| The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and Tolkien - The One Ring
> Virtual Tolkien Study Group (Page 1 of 9) |
|
|
|
| Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next |
  |
|
Goto:
|
|
|
Master_Gurloes
Rider of the Mark
Alliance: House of Cirdan
Last Visited: 14 Jul 2004
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 784
|
Posted: Sun May 26, 2002 8:50 pm |
     |
|
Welcome to the opening thread of the Virtual Tolkien Study Group. Over the months ahead we will study, discuss and learn together from The Silmarillion. Those who are new to the Forum, and have come to this thread first, would be well advised to take a look at the opening post of this other thread first: READ THIS FIRST / SIGN ON HERE . There you will learn more about the purpose of the Forum, an approximate schedule, and some (voluntary  ) background reading.
Rather than let the thread get unmanageably long, the discussion will continue over a number of threads. You are now in the first thread (Thread 1A) and it is now closed. Please do not make any further posts to this thread. The current discussion thread is here: Section 1: 'Ainulindalë' and 'Valaquenta' Thread 1B (Now open).
If you are posting in this discussion, and haven’t yet signed up for the Forum, please introduce yourself. We’d love to know a little about you. There is also ‘The Tolkien Virtual Resource Library’ HERE, containing links to a wealth of background information, and another thread HERE with ideas on how a reading of The Silmarillion should be approached. Before posting, we would (respectfully) ask that you at least read through the sections of the Silmarillion under discussion, and maintain the flow and topic of the discussion underway at any one time.
I’ll come clean straight away: I don’t personally think that The Silmarillion is Tolkien’s masterpiece. That accolade, in my opinion, belongs to The Lord of the Rings. Yet, for many in this group, The Silmarillion surpasses The Lord of the Rings in scope, majesty, vision and creativity. I vividly remember buying The Silmarillion on the day of its first publication in 1977, and being utterly bowled over by the ‘biblical’ nature of the opening sections. Put yourself in the position of those of us who had been reading the LOTR for some years, knowing that an unpublished book called ‘The Silmarillion’ existed, but knowing nothing about it. When it was actually published, I will readily admit to feeling dismayed by the Quenta Silmarillion itself. It wasn’t remotely like the LOTR which I loved so well. It took me several years to finish it, and several more readings to fully grasp its structure. I imagine many were (and will be) the same. Yet it is ultimately one of the most rewarding literary experiences available today, in this world of writing-by-numbers fantasy series. Even now, it’s not my particular area of Tolkien expertise, and I’m looking forward to learning from those who are convinced of its preeminence over the LOTR. We all owe a great debt to those who made this Forum possible, particularly to Novice for the idea and the hard work, and to Ted for permission.
There now follows a summary of this month’s sections: Ainulindalë and Valaquenta. After that, I’ve listed some possible areas for discussion. I’ve pasted the first topic into the next thread, as I’d like that topic to kick things off. I would hope we could work through them all, and many more besides, before leaving these wonderful opening sections.
AINULINDALË
'There was Eru, the One, who in Arda is called Ilúvatar; ... '
Ainulindalë opens before the throne of Ilúvatar, in a spiritual plane of existence beyond time and space; indeed, it opens before time or space are even created. Ilúvatar’s first act of creation is to make the Ainur – mighty, angelic, spiritual beings – and the cosmology of Ainulindalë places them in the ’fair regions’ created for them and surrounded by The Void. The motivation for creating the Ainur remains obscure. They are not omnipotent like Eru, they are by nature limited beings, being each the product of only part of the mind of Ilúvatar. Yet there is a clear hierarchy of power, and Ainulindalë hints that they were not all created at the same time. First were Melkor and Manwë, ’brethren in the thought of Ilúvatar’.
