Good and Evil Theme Analysis

The Lord of the Rings series, beginning with The Fellowship of the Ring, initially presents the traditional epic trope of the struggle between good and evil as relatively simple and straightforward. Sauron, who appears only as a watchful and malevolent gaze, is uncomplicated and purely evil in his desire to enslave Middle-earth. Likewise, characters such as Aragorn, the true king of Gondor, are similarly presented as purely righteous. However, the second volume, The Two Towers, complicates the series’ understanding of the fundamentally opposed forces of good and evil through characters who undergo moral struggles. For instance, though Boromir gives in to the Ring’s influence, he also sacrifices his life to protect Merry and Pippin. Saruman, on the other hand, was on the side of the wizards and the White Council for many years, but he falls prey to Sauron’s influence and his own greed, destroying the land of Isengard and waging war with Rohan in his schemes for domination. Théoden, who cares deeply about his people, allows himself to be poisoned by the counsel of Wormtongue and sits idle as his country suffers. Gollum is split in two by his opposing desires: half of him longs to be good and keep his promise to Frodo, while the other half is completely corrupted and malicious, desiring only the Ring. As the war begins and the world of Middle-earth grows more complicated, it becomes more difficult to categorize absolute evil and absolute good—and, in characters where the two forces blur, to distinguish which is the more powerful force. Through the struggles of characters who are neither purely good nor purely evil, The Two Towers uncovers the murkiness of morality and reveals that the struggle between good and evil occurs not only on battlefields, but also within individual hearts and minds.

Boromir is fallible, neither purely good nor purely evil, and the temptation of the Ring is “too sore a trial” for him to overcome. The Two Towers presents a world in turmoil at the brink of war, and it begins with the dissolution of the Fellowship—a company of nine people created to take the Ring to Mordor and destroy it—partially due to Boromir’s actions. The Ring exploits what is seemingly one of Boromir’s most heroic and noble qualities—his desire to protect and preserve his homeland and its people. At the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, it drives him to try to take the Ring from Frodo, revealing his susceptibility to influence and the allure of power. This act does not, however, reveal him to be wholly evil, as Sauron, the Nazgûl, or the orcs have proven to be. His next and final act, heroically sacrificing his life in the defense of Merry and Pippin, is one of love and selflessness, completely opposed to his arrogant desire for the Ring. Boromir’s tragic fate is the first indication of the newly complicated nature of morality in Middle-earth and proves the power of the Ring to corrupt even the most noble of men.

Both Saruman, once the greatest wizard of the Order, and Théoden, the king of Rohan, also fall prey to corruption. While Saruman spends The Two Towers destroying the land and seeking to empower himself—aims that aren’t purely good or selfless—his past righteousness indicates that he might not be purely evil, either. Théoden is similarly corrupted by external influence, though, like Boromir and unlike Saruman, he redeems himself after his release from that influence. Wormtongue’s counsel keeps Théoden complacent and inactive during a crucial time for Rohan, which desperately needs its king’s intervention for guidance and protection. In his idleness, Théoden has failed his nation, allowing evil into his borders and into his house. Eventually, though, he moves from his complacency to join the side of good in the straightforward conflict against the obvious evil of Sauron. These examples of shifting loyalties again indicate that morality in Middle-earth is not always easily categorized.

Gollum, who has two distinct personalities that verbally argue, is perhaps the best example of how good and evil both combine and struggle for dominance in one character. One of those personalities, who speaks on the Ring’s behalf, attempts to drive the other personality, Sméagol, to betrayal and murder. Though Sam is certain that the Sméagol personality is primarily an act put on for Frodo’s benefit, it is unclear just how much Gollum struggles to reconcile his two opposing desires. Though Gollum’s desire for the Ring is ultimately more powerful than his wish for goodness and friendship, his internal conflict is revealed in the moment just before Shelob’s lair when, resembling an “old weary hobbit,” he reaches out to touch Frodo’s knee. Had Sam not spoken roughly to him at that crucial moment, it’s possible that Gollum’s more benevolent side might have prevailed.

In the absence of absolute goodness and absolute evil, the reader’s judgement of these characters is complicated by a number of factors, including the characters’ own actions (some good and some evil) and the external influence that Sauron, Wormtongue, or the Ring place on them. The deciding factor in what makes a character a hero or a villain—that is, primarily aligned with good or evil—must lie in the character’s informed and continued choices. Boromir and Théoden, though influenced by evil, repent of that evil and choose to align themselves with the forces of good. Saruman, though, refuses to break free of evil’s influence when Gandalf offers him the opportunity to join him. As the world grows more complicated, however, so do the characters and the choices those characters make. Gollum never becomes truly free of the Ring’s influence. Though a reader might classify Boromir and Théoden as heroic despite their mistakes, and Saruman as villainous despite his former goodness, Gollum is significantly harder to classify. The conflict of good and evil rages on in him throughout The Two Towers; not even he knows which is stronger.