for small children.

      Of the making of ``Rings,'' Senior Editor Jeff Giles writes that
      directorPeter Jackson brought to his native New Zealand, where the movie was
      shot, the most expensive and manifestly ambitious movie project of all time:a
      trilogy shot simultaneously -- in 274 days -- for a combined cost of at
      least$270 million.The first movie, ``The Fellowship of the Ring,'' will be
      released on December 19th, with sequels set for Christmas 2002 and 2003.

      For Jackson, shooting the trilogy was a lifelong obsession.``I've always
      thought fantasy was the last frontier of cinema,'' he says.``It's the only
      genre that's never really been mastered.The characters are always so
      cliched.I mean, I actually hate wizards in movies -- they're always terribly
      pompous, and they tend to fire blue lightning bolts from their fingertips.''

      At the height of the epic shoot, Jackson had to command and choreograph an
      unheard-of seven camera crews working simultaneously to get the staggering
      number of shots required. His partner, Fran Walsh, was deputized to film a
      moving scene between two hobbits toward the end of the first film. Producer
      Barrie Osborne shot battle sequences. Jackson would sit in front of as many
      as seven monitors, directing by satellite feed and often bicycling back and
      forth between units.There were floods, landslides and snowstorms to be
      contended with. Endless schedule changes.And, midway through the shoot, no
      more vacations.

      ``There was one gigantic battle sequence that some of us worked on all night
      every night for three months straight, which is insane,'' says Viggo
      Mortensen, who plays the courageous Aragorn, a human in the Fellowship who is
      vulnerable to the ring's temptation to wield unlimited power.``It was dark
      and wet.That was a real tough one for the cast and crew, and it forged some
      strong friendships.''

      New Line Cinema committed $450 million to produce, distribute and market
      three consecutive ``Rings'' films, though with foreign distribution partners
      and merchandise alliances, the company has far less money at stake than
      appearances suggest.Yet the wager couldn't be bigger, writes Senior
      WriterJohn Horn.``Rings'' could determine whether New Line remains an
      independent piece of parent company AOL Time Warner.

      When all international sales are tallied, New Line's real financial risk on
      each $90 million movie is only $25 million, the studio says.The real danger
      is recovering marketing costs of $60 million a film, although promotional
      partners like Burger King help .International distribution president Rolf
      Mittweig, who pushed casting Liv Tyler over Winona Ryder in a supporting role
      to entice overseas buyers, insisted foreign exhibitors wanting the first
      movie had to buy rights to all three movies, sight unseen.``They did that not
      knowing anything except that if the first film doesn't work, the other two
      won't work, either,'' he tells Newsweek.
    • David S. Bratman
      ... Yes, I too cannot wait to find out what Frodo Baggin [sic] does next in his single-handed combat against the massed armies of Sauron. There was nothing
      Message 2 of 18 , Dec 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        At 07:22 AM 12/2/2001 , http://biz.yahoo.com wrote:

        >Critic David Ansen writes that the first movie in the trilogy of fantasy
        >films based on J.R.R. Tolkien's novels, ``works'' and he's sorry to have to
        >wait a full year to see what happens next in Frodo Baggin's battle against
        >the armies of the Dark Lord, Sauron.

        Yes, I too cannot wait to find out what Frodo Baggin [sic] does next in his
        single-handed combat against the massed armies of Sauron. There was
        nothing like that in the book, and no character named Baggin, so we'll all
        have to wait. <g>

        >In the first look at the film, Ansen
        >describes ``The Lord of the Rings'' as having ``real passion, real emotion,
        >real terror, and a tactile sense of Evil that is missing in that other long
        >current movie dealing with Wizards, wonders and wickedness.''

        Well, excuuuuuse me for not considering the Harry Potter film to be wholly
        terrible.

        About the rest of the review I'll reserve comment until I've seen the film,
        as the clips have been too short to judge fairly; but if it indeed fits
        this description, I'm intrigued that I would criticize much of what he
        finds praiseworthy, and praise what he criticizes.

        David Bratman
      • Berni Phillips
        From: ... plunging ... Oh, I would like to see that. It makes me think of the class material at Hogwarts. Berni
        Message 3 of 18 , Dec 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          From: <Stolzi@...>

          > This appears to have
          > come my way from http://biz.yahoo.com
          >
          > Ansen praises Jackson's shooting of the
          > movie, saying his camera ``literally flies like a hawk, swooping and
          plunging
          > into breathtaking scenes of blood and destruction.''