Ilúvatar starts the process of the creation of the universe by gathering the Ainur before him and teaching them to make music. This starts with the Ainur essentially doing little more than singing back to Ilúvatar, initially one at a time, themes (that is, melodies or tunes) which he had devised. When judged ready, the Ainur are taught the melody of the Great Music. It is important to remember that the melody or ‘tune’ of the Great Music – indeed all the music - was created by Eru, not the Ainur. Their role was to make the harmonies, ornamentation, and all the parts that would turn a ‘tune’ into a ‘symphony’. In this they were to use their own thoughts, so it is clear that the Ainur had free will from the beginning. And in this orchestration the Ainur succeeded magnificently, making music that they have never yet bettered. Yet, they had no idea at that stage of the purpose of their Music, other than it was a thing of beauty in itself.
The Great Music becomes marred by Melkor. The motivation for Melkor’s evil is never fully fleshed out, and I would argue that it is not entirely convincing. The motivations recounted in Ainulindalë are essentially those of pride and jealousy – he wished to increase the power and glory of his own contribution, he was jealous of Ilúvatar’s complete monopoly of the ability to create, and he was shamed when these were pointed out. More the behavior of a spoiled child, in my opinion, than the mightiest of the Ainur. The first time Melkor spoils the Music, Ilúvatar starts a second theme (possibly containing the creation of Arda, the Earth) which the Ainur elaborate. Melkor spoils it again and Ilúvatar starts a third theme (containing the creation of the Elves and Men) which the Ainur (other than Melkor) appear to have little or no part in. At the height of Melkor’s further disruption Eru brings the Music to a sudden cataclysmic ending chord. And that chord is the end of our world and history as we will (one day) know it. And for Tolkien it was almost certainly the Second Coming of Christ, beyond which Ainulindalë hints that a further, perfect, uncorrupted Music will then follow. It was the bedrock of Tolkien’s religious beliefs.
But, at this stage, the Ainur still do not know that their actions within the Music have any consequences. Then Ilúvatar enlightens them (literally). He shows them ‘a vision’ of how the unfolding of the Music in fact contained the creation of The World (that is, the universe, nature, existence). The history of the universe – from the very beginning of time and matter to the height of the powers of the Elves in Arda – is played out before their eyes, and they are amazed, particularly by Elves and Men (The Children of Ilúvatar) in whose creation they had no part. But they do not see how the universe will end.
The vision is taken away, and the Ainur are surprised to see that it was just a vision, and that the actual process of creating The World (the universe) and Arda (our Earth) in preparation for the Children of Ilúvatar must be achieved by themselves. Mainly out of love for what they have seen of the Elves, many of the Ainur want the vision to exist. Eru grants the vision being (‘The Secret Fire’, existence) and sets our plane in the midst of the Void with that beautiful and simple word ’Eä!’. Many of the Ainur go into The World in order to start the process of achieving what they had seen in the vision, despite the stipulation that they must thereafter remain within it until it is complete, to be its life and it their life.
Ainulindalë draws to an end with the depiction of how the Lords and Queens of the Valar descend into the plane of matter, taking majestic forms similar to the Elf Lords and Ladies they had seen in the vision. How they created the universe and ultimately Arda, the Earth. How Melkor and Manwë contended for kingship of Arda, and the contest between Melkor and the Valar (which will dominate the first part of the Silmarillion) began; and how, together with lesser spirits that chose to follow and serve them, the Valar battled to shape Arda even as Melkor marred it.
’And thus was the habitation of the Children of Ilúvatar established at the last in the Deeps of Time and amidst the innumerable stars‘.
VALAQUENTA
Valaquenta is arguably the simpler of the two pieces, being essentially a catalogue of the names and attributes of the chief Ainur who chose to enter into the World at the beginning of Time. Yet the characteristics of the Valar are important to get clear at the beginning of a reading of the Silmarillion. We even come across several names which are familiar to readers of the Lord of the Rings.
