The main point - which you could have brought up - is a recorded event where Tolkien asks a young student if he thought there might be fairies living in the flower they were looking at. Tolkien liked the fairy tale side of the world.
Thus why Tolkien created a
mythological history based on the Norse Eddas and other fragmented legends and mythologies (and a dash of Christian theology). He never intended it to be literal.
You've convinced me, but the thing is. Now we can accuse Tolkien of being racist.
This is inane. Tolkien based his works upon Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon mythologies, and so it would be odd if there were a mixture of peoples (European, Asian, African etc.) living in northwestern Middle-earth (the mythological equivalent of Western Europe). Tolkien was English, and wanted to make a mythology for England. Therefore he wrote
The Lord of the Rings according to his people's point of view. He could not make his protagonists, say, Incan or Japanese, or even put the setting anywhere else than (an alternative) North-western Europe, in spirit if not in actuality.
The whole of Tolkien's legendarium contains a conflict between literal light (The Trees, the Silmarils) and darkness (the literal absence of light). Morgoth's standard was "
sable unblazoned" (that is, plain black). "Mordor" means "black land" in Sindarin. If you were to therefore assert this distinction represents some kind of subtle racism on Tolkien's part, you would be ignoring the fact that Eol, father of Maeglin was known as the Dark Elf, and the Moriquendi were called the Elves of Darkness. Both of these terms refer to remaining outside the light of the Two Trees, not to skin tone. The Black Númenóreans are likewise named because of the color of their allegiance to Sauron and their heraldry, not their skin tone.
You can point to the Easterlings, some of whom are described as being of fairly dark skin complexion ("
swarthy") or the Haradrim are who are described as black-skinned, and some of whom are at least inspired by Indian cultures - fighting on Mumakil-back, for example - as evidence of racism. Again, this would be
completely ignoring the context of the established legendarium.
Firstly, the the the Woses are primitive, small, and alien compared to other peoples, yet they are valuable allies against Sauron. While Tolkien does not mention their skin colour, they were considered monsters by the Rohirrim who hunted them as animals, which the narrative explicitly condemns. However in the First Age they were counted as Edain, or noble Men, and were allies of the Elves. Furthermore, not all enemies are non-white. Noteworthy examples are Saruman, Gríma, Gollum, and at least two of the Nazgûl. Also, Lotho Sackville-Baggins and the ruffians are white-skinned and cruel characters who ravage and take over the Shire.
Indeed, during the time-frame of Lord of the Rings those enslaved and serving Sauron in Núrn are darker-skinned people from the South and East, and thus had no choice in the matter (Aragorn grants them their own land after the War of the Ring, incidentally). More to the point, it is clear that
Sauron's tyranny frightened and coerced the Easterlings and Haradrim into an alliance with him, just as his craftiness tricked the Noldor and the Númenóreans. Furthermore, they had good reason to hate Gondor anyway, as they had fought many wars against it, and indeed many territories of the Haradrim were forced to pay tribute to the borderline imperialistic Gondor for hundreds of years. They weren't just fighting against Gondor because they were evil Eastern people intent on destroying good Western culture - indeed, not only the East and South are associated with evil, and neither were they always so. In the First Age, evil came from the North when Morgoth based himself in Angband, as it did when the Witch-king took up residence in Angmar. All Men and Elves first awoke in the East. Boromir is introduced as a "
man of the South".
One only needs to look to Sam for evidence of understanding and empathy between the West and the Haradrim:
"
It was Sam's first view of a battle of Men against Men, and he did not like it much. He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man's name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil at heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace."
It must also be made clear that during the history of Middle-Earth
many of the white races of man and even some Elves were fooled and coerced by the Enemy. It is not simply some 'weakness' of the Haradrim and the Easterlings, simply a reflection of the Enemy's corrupting influence over all the Children of Ilúvatar.
Let us look to Tolkien himself. As you may know, when a German publisher looked to publish the Hobbit in Nazi Germany, they asked Tolkien if he was of entirely German descent, and whether he had any Jewish ancestors. This is part of his response (Letter 30):
"
I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-Iranian; as far as I am aware None of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people."
Another few quotes:
"
I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones."
"
The treatment of colour nearly always horrifies anyone going out from Britain, & not only in South Africa. Unfort[unately], not many retain that generous sentiment for long."
"
Anyway, I have in this War a burning private grudge—which would probably make me a better soldier at 49 than I was at 22: against that ruddy little ignoramus Adolf Hitler (for the odd thing about demonic inspiration and impetus is that it in no way enhances the purely intellectual stature: it chiefly affects the mere will). Ruining, perverting, misapplying, and making for ever accursed, that noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have ever loved, and tried to present in its true light."
My final point on this matter is one of relativism. Tolkien was telling the story from one side - not a side that was defined along racial lines, as I hope I have made clear - but along the lines of those who fought against Sauron and those who fought for him. If one were to write a historical fiction novel set during the time of the Crusades, and the protagonist was a crusading Teutonic knight who called the Muslims he was fighting against "
cruel" and "
evil" would that make the author a racist? More to the point, would that make the protagonist a bad person? Would his reaction and views be understandable? I'll leave you with that thought, since this response has gotten too long already.
And to people who fill in all the gaps in the legendarium with real world stuff so that the Shire=England, Rohan=England, Tol Eressea=England - I still accuse you of being boring with no creativity. This is what I try to stop whenever I say Middle-earth does not equal the real earth.
Nobody has said that the Shire equals England, or that Rohan equals England. Strawman arguments won't hold up here. All that I said was that the Shire is heavily based on rural 19th century English culture, and that Rohan is heavily based on Anglo-Saxon culture. You might have noticed that Englishmen don't live in holes in the ground and aren't three feet tall.
All that I have said is that these cultural similarities means that it would be valuable to look at medieval Arabic/steppe/African cultures to come up with ideas for structures and social organisation. It doesn't prevent creativity, it just provides a basis for it.