          Oh, I would like to see that. It makes me think of the class material at
          Hogwarts.

          Berni
        • Stolzi@aol.com
          In a message dated 12/2/01 11:34:42 AM Central Standard Time, ... I was depressed that the reviewer found the evil things in the film the most convincing, and
          Message 4 of 18 , Dec 2, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 12/2/01 11:34:42 AM Central Standard Time,
            dbratman@... writes:

            > I'm intrigued that I would criticize much of what he
            > finds praiseworthy, and praise what he criticizes.
            >

            I was depressed that the reviewer found the evil things in the film the most
            convincing, and the things representing Good to be hackneyed and trite.
            (Well, OK, I myself thought that Galadriel's swan boat as seen in stills was
            rather icky.)

            If it's true, it is a failure on Jackson's part, certainly (and I've been
            alarmed by the likeness of some shots and clips I've seen to Horror Movies).
            If it's not true, then either the reviewer, which is bad, or the whole
            culture, which is worse, simply has a blind spot, an allergy or deafness to
            Good. Which is highly possible.

            As for what you say about HPOTTER, David, I dunno. He hasn't said it's
            "terrible," just that it doesn't have "real passion, real emotion, real
            terror, and a tactile sense of Evil" - and I am not sure, myself, that it
            did. At least, maybe appropriately for a children's film, these things were
            not there on a very deep level.

            Am I the only one who thinks that Viggo Mortensen looks EXACTLY like Aragorn
            ought to look?

            Diamond Proudbrook
          • Joan Marie Verba
            ... He doesn t look anything close to what I imagine Aragron to look. But I can make allowances. Joan ****************************************** Joan Marie
            Message 5 of 18 , Dec 2, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Diamond Proudbrook wrote:

              > Am I the only one who thinks that Viggo Mortensen looks EXACTLY like Aragorn
              > ought to look?

              He doesn't look anything close to what I imagine Aragron to look. But I
              can make allowances.

              Joan

              ******************************************
              Joan Marie Verba
              verba001@...
              http://www.sff.net/people/Joan.Marie.Verba
            • Janet Croft
              I wasn t sure at first, but the more I see the actors, the more the pictures in my mind start to look like them. Except Gimli. I love the concept of John
              Message 6 of 18 , Dec 4, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                I wasn't sure at first, but the more I see the actors, the more the pictures
                in my mind start to look like them. Except Gimli. I love the concept of
                John Rhys-Davies as Gimli, but somhow the few clips and pictures I've seen
                haven't "clicked" for me.

                Janet
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Joan Marie Verba [mailto:verba001@...]
                Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 8:45 PM
                To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [mythsoc] LOTR review


                Diamond Proudbrook wrote:

                > Am I the only one who thinks that Viggo Mortensen looks EXACTLY like
                Aragorn
                > ought to look?

                He doesn't look anything close to what I imagine Aragron to look. But I
                can make allowances.

                Joan

                ******************************************
                Joan Marie Verba
                verba001@...
                http://www.sff.net/people/Joan.Marie.Verba

                Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                ADVERTISEMENT




                The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Grace E. Funk
                Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest, Whitsuntide 2002, pp37-38, is an item titled We See Evil for What It Is . Having described LOTR
                Message 7 of 18 , May 30, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest, Whitsuntide
                  2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It Is". Having
                  described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of straightforward
                  good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to take off
                  on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                  away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivance was "modern" and
                  promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. Americans now recognize
                  that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden, who ought to be given
                  royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR.
                  Now there's a stretch! The article was copied from the Dallas Morning
                  News.