Even before listing the names, it becomes clear that the Valar have been worshipped under many different names by Men throughout Middle-Earth. In Tolkien’s creative scheme, Valaquenta was of course translated from the Elvish many ages before the rise of the Sumerian, Norse, Greek, Roman etc pantheons of gods. But the implication must surely be that these gods are in fact the Valar, worshipped down the ages by Men ignorant of Eru. We can, for example, see aspects of Manwë and Aulë in the Norse gods Odin and Thor. Again, Oiolossë - the mountain home of Manwë and Varda - is reminiscent of Olympus, the home of the Greek gods. And there are many other examples in comparative mythology.
The names given to the Valar are those given by the Elves who had the advantage over Men of actually meeting and living with the Valar, and this period of ‘bliss’ for the Elves is recounted in the opening chapters of Quenta Silmarillion. In summary they are as follows, listed (where appropriate) with their respective spouses. Those in bold are the Aratar, the High Ones of Arda:
- Manwë, Lord of the realm of Arda, and Varda (Elbereth), Lady of the Stars
- Ulmo (Lord of Waters)
- Aulë, smith and master of all crafts, and Yavanna Kementári, Queen of the Earth, the Giver of Fruits
- Mandos (Namo), keeper of the Houses of the Dead, the Doomsman of the Valar, and Vairë, the Weaver
- Lórien (Irmo), master of visions and dreams, and Estë, healer of hurts and of weariness
- Nienna, mourns for every wound that Arda has suffered
- Tulkas Astaldo, the Valiant, and Nessa, swift as an arrow and delights in dancing
- Oromë (Aldaron; Tauron), the Lord of Forests, hunter of monsters and Vána, the Ever-young
The Maiar are Ainur of a lesser order than the Valar. They followed the Valar and Melkor into Eä, at the beginning of Time. They are their servants and helpers. Ossë and Uinen are mentioned most prominently in Valaquenta, but Melian has a more prominent (and important) part later in the Silmarillion, with echoes that carry on into the Lord of the Rings. And Olorin, the Wisest of the Maiar, is our beloved Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings, sent in the body of an old man with the other four Wizards (Istari) by the Valar to aid Middle-Earth against Sauron. And speaking of Sauron , we find him mentioned in the section ‘Of the Enemies’, as the chief of the servants of Melkor, but initially one of the Maiar of Aulë. It is important for those familiar only with the Lord of the Rings, to realize that Sauron – the most powerful being in Middle-Earth in the Third Age – was only the servant of the incomparably more powerful first Dark Lord Melkor/Morgoth. Both feature prominently in the Silmarillion. And I can still remember the thrill of recognition when I first read that the Balrogs were among the Maiar servants of Melkor. So both Gandalf (Olorin) and the Moria Balrog had, at least technically, known eachother from before the beginning of Time.
SOME AREAS FOR DISCUSSION
I am following these summary sections with a number of points and questions which arose most prominently in my mind while reading and re-reading Ainulindalë and Valaquenta in preparation for this section.
- Firstly, perhaps the easiest ‘way in’ to The Silmarillion for first time readers who are familiar with The Lord of the Rings, is to explore the ways in which material from The Silmarillion adds information to The Lord of the Rings. This is important, I think, because there are many people who have signed up for this Discussion Group who admit to having been defeated by a first reading of the The Silmarillion. I’ve already mentioned a number of areas in which Ainulindalë and Valaquenta give glimpses of words already known to LOTR readers, such as Eru, Elbereth, Olorin (Gandalf), Sauron, Balrogs etc. Are there others? Wilko has already reminded us HERE that the copy of The Silmarillion that you hold in your hand is ultimately derived from Bilbo’s Translations from the Elvish by B.B. that he composed during his long residence in Rivendell and gave to Frodo. I’ve heard that said often before, but does anyone have references for that opinion? And the final sentence of Valaquenta left me with a question: whoever wrote it originally (i.e. whose words did Bilbo translate?) wrote the following about Sauron: ’But in after years he rose like a shadow of Morgoth and a ghost of his malice, and walked behind him on the same ruinous path down into the Void’. This seems to imply a knowledge that Sauron was ultimately defeated at the end of the Third Age. So who wrote Valaquenta, and when? I’d like to start the discussion with this broad topic, so I’ll paste it into the next post.
