Since the beginning of time, people have been tormented by the ever-existing evils of the world. However, in a world where darkness exists, the forces of good are present to maintain balance. In today's world, many take this belief for granted because in all stories and films there is both good and bad, a hero and a villain. What you see when looking more closely at the concepts of good and evil is that many people's perception of the topic is usually not the truth. These opinions are influenced by what we are presented with. Why look at a problem that has already been answered? The problem in this case would be: what is the true status of good and evil in the world, and the answer that is presented to them as the Manichean view in which the two equal and opposite forces of good and evil both play a role in influence the world. But what if the answer was wrong? Can a company be led astray? For this reason I will try to find the truth myself. So, to find the truth about good and evil in the world, I will examine the novel The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien. Within this novel, we see the pure and untainted character of Bilbo dive into a world of adventure, danger, greed, corruption and, above all, evil. Through his adventures he becomes a different character than the person we were first introduced to. In an environment so tainted by the evils of the world, how could an innocent hobbit emerge as a character who has truly progressed for the better? This brings us to the final question. Is there really good in the world according to JRR Tolkien in The Hobbit? Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayThis idea of ​​good in the world has often been explored in countless literary works and has established itself as a truly significant concept to evaluate. The main questions that emerge from this concept usually concern the presence of good and evil within a situation or environment. That said, I chose the concepts of good and evil as the basis for the essay. This will be expanded upon in my assessment of The Hobbit and will be explored in terms of both Boethian and Manichaean ideology. I chose these specific ideologies to focus on because they represent both sides of the issue. The Boethian notion of good, in my opinion, states that the only force in the world is “good,” and that evil is simply the absence of good. Manichaean ideology seems to be more of a modern interpretation of the world's workforce. This ideology says that good and evil are forces, both equal and opposite. In my opinion The Hobbit was the ideal choice because it can be seen both ways, for better or for worse. What makes The Hobbit more appealing is the presence of innocence in Bilbo, the protagonist. Through Bilbo's innocence I can trace the influential powers that leave their mark on him throughout his adventures. Without this innocence of Bilbo at the beginning of the novel, we would not be able to follow the progression as we have no starting point. Therefore The Hobbit represents the perfect setting for a study on the presence of good in the world, as well as the application of Boethian and Manichean ideologies, which help to broaden the discussion. Regardless of the ideology you choose to see within The Hobbit, I believe the novel is a tale with the central theme of coming into oneself. I see this through Bilbo's initial innocence at the beginning of the tale and how content he is with his peaceful lifestyle. However, despite this, he abandons his old life to assist the dwarves on their journey. Through adventure, Bilbo is exposed to things he doesn't havenever seen before and faces them with courage. He steals from trolls, fights giant spiders, and even tries to bring peace between warring armies. Although his transformation happens slowly, the theme of character progression shines throughout The Hobbit. Through this novel I understood that regardless of what someone may think of themselves, the truth of their character cannot be seen until they are tested, in very difficult situations. Without this adventure Bilbo would never have known of his courageous nature, because within his protected world he would never have required such a trait. In the eyes of his fellow hobbits, Bilbo had lost his respectability, but to me Bilbo's perceived loss is a real gain. This gain was due to the fact that he left his innocent and pristine world and returned not only with a new meaning of life, but with a new sense of himself. Now, even if the theme of achieving oneself is generally considered positive, the fact remains that the transformation could inevitably still be a degradation rather than progress. The only way to fully interpret which view is truly prevalent is through the previously stated investigation of whether there actually exists good in the world according to JRR Tolkien in his novel The Hobbit. To fully examine whether there truly is good in the world, we must analyze the characters and their progression in the novel. To begin the analysis, we must evaluate Bilbo Baggins' initial character attitudes and the environmental factors that influenced him and shaped his overall character. This will provide a framework for tracking Bilbo's change over the course of the novel. At the beginning of The Hobbit, we begin in a small village known as The Shire. The Shire was based on Tolkien's childhood home at Sarehole, what he considered a "countryside oasis" and represented "rural tranquility" and an "aura of long-lost pastoral Eden". This then places Bilbo in the setting of a world in its pristine state of innocence. Bilbo is similarly considered "very respectable" in his community, meaning that he has "a good or fair social position and possesses good moral qualities naturally appropriate to this." He also maintained a comfortable lifestyle and, in other words, was only exposed to the “smile of Fortune”. In the eyes of most this would allow Bilbo to fall into the good league. Boethius would state, regarding the character of Bilbo, that he is a man to whom fortune has been pleased to bestow its gifts, and is therefore in possession of the only power within Boethian ideology. This statement is realized in the awareness that according to Boethius there is no evil, but only the absence of good. Therefore, since Bilbo never experienced this absence, he never experienced what the Manichaean view would consider evil. The Manichaean concept of good and evil can be contrasted with the Boethian view in that Manichaean ideology believes that there are two forces of influence, good and evil, rather than just one and its absence. However, regardless of the opposing theories, at this point in the novel, both tend to agree that Bilbo is on the side of the good and innocent. I, on the other hand, don't consider either of these two to be Bilbo. I see Bilbo as the Tabula Rasa. This basically means a young mind not yet influenced by the ways of the world. My idea is in direct opposition to the Boethian idea in that, instead of only good existing, I see the world as evil. So in my opinion Bilbo is not good at all but simply pristine. Therefore when Bilbo enters the world he will demonstrate one of the three theories presented through how he is affected by itand/or influenced. This will then give us the answer to the