                  --
                  Grace E. Funk R.R. #1, Lumby, B.C. V0E 2G0 Phone (250)547-6333
                • jamcconney@aol.com
                  In a message dated 5/30/2002 1:50:22 PM Central Daylight Time, ... My word!--as a good card-carrying Episcopalian, I really must track this one down. Jamaq
                  Message 8 of 18 , May 30, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 5/30/2002 1:50:22 PM Central Daylight Time,
                    gfunk@... writes:


                    > Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest, Whitsuntide
                    > 2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It Is". Having
                    > described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of straightforward
                    > good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to take off
                    > on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                    > away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivance was "modern" and
                    > promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. Americans now recognize
                    > that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden, who ought to be given
                    > royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR.
                    > Now there's a stretch! The article was copied from the Dallas Morning
                    > News.
                    >

                    My word!--as a good card-carrying Episcopalian, I really must track this one
                    down.
                    Jamaq


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • dianejoy@earthlink.net
                    ... From: Grace E. Funk gfunk@junction.net Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:03:41 -0700 To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com Subject: [mythsoc] LOTR review
                    Message 9 of 18 , May 31, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Original Message:
                      -----------------
                      From: Grace E. Funk gfunk@...
                      Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 12:03:41 -0700
                      To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [mythsoc] LOTR review


                      << Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest, Whitsuntide
                      2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It Is". Having
                      described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of straightforward
                      good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to take off
                      on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                      away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivalence was "modern" and
                      promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. >>

                      So who are the stupid people who listened to these "intellectual betters" and followed like sheep? Some perhaps didn't know what was happening to their minds or consciences, but others just brushed it away as too impractical, too abstract, having no relationship to themselves. So when their kids come up with "that's your truth," they gurgle and look helpless

                      << Americans now recognize that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden, who ought to be given royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR. >>

                      Osame bin Laden, sharing JRRT's royalties? Some cirtics are too clever for their own good. And this was in an *Anglican* magazine? I know it's a joke, but I find irony like that very unfunny these days. For shame! ---djb



                      --
                      Grace E. Funk R.R. #1, Lumby, B.C. V0E 2G0 Phone (250)547-6333




                      The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org

                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


                      --------------------------------------------------------------------
                      mail2web - Check your email from the web at
                      http://mail2web.com/ .
                    • Randall Eicher
                      ... Whitsuntide ... and followed like sheep? Some perhaps didn t know what was happening to their minds or consciences, but others just brushed it away as too
                      Message 10 of 18 , May 31, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > << Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest,
                        Whitsuntide
                        > 2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It Is". Having
                        > described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of straightforward
                        > good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to take off
                        > on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                        > away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivalence was "modern" and
                        > promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. >>
                        >
                        > So who are the stupid people who listened to these "intellectual betters"
                        and followed like sheep? Some perhaps didn't know what was happening to
                        their minds or consciences, but others just brushed it away as too
                        impractical, too abstract, having no relationship to themselves. So when
                        their kids come up with "that's your truth," they gurgle and look helpless
                        >
                        > << Americans now recognize that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden,
                        who ought to be given royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR.
                        >>
                        >
                        > Osame bin Laden, sharing JRRT's royalties? Some cirtics are too clever
                        for their own good. And this was in an *Anglican* magazine? I know it's a
                        joke, but I find irony like that very unfunny these days. For
                        hame! ---djb
                        >

                        As a resident of Dallas I get to see Mr. Murchison's rantings on the
                        editorial page and can provide a modicum of insight into his viewpoint. He
                        is an ultra-conservative fundamentalist Christian who is always ranting on
                        about how American has gotten away from "good, solid" Christian values and
                        proceeds to condemn everyone and everything that does not fit in his
                        extremely narrow view.

                        He is of the opinion that the world would be better off blindly following
                        whatever they are told by their Church leaders rather questioning and
                        thinking for themselves.

                        Randall Eicher
                      • Christine Howlett
                        Sorry, I m born American, but I have real problems selecting people to personify evil. It seems like there are too durn many people doing that to justify
                        Message 11 of 18 , Jun 2, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Sorry, I'm born American, but I have real problems selecting people to
                          personify evil. It seems like there are too durn many people doing that to
                          justify their prejudices and then their bloodshed. I am willing to say that
                          Osama's acts are morally indefensible on any grounds, even if the US had
                          actually done all the evil that he accuses us of. Himself? He's one sick
                          puppy. Evil? That's up to God.
                          Score one for ambivalence.
                          Christine

                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "Grace E. Funk" <gfunk@...>
                          To: <mythsoc@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 3:03 PM
                          Subject: [mythsoc] LOTR review