- Secondly, I’m intrigued by the origin of Melkor/Morgoth’s evil. As I said earlier, his does not seem to be a slow fall into evil. Rather, he seems to show pride, jealousy, disruption and a determination to impose his own will on Eru and others right from the beginning. Yet, Tolkien clearly states that the Ainur were ‘the offspring of his [Eru’s] thought’. And Eru is described as ‘The One’, so must contain all things within his being. Can the mightiest of the Ainur therefore be reflecting a dark aspect of Eru? Would Tolkien even have accepted that Eru had a dark side? If not, what is the origin of Melkor’s complete evil. And to what extent did the Ainur, as offspring of Eru’s thought, really have free will? How does the creation story in Ainulindalë derive or differ from the Judaeo-Christian creation story in the biblical Genesis.
- Thirdly, I would love to learn further, from those who know these things in greater detail, how the pantheon of Tolkien’s Valar compares with the other pantheons of ‘gods’, particularly those of Norse mythology. In fact, how does the cosmology of Middle-Earth compare to other cosmologies?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Master_Gurloes
Rider of the Mark
Alliance: House of Cirdan
Last Visited: 14 Jul 2004
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 784
|
|
Posted: Sun May 26, 2002 8:51 pm |
|
|
I’d like to start the discussion with this broad topic, so I've pasted it from the first post into this one:
Firstly, perhaps the easiest ‘way in’ to The Silmarillion for first time readers who are familiar with The Lord of the Rings, is to explore the ways in which material from The Silmarillion adds information to The Lord of the Rings. This is important, I think, because there are many people who have signed up for this Discussion Group who admit to having been defeated by a first reading of the The Silmarillion. I’ve already mentioned a number of areas in which Ainulindalë and Valaquenta give glimpses of words already known to LOTR readers, such as Eru, Elbereth, Olorin (Gandalf), Sauron, Balrogs etc. Are there others? Wilko has already reminded us HERE that the copy of The Silmarillion that you hold in your hand is ultimately derived from Bilbo’s Translations from the Elvish by B.B. that he composed during his long residence in Rivendell and gave to Frodo. I’ve heard that said often before, but does anyone have references for that opinion? And the final sentence of Valaquenta left me with a question: whoever wrote it originally (i.e. whose words did Bilbo translate?) wrote the following about Sauron: ’But in after years he rose like a shadow of Morgoth and a ghost of his malice, and walked behind him on the same ruinous path down into the Void’. This seems to imply a knowledge that Sauron was ultimately defeated at the end of the Third Age. So who wrote Valaquenta, and when? Give us your thoughts on how these sections might add to a reading of the LOTR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ArPharazon
Mariner
Alliance: House of Beren
Last Visited: 29 Jan 2005
Joined: 13 Dec 2001
Posts: 6360
|
|
Posted: Sun May 26, 2002 10:42 pm |
|
|
An EXCELLENT opening post if I may say so Master Gurloes.
Let me start by saying that I wish this new forum and the discussions well - "May God Bless her and all who sail in her!" 
You wrote: "And the final sentence of Valaquenta left me with a question: whoever wrote it originally (i.e. whose words did Bilbo translate?) wrote the following about Sauron: ’But in after years he rose like a shadow of Morgoth and a ghost of his malice, and walked behind him on the same ruinous path down into the Void’."
I first bought The Sil a few days before its official publication day in 1977, and was shocked by its "biblical" quality. But to me - once I got over the surprise that this was not a successor to the Lord of the Rings (in style not story) that I had hoped for - its "difficult nature that has always given the book its purpose for me. To me then, The Sil is like an ancient tome of lore into which we can did to provide context and detail for LOTR (where we come actually to know individuals in a modern sense). It is like having a library where one can research, and (though this is off topic) later volumes like UT and HoME add to that ability and the size of that library.