question of whether there really is good in the world, or simply the absence of evil. Bilbo gets his first taste of the world when he meets the cast of characters known as Thorin and companions. These characters include twelve dwarves and are introduced to Bilbo by Gandalf, a witty and mysterious old wizard, after Gandalf states that the dwarves need Bilbo's help in an adventure to recover the gold taken from their ancestors by an old man dragon named Smaug. Now, before this moment, Bilbo had only been exposed to people within the Shire who had no influence on him. However at this point we bring in the dwarf characters, who have been outside of this “long lost pastoral Eden” and bring fresh new concepts to Bilbo. The dwarves themselves faced a problem that can be described as the Boethian theory of Lady Luck. According to Boethius, Fortune does not belong to any man, but is rather given and taken away by an entity of fortune. When Fortune is gifted to someone, that individual is then considered in the face of what is good, when Fortune decides to take back her gifts, good has officially taken her leave. The problem is that during the time one enjoys the gifts of Fortune, one develops a sense of entitlement, as if Fortune is theirs and they deserve it. This causes the individual to become angry when Luck is taken away. This attitude is what leads to the realization of the Manichean ideals of evil, which are the evils of anger, greed, envy and the desire for revenge. Boethius would say that these developed from the absence of good, Manichean views would argue that they have always been there and can be defeated by the powers of good. However, what if they were continually present, but instead of fighting the powers of good they were simply nourished by the evil represented in the worldly pleasures of wealth and opulence? Thus, when the evils of worldly pleasures were exhausted, the evils of greed, anger and revenge came to take their place. This would strengthen my idea that only evil is present in the world and give an explanation of why some evils are sometimes found less widespread than others. We would then find a new concept, that is, that evil feeds on evil to maintain a balance. If all this turns out to be coherent in the novel, then the question of whether there really is good in the world can be answered with a no. Bilbo ultimately accepts the quest and is removed from the safety and innocence of his Shire. It is then thrown into the world and now has many influential forces of different ideologies. One of the first key events where we begin to see Bilbo's character begin to be affected, is seen through his encounter with the trolls. This encounter begins after Bilbo is sent by Thorin and his companions to find the light in the middle of the woods, where they are currently camped. Bilbo runs into the trolls, but fortunately remains hidden just out of the firelight. At this point Bilbo "was very alarmed, as well as disgusted, he wished he were a hundred miles away, and yet - and yet somehow he could not go straight back to Thorin and company empty-handed." Standing out of the firelight, Bilbo makes his first real decision: warn the others or pickpocket the trolls. Reading this part of the novel, you can see Bilbo's innocence. This can be seen from the fact that he was “alarmed” and “disgusted” by the very presence of trolls. These initial reactions were due to the fact that the trolls were completely unrelated to Bilbo. Furthermore, having heard tales of trolls from the dwarves, he immediately recognized the danger and threat they posed. Because of these factors, Bilbo reacted the way he did. I assumethat this was formed by his years of innocence in the Shire. So he would naturally be “alarmed” by the danger and wish he were “a hundred miles away.” However, after his initial response, the influence of the greed possessed by the dwarves, which Bilbo has been exposed to and influenced by, begins to manifest itself. This presentation of evil is made evident through the phrase, “and yet…and yet somehow he could not return directly to Thorin and company empty-handed.” The obvious point in the quote is that the previously mentioned Tabula Rasa has now been affected to the point that the characters' actions change from what they once would have been. This presents itself in many points of view according to different ideologies. Boethius would see this scenario as if Bilbo had been excluded from Fortune's blessings and thus left in the absence of good. However, because he has been accustomed to a comfortable lifestyle in the Shire, he has developed a sense of entitlement and thus longs for the fortune he once held. This paves the way for the Manichaean concept of evil to make its way into Bilbo's mind in the form of greed. Greed, the current force of evil, is driving Bilbo to commit theft, something his unaffected self would never have done. This therefore showed that the forces of evil were gaining the upper hand over the forces of good. However, Manichean ideology carries more weight because of one small detail: repetition. The fact that the author uses the expression "and yet-and yet" tells me that there is a conflict going on in Bilbo's mind. This simple hesitation makes me assume that Bilbo is weighing the pros and cons of the situation in his mind, causing a momentary uncertainty in the character. We might assume that this represents the forces of good and evil in Bilbo's consciousness. Yet the question in this scenario is: if greed was the force for evil, then what was the force for good? The opposite of greed in this situation would be generosity. However, when referring to Bilbo's initial frame of reference, there was never any indication that this initial Bilbo was generous. Therefore, if this force of good is not present, and never has been, then only the power of evil is influencing Bilbo. If this is true, then the hesitation could simply be seen as the evil force slowly changing Bilbo's character to the point of influencing his actions. Through this first point in the novel, we see that the Bilbo we once knew is now no more. The worst part is, in Bilbo's words shortly after this part, he says "This is only a beginning!" This statement leads me to believe that the trend of evil influences in our character Bilbo will only continue. In this way we are already starting to get closer to the answer to whether there is truly good in the world. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay To summarize, through the adventures of Bilbo Baggins in JRR Tolkien's The Hobbit, we learn that the world is simply not as good as people like Boethius would have you believe. In all the avenues and in all the characters he said that only the presence of good existed and that everything else was simply that of its absence. However, upon further analysis, I found that this ideological concept does not take into account such things as the development of greed, anger, or the desire for revenge. It is true that Boethius explains this in part by explaining the development of the sense of entitlement to Fortune. However, if these evils continue to grow out of this sense of entitlement, then this is evidence of a break in its logic. For if these things occur in the absence of good, then only this fact.