                          > Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest, Whitsuntide
                          > 2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It Is". Having
                          > described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of straightforward
                          > good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to take off
                          > on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                          > away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivance was "modern" and
                          > promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. Americans now recognize
                          > that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden, who ought to be given
                          > royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR.
                          > Now there's a stretch! The article was copied from the Dallas Morning
                          > News.
                          >
                          > --
                          > Grace E. Funk R.R. #1, Lumby, B.C. V0E 2G0 Phone (250)547-6333
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
                          >
                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                          >
                          >
                        • Pauline J. Alama
                          I m with Ms. Howlett. Judge not lest ye be judged, or as Gandalf says, even the very wise do not know all ends. pauline Pauline J. Alama THE EYE OF NIGHT
                          Message 12 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I'm with Ms. Howlett. Judge not lest ye be judged, or as Gandalf says, even the very wise do not know all ends.

                            pauline

                            Pauline J. Alama
                            THE EYE OF NIGHT
                            (Bantam Spectra, July 2002)


                            --- On Sun 06/02, Christine Howlett wrote:
                            From: Christine Howlett [mailto: chowlett@...]
                            To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                            Date: Sun 06/02
                            Subject: Re: [mythsoc] LOTR review

                            > Sorry, I'm born American, but I have real problems selecting people to
                            > personify evil. It seems like there are too durn many people doing that
                            > to
                            > justify their prejudices and then their bloodshed. I am willing to say
                            > that
                            > Osama's acts are morally indefensible on any grounds, even if the US had
                            > actually done all the evil that he accuses us of. Himself? He's one
                            > sick
                            > puppy. Evil? That's up to God.
                            > Score one for ambivalence.
                            > Christine
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: "Grace E. Funk"
                            > To:
                            > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 3:03 PM
                            > Subject: [mythsoc] LOTR review
                            >
                            >
                            > > Odd reviews do pop up in odd places. In The Anglican Digest,
                            > Whitsuntide
                            > > 2002, pp37-38, is an item titled "We See Evil for What It
                            > Is". Having
                            > > described LOTR (the film) as "a straightforward tale of
                            > straightforward
                            > > good and evil", the author, one William Murchison, proceeds to
                            > take off
                            > > on his own agenda, which is to prove that Americans have been driven
                            > > away from non-judgmental ambivalence. Ambivance was
                            > "modern" and
                            > > promoted by "our Intellectual Betters", he says. Americans
                            > now recognize
                            > > that evil is personified in Osama bin Laden, who ought to be given
                            > > royalties for contributing to the popularaity of LOTR.
                            > > Now there's a stretch! The article was copied from the Dallas
                            > Morning
                            > > News.
                            > >
                            > > --
                            > > Grace E. Funk R.R. #1, Lumby, B.C. V0E 2G0 Phone (250)547-6333
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
                            > >
                            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                            > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            >
                            >
                            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                            > ---------------------~-->
                            > Kwick Pick opens locked car doors,
                            > front doors, drawers, briefcases,
                            > padlocks, and more. On sale now!
                            > http://us.click.yahoo.com/ehaLqB/Fg5DAA/Ey.GAA/DtIolB/TM
                            > ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
                            >
                            > The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org
                            >
                            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >

                            ------------------------------------------------
                            Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
                            The most personalized portal on the Web!


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Carl F. Hostetter
                            That is certainly not what judge not ... means. As moral creatures with conscience and Free will, we are not only allowed but required to discern the
                            Message 13 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              That is certainly not what "judge not ..." means. As moral creatures with
                              conscience and Free will, we are not only allowed but required to discern
                              the difference between good and evil. (I'm speaking both of the races of
                              Middle-earth and our own world.) What we cannot do is determine another's
                              fate. That is left to God/Eru. Osama bin Laden is evil. Sauron was evil. Is
                              either iredeemable to God/Eru? _That_ is not for us to decide.