Tolkien always saw The Sil as a collection of different writers' achievements brought together - in the Bible we have books like Kings and Chronicles which tell the same story in different ways (annalistically and as a narrative) some giving more details than others. We know from HoME that Tolkien worked on the Sil annalistically, and worked up narratives in different degrees of detail and characterisation.
He also from time to time ascribed authorship of parts of The Sil to various individuals (see BoLT) and also their transmission - but his view on this seems to have changed. Also had he ever managed to publish the Sil himself (in my view an impossibility) JRRT would have produced a book very different in tone and character to that which his son did - and that is no criticism of what we have.
I am quite content to accept that what we have is Bilbo and Frodos cullings from the great libraries of Rivendell and Minas Tirith. Just as Ovid summarised many of the Greek Myths in Metamorphoses - drawing from a huge range of options which then existed. (Has anyone read Robert Graves 2 vols on the Greek Myths? They indicate that although most as now lost to us, the ancients had many different alternative stories to chose from, and how they might have arisen.)
I think we must accept that the final choice of contents and unstated sub-text of The Sil as we have it, is post end of 3rd Age. That does not mean of course that individual stories such as those of Beren or Turin need be overly affected. But the whole Sil could be seen as a narrative showing how ME came to be in the position it was when we open the first page of LOTR.
I have other things to say of my own, and as far as Master Gurloes comment on the origin of Melkor's evil is concerned, I have a radical re-interpretation of the whole Ainulindale to present, but I'll do that once the discussion has developed. On a surface reading of the section though, I think we are meant to interpret this as being an off-shoot of free-will. this is perhaps summed up best by Iluvatar's discussion with Aule over the dwarves. essentially, do you want creations that merely do what you do/want them to; or ones who can think for themselves. If the latter, then you give them free-will - and one outcome of that is Melkor.
Also I don't think we should see Melkor as evil at this stage or in the Music - though of course he was (or became so). In LETTERS, Tolkien is insistent that neither Melkor nor Sauron were evil in the beginning - but they were "impatient" (there is a phrase in Ainulindale - "for desire grew hot within him" . Surely, the element of Iluvatar's mind/ character which Melkor reflected was that of creator/creativity. How he came to use it is, of course a different matter.
Not much original here, I'm afraid, but its great to hve got the thread and the discussion underway. I look forward to reading what others have to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Novice
Ranger of the North
Alliance: -None - Female-
Last Visited: 02 Apr 2009
Joined: 14 Feb 2002
Posts: 2734
|
|
Posted: Sun May 26, 2002 11:40 pm |
|
|
Yipeee! Yipeee! Yipeee! Yipeee! Yipeee! Yipeee!
I'm sorry, but I just couldn't help myself. I'll get my little dance of unbridled joy over and done with and address the topic.
...but really, you've no idea what a thrill it was to enter the forum and see FOUR THREADS--and the top thread is the INAUGURAL DISCUSSION THREAD!
...thanks for a superlative opening post, M_G. I have to go off line to get my thoughts together for the reply post, otherwise it will be incoherent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 12:44 am |
|
|
Yes, I'll second..or rather Third the compliments on the opening post Master G. So we are to discuss the first point you have mentioned right?..Now I have only read this once so forgive me if I say anything absurd...here goes:
I agree with what Arph said. It is very likely that Bolbo collected information from various sources available to him at Rivendell in the form of scrolls, folklore..and maybe even told by Gandalf. These accounts may have been given by the Maiar and recorded in various scripts. Some of these scripts may have been written before and after the fall of Sauron.
However, as I read the Silm. I felt it had this feeling of being written by someone who existed long after the fall of Sauron. It does not sound like what Bilbo would have written if the fall of Sauron had just taken place. It sounds like a distant memory, as though someone is speaking of a myth, not a fact. Bilbo writing in that style for the Valar, and the Ainur is understandable, but I feel he would have been more factual about the account of Sauron. What say?
Shall I discuss the other points simultaneously, or should we do it one at a time?
