Although I really doubt that in Tolkien’s case, the role of “white” in wizard identities was consciously meant to stand for any kind of intrinsic personal superiority, racial or otherwise. Saruman was the original “white” wizard, after all, and he ended up as Bad Guy Number Two.
(My impression of Saruman’s “rainbowness” was that it was meant not to represent the inferiority of non-white colors, but rather to symbolize his deceitfulness and unreliability. His robes still superficially looked the same plain white color as before but it was just a trick to disguise his rejection of his old identity and his greedy appropriation of all the colors.)
Ability to interbreed is not a very precise test for sharing a species. There are many well established species that can interbreed under the right circumstances. Lions and tigers, for example. Or horses and donkeys. I don’t know if that is germane to the OP, but it seems to be an assumption made in some of these posts.
Was your use of “white wizard” as opposed to just “wizard” necessary? Because it sure seems like signaling something there. And are you trying to say this as if to “jokingly” open the door to advance ideas that maybe similar relationships exist between IQ and… other social constructs?
Because, yeah, it is kind of racist. Bonus points for the “fantastically” double entendre, as in it both very racist and also makes reference to fantasy.
That’s why I use the “readily reproduce” in my definition. If there isn’t natural genetic exchange between the groups, whether it be because they don’t coexist in the same location or they have mating practices or anatomical differences that act as a barrier, then I consider them different species. The existence of the rare hybrid doesn’t change that.
The use of “white” vs. “black” as meaning good vs. evil isn’t necessarily connected to race (though I don’t dispute that it’s on occasion been coöpted for that purpose). I suspect that it has more to do with the fact that we’re, all of us, a diurnal species. A person wearing black and going out at night is difficult to see, which is conducive to evil or at least antisocial activities like theft. White, meanwhile, is associated with light, and that which is not hidden.
As for the races of Middle-Earth, orcs are not fundamentally evil. They’re fundamentally elves, who have been corrupted by the Dark Lord (originally Melkor, later Sauron and Saruman). I think that, if an orc were to be redeemed (which would be difficult but not impossible), that being would no longer be an orc, but would thenceforth be an elf (possibly a physically ugly elf, but an elf).
And Tolkien is quite clear that the Southrons in Sauron’s army were no more nor less inherently evil than any other humans, and differed from the men of the “good” nations only in that their leaders were evil. Doubtless there were some evil men among them, but then, there were evil men of Gondor and Rohan, as well.
Aulë (one of the Valar) had seen the “Children of Illuvatar” (Elves and Men) who had been created during the “Music of the Ainur” (the creation of the world). As Aulë was the Valar of crafts, he was inspired, by seeing Elves and Men, to create people of his own, and thus he created the original Dwarves.
True enough. And yet, as I said upthread, I can’t help but wonder why the OP specifically identified a “white wizard” as opposed to just “wizard.” Yes,I am aware that there are brown, gray, white, and blue wizards in the Tolkienverse. It’s almost like the joke in the opening post was specifically constructed with racist undertones in mind, set just low enough to slip under the threshold.
I mean, I’d call it subtext, but it’s pretty darn clear in the overt text and in the thread title what’s going on here.
I also have this position. In reality, our DNA (well, the DNA of those of us with ancestry outside of sub-Saharan Africa) shows that we did exchange DNA with two other species of hominid: the Neanderthals and the Denisovans. Regardless, Neanderthal, Denisovan, and Sapiens are considered separate species because while they could interbreed apparently they seldom did so.
Likewise, I always had the impression that even if they could interbreed the Hobbits, Dwarves, Elves, and Men of Tolkein’s universe were nonetheless separate species because even if they could they very seldom did. Unlike the sub-divisions of H. sapiens which seem to intermingle at the drop of a hat. In TLofR universe I’m not sure if the obstacles are cultural, anatomical, divine fiat, or a mix of all three, but there do seem to be higher barriers between the various races than exist between the divisions of H. sapiens.
Isn’t whether they can breed or not sort of beside the point? Throughout various fantasy properties humans, elves, orcs, hobbits, goblins, fairies, dragons, and all sorts of other species/races are explicitly defined as having varying physical and magical abilities and proclivities - it’s explicitly built into the mechanics of D&D, for example. And this remains true even if you can crossbreed - half-elves have their own distinct set of physical and magical abilities and proclivities, after all. (As do half-dragons, in some properties, and don’t ask me how that works out.)
Fantasy ‘races’ always make problematic analogues for human races for this reason; human racism is when imaginary distinctions are drawn between groups and and then acted upon, but when it comes to fantasy ‘races’ often the distinctions are physical reality within the universe. Nowadays fantasy dwarves are all short, sturdy, and strong by definition - and are also often craftsmen, alcoholic, hairy, and greedy by definition. Since that’s the way they’re literally defined in universe it’s not in any real way racist to recognize and acknowledge it - but if the implication is to analogize them with some human race that you think carries those traits, that’s racist as fuck.
So sure, maybe hobbits as a race are markedly more resistant to the corrupting influence of the one ring, and maybe dragons are more resistant to being burned by fire or killed by non-black arrows. That’s fine. But if the intention is to imply that, say, pastoral rural englishmen are more morally upright than the readily-corruptible city folk, then that is a problem.
Nope. Because as soon as those two groups met up intermingling commenced. Sometimes voluntary, sometimes not (unfortunately) but it started pretty much immediately and immediately started producing viable, fertile crosses between the two groups.
This is in contrast to H. neanderthal and H. sapiens which co-existed in Europe and the Middle East for thousands of years with very little co-mingling of DNA.
I specifically did NOT mention geography in my list of possible reasons not to interbreed. If Sapiens and Neanderthal didn’t produce many offspring it was due to reasons other than whether or not they were in the same area.
Likewise, in Middle Earth all those races were in close proximity to each other, but seldom produced offspring. Therefore, the lack of crosses was not due to geographic factors.
Yes, as long as they knew their place and to been the knee wrt the master breed of humans they were considered good. Following a strict bloodline of power was quite important to JRR.
Yes, it is obvious, but not in the way you state. The white wizards were generally treated as most intelligent and powerful. Gandalf in particular upgraded from gray to white to show he was now better.
And it is obvious these color were not racial references because the colors do not match races. They were inferred to all be white.
Furthermore, someone who is concerned about possible racism doesn’t tend to include racist jabs in their post.
So it’s clear he was saying that you don’t have to be one of the smartest people in Middle Earth to see the potential issue, and was not slipping in some white supremecist ideology.
And yet we are not reading this joke from our hobbit holes in Middle Earth, we are reading from more conventional (probably) dwellings on Actual Earth where races are, unfortunately, considered to be a thing and that when someone shoehorns a reference to color like that into a joke, there might just be a reason for it other than just good clean fun or remaining true to the source material.
Where do you get the impression that the OP is “concerned about possible racism”? The post seems to lean more to the “racism is totally funny, but doubly so when I can slip it in implicitly” side. Which is my humble opinion, and 100% on topic related to the question asked, and I feel I must say that because I am aware that accusing someone of making a racist post (note: I said the post, not the poster! ;)) can put the accuser in a somewhat precarious position.
It’s clear to me that he wanted to get this “joke” out there, and apparently prefacing it with a question somehow makes it “totally not racist” even though it clearly draws parallels to more explicitly racist jokes and concepts that exist in the real world, if not Middle Earth.