                              |======================================================================|
                              | Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org |
                              | |
                              | ho bios brachys, he de techne makre. |
                              | Ars longa, vita brevis. |
                              | The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne. |
                              | "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take |
                              | such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about." |
                              |======================================================================|

                              --------------------------

                              On 6/3/02 7:53 AM, "Pauline J. Alama" <PJAlama@...> wrote:

                              > I'm with Ms. Howlett. Judge not lest ye be judged, or as Gandalf says, even
                              > the very wise do not know all ends.
                              >
                              > pauline
                              >
                              > Pauline J. Alama
                              > THE EYE OF NIGHT
                              > (Bantam Spectra, July 2002)
                              >
                              >
                              > --- On Sun 06/02, Christine Howlett wrote:
                              > From: Christine Howlett [mailto: chowlett@...]
                              > To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                              > Date: Sun 06/02
                              > Subject: Re: [mythsoc] LOTR review
                              >
                              >> Sorry, I'm born American, but I have real problems selecting people to
                              >> personify evil. It seems like there are too durn many people doing that
                              >> to
                              >> justify their prejudices and then their bloodshed. I am willing to say
                              >> that
                              >> Osama's acts are morally indefensible on any grounds, even if the US had
                              >> actually done all the evil that he accuses us of. Himself? He's one
                              >> sick
                              >> puppy. Evil? That's up to God.
                              >> Score one for ambivalence.
                              >> Christine
                            • trudygshaw
                              What we can t do (literally--can t) is get inside another person s being and judge his or her motivation, state of mind, and all the other things that go into
                              Message 14 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                What we can't do (literally--can't) is get inside another person's being and judge his or her motivation, state of mind, and all the other things that go into the choice of an action, good or bad. We can do that only for ourselves, and even there (IMHO) only to a limited degree. One of the many reasons I'm glad I'm not God--I gratefully leave the task to her.

                                Free will gives us the responsibility to discern between good and evil (or choose from more than one good) in our own decisions, including how we decide to respond to another's evil actions.

                                --Trudy


                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: Carl F. Hostetter
                                To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                                Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 8:05 AM
                                Subject: Re: [mythsoc] LOTR review


                                That is certainly not what "judge not ..." means. As moral creatures with
                                conscience and Free will, we are not only allowed but required to discern
                                the difference between good and evil. (I'm speaking both of the races of
                                Middle-earth and our own world.) What we cannot do is determine another's
                                fate. That is left to God/Eru. Osama bin Laden is evil. Sauron was evil. Is
                                either iredeemable to God/Eru? _That_ is not for us to decide.


                                |======================================================================|
                                | Carl F. Hostetter Aelfwine@... http://www.elvish.org |
                                | |
                                | ho bios brachys, he de techne makre. |
                                | Ars longa, vita brevis. |
                                | The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne. |
                                | "I wish life was not so short," he thought. "Languages take |
                                | such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about." |
                                |======================================================================|

                                --------------------------

                                On 6/3/02 7:53 AM, "Pauline J. Alama" <PJAlama@...> wrote:

                                > I'm with Ms. Howlett. Judge not lest ye be judged, or as Gandalf says, even
                                > the very wise do not know all ends.
                                >
                                > pauline
                                >
                                > Pauline J. Alama
                                > THE EYE OF NIGHT
                                > (Bantam Spectra, July 2002)
                                >
                                >
                                > --- On Sun 06/02, Christine Howlett wrote:
                                > From: Christine Howlett [mailto: chowlett@...]
                                > To: mythsoc@yahoogroups.com
                                > Date: Sun 06/02
                                > Subject: Re: [mythsoc] LOTR review
                                >
                                >> Sorry, I'm born American, but I have real problems selecting people to
                                >> personify evil. It seems like there are too durn many people doing that
                                >> to
                                >> justify their prejudices and then their bloodshed. I am willing to say
                                >> that
                                >> Osama's acts are morally indefensible on any grounds, even if the US had
                                >> actually done all the evil that he accuses us of. Himself? He's one
                                >> sick
                                >> puppy. Evil? That's up to God.
                                >> Score one for ambivalence.
                                >> Christine


                                Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                ADVERTISEMENT




                                The Mythopoeic Society website http://www.mythsoc.org

                                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Bill
                                Sorry. I truly believe there are or have been evil people in this world. Hitler, for example, or Pol Phat (sp?) While bin Laden certainly is not in their
                                Message 15 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Sorry. I truly believe there are or have been evil people
                                  in this world.
                                  Hitler, for example, or Pol Phat (sp?)
                                  While bin Laden certainly is not in their league, I've no
                                  doubt, given the weapons and
                                  chance, he could be. ((assuming he's still alive)).
                                  Of course. one can argue evil is in the mind of the
                                  beholder. I'll not go any further
                                  because I might stray over into politics, and this isn't the
                                  venue for that.
                                  Except, in this case, in the US, at least, the
                                  overwhelming belief is bin Laden IS
                                  evil.