PS: Novice, believe me, I share your excitement
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nerdanel
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Feanor
Last Visited: 06 Dec 2005
Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 4031
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 2:26 am |
|
|
I think in Ainulindalë Tolkien shows an interesting solution to the problem of evil. I get the impression that Eru is pretty much all-powerful but incapable of evil unlike the Ainur who were created with free will. As Eru is all-good he wants to make things the best they could be, but Tolkien proposes there are end results one cannot reach without the existence of evil and furthermore that these states can be better than could be achieved with evil.
So originally Eru sets out to achieve the best thing achievable doing only good deeds. Then Melkor comes and disrupts things. Eru most likely could have cleaned things up, but from Melkor's deeds he could see opening new paths to good things otherwise impossible. Eru lets Melkor's disharmony stay but takes care that the end result is what he wants.
This point is illustrated well in the origin of rain and snowflakes which there wouldn't be without Melkor's desire to destroy water.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 2:41 am |
|
|
Hmm.. Eru was The One. The Ainur were the offspring of his thought. If Eru was all good, the Melkor should never have been bad. It is a possiblity that Eru too had a dark side, maybe anger, maybe pride...from which melkor sprung and hence had a bit of evil in him (A lot actually)
Secondly, it was not eru who was making things, it was only some of the Ainur who had decided to decend onto the earth and form it. Melkor kept disrupting the work which they did. Eru already knew all that was going to happen. The strife between the Ainur and Melkor was inevitable, as inevitable as the struggle between good and evil. Eru has already designed for all this to happen, and he only knows that Melkor's work will ultimately add to his plans, be a part of his plans. Even Melkor does not know that. He feels that he has his own will and whatever he is doing is ruinous for the rest, but actually, he is but a part of a play already written by Eru, as he and the Ainur would find out eventually.
The question here is, did Eru have a dark part?..If not, how was melkor corrupted, being sprung from good? I think eru did have a dark part, and it was this dark part from which Melkor was formed and hence he was dark too. If Melkor had sprung from creativity, he would have used it in a good way. but he was power hungry, he wanted to be supreme. Hunger for power does not arise out of impatience, it arises out of bad ambition, greed and the likes of such...
Basically, whatever characteristics he had, he got from Eru. If he was impatient, the aspect too would have to attributed to Eru, right? But then Eru is not depicted as havingsuch qualities. It is another possibility that Eru did have these qualities, but well under control. he had other aspects like patience, kindness, love, care etc to counter these. If Melkor was made from only the dark part, then he would have none of the other characteristics. He would learn it eventually, but only too late. Hence the rise of evil. Thats what i think anyways..
|
|
|
|
|
|
-Rómestámo-
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 15 Oct 2004
Joined: 06 Mar 2002
Posts: 2947
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:11 am |
|
|
Congratulations to all who toiled so hard to establish this project! Now we're up and running... I'll confine myself to addressing the question posed... (for the moment keeping well away from such hot potatoes as 'the origin of Evil' and 'Free Will and an omniscient God'...)
This seems to imply a knowledge that Sauron was ultimately defeated at the end of the Third Age. So who wrote Valaquenta, and when?
Following JRRT's conceit that the works that he penned are but 'translations' of hitherto lost and forgotten texts, the most useful source for the origins of the lore and tales collected as The Silmarillion is, in fact, the section in the Prologue of LotR entitled "Notes on Shire Records". While originally collected by Bilbo Baggins, the "Translations from the Elvish", particularly in the copy kept at Great Smials and copied from 'The Thain's Book' was transcribed in Gondor, probably at the request of the great-grandson of Peregrin, and completed in SR 1592 (FA 172). Its southern scribe appended this note: Findegil King's Writer finished this work in IV 172 ... In Minas Tirith it received much annotation, and many corrections, especially of names, words, and quotations in the Elvish languages;... But the chief importance of Findegil's copy is that it alone contains the whole of Bilbo's 'Translations from the Elvish'. These three volumes were found to be a work of great skill and learning in which... ...he had used all the sources available to him in Rivendell, both living and written.