                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • SusanPal@aol.com
                                  In a message dated 6/3/2002 10:33:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ... I m not so sure he s not in Hitler s and Pol Pot s league -- the idea of assessing the evil
                                  Message 16 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    In a message dated 6/3/2002 10:33:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
                                    lunacy2@... writes:


                                    > While bin Laden certainly is not in their league, I've no
                                    > doubt, given the weapons and
                                    > chance, he could be.

                                    I'm not so sure he's not in Hitler's and Pol Pot's league -- the idea of
                                    assessing the evil of actions numerically makes me very nervous.

                                    And I think it's much easier (although still not always easy!) to determine
                                    if ACTIONS are evil than to determine if people are . . . and, to me, that
                                    seems like safer theological ground, too.

                                    Susan


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • jamcconney@aol.com
                                    In a message dated 6/3/2002 12:33:28 PM Central Daylight Time, ... Dorothy Sayers has an essay ( in _Creed or Chaos_ I think) in which she asks the reader (I
                                    Message 17 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      In a message dated 6/3/2002 12:33:28 PM Central Daylight Time,
                                      lunacy2@... writes:


                                      > While bin Laden certainly is not in their league, I've no
                                      > doubt, given the weapons and
                                      > chance, he could be.

                                      Dorothy Sayers has an essay ( in _Creed or Chaos_ I think) in which she asks
                                      the reader (I paraphrase, not having the book at hand) if the evil we do is
                                      less because we lack the opportunity. It's an interesting point, as we do
                                      tend to be a bit unclear whether we're talking about quantity or quality (if
                                      one can use the word 'quality' about evil). Is the _quality_ of evil greater
                                      in the WTC attack than in the Cole bombing--or was it just a bigger death
                                      toll and a lot more spectacular.

                                      Mind you, I don't necessarily subscribe to what I'm suggesting--I'm just
                                      throwing the idea out for discussion. I don't subscribe to leGuin's "The Ones
                                      Who Walk Away from Omelas" either, being of the unfortunate temperament that
                                      prefers to draw the line in the sand and slug it out--but even after having
                                      read it many times, I cry at the end.

                                      Jamaq


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • michael_martinez2
                                      I think I have read this entire discussion to date. I don t quite follow it. What was the definition for evil being used in the original article? While I
                                      Message 18 of 18 , Jun 3, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I think I have read this entire discussion to date. I don't quite
                                        follow it. What was the definition for "evil" being used in the
                                        original article? While I do feel Osama Bin Laden is evil, that
                                        belief is founded upon my own understanding of what constitutes
                                        evil. I'm not sure there is or can be a magnitude of evil. One may
                                        or may not be evil, but each evil act is a thing unto itself. After
                                        unjustly putting many Christians to death, Saul of Tarsus had an
                                        experience on the road to Damascus which changed his life, his
                                        beliefs, and his behavior.

                                        Was he evil simply because he had sinned?

                                        The Christian view of evil can be distorted (or distilled into
                                        various flavors) through argument and debate, but if Saul were really
                                        deemed evil by God, then why would God make him an apostle? Or can
                                        evil be cleansed from the soul? Isn't that what salvation is all
                                        about?

                                        Is Osama Bin Laden truly responsible for spurring sales of THE LORD
                                        OF THE RINGS (and one must wonder how such influence was factored out
                                        of the normally strong sales AND the movie-inspired sales AND the
                                        various commercial play-inspired sales)? That sounds rather like the
                                        claim that Al Gore invented the Internet, or that the business boom
                                        of the 1990s would not have happened had Clinton not won the
                                        presidency.

                                        Maybe if Charles Beckwith III hadn't sat on a bench on April 13,
                                        1914, World War II would never have happened. He committed such an
                                        evil act, if he truly existed, and if his action was indeed the cause
                                        of a long chain of events which led to the invasion of Poland. After
                                        all, where does one draw the line between good and evil?

                                        Is this simply another case of "Us" versus "Them"? According to
                                        Osama Bin Laden (and millions of people in the Arab/Muslim world, if
                                        the western news media is to be believed), America is evil. That
                                        makes us evil. Why? Because someone else believes we are evil.
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.