Here lies the answer to your question. The Valaquenta was written by Bilbo from sources in Rivendell (Elves who had lived in the Blessed Realm such as Glorfindel, and works from the Elvish libraries) but amended by Scholars in Minas Tirith. Perhaps Findegil King's Writer in IV 172, perhaps even the King Elessar when he received the Thain's Book in IV 64, added the epilogue- before it was copied and sent back to the Shire. This most important copy is the basis for our published Silmarillion... At least that's my take on it .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:19 am |
|
|
Yikes!!..From where did you get all that!!???....its very insughtful..i din't know any of that..thanks a lot..
OOC: Novice, for some reason, I am getting seven update mails or every post made over here. Do you have any idea so as to why this is happeneing?..I'll ask the Mods too.Thanks..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nerdanel
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Feanor
Last Visited: 06 Dec 2005
Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 4031
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:34 am |
|
|
I think Eru was indeed all-good which I think he needs to be if he was supposed to be compatible with Christianity. (I know that in the Old Testament particularly God doesn't really come off as all-good, but that's the Christians' problem.)
I think the creation of free will was supposed to be a good action even if it had the potential for unhappy consequences. (Just listen to the Christian apologists on this board.)
About Melkor:
He had gone often alone into the void places ... But being alone he begun to consider thoughts of his own unlike those of his brethren.
I think the Christian view to which Tolkien subscribed was that evil was the absence of good. Therefore it doesn't need special creation to appear. By going to the void Melkor become influenced by the absence of Eru and the rest is (imaginary) history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Novice
Ranger of the North
Alliance: -None - Female-
Last Visited: 02 Apr 2009
Joined: 14 Feb 2002
Posts: 2734
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:44 am |
|
|
Quite so, Romestamo (and well met!)
Bilbo's 'translations from the elvish' were the source of both the silm (and Lotr), according the prologue. But I'd like to look further to find who wrote (or told the story) of the creation music and the coming of the Valar, for this, after all, is the deepest and oldest tale, if we accept that this is 'history' and lost in the far mists of distant time.
I blush to do this so early in the thread, but could I venture that we look for a source in the Lost Tales. In the first chapters, Rumil the Sage ("the aged of the Noldoli" ), speaker of many tongues and attributed with inventing the first elvish alphabet, tells the mortal mariner Eriol the tale of the music of the ainur and the coming of the valar.
Rumil says he learned the early tongue of the Valar "in Kor, a lifetime gone, of the goodness of Aule and thereby i know many matters: very many matters". (Kor being the earliest name Tolkien gave to Vallinor)
I know that Lost Tales are well and truly superceded by the silm, but where the Silm text is silent, and extrapolating from the prologue, is it not possible that the earliest coherent telling of the creation of Ea came from Rumil, and was preserved and distilled thereafter by the elves. The story would possibly have been found in the library of Rivendell, but I don't know that it would have been known in Minas Tirith. It is, after all the earliest of all the tales of Arda and Minas Tirith would have held what material was saved from Numenor and whatever history was told of the Third Age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 3:54 am |
|
|
The Gods of middle earth, To me, seem to be a mix between various real religious beliefs like Christianity and Greek mythology. In Greek myths, Zues was the all supreme God and he had many children, who were also gods. These children had a will of their own and not all were good. In fact, each had some fault or the other. They seemed to have many 'human' characteristics but had the power and authority of Gods. I feel, in Eru and the Ainur we find the same thing, mixed with Christian beliefs. Eru is, arguably, all good. But Ainur have a will of their own (Melkor nearly convincesOsse to take his side against Manwe and Ulmo, promising to give him Ulmo's realm), and hence weaknesses of their own too. They fight within themsellves, have wars, defeat each other, are capable of changing alliances etc..maybe not to the extent of the Greek gods, but almost like them.It seems to me that Eru is made to look like the all good Christian god, whereas the Ainur are made to look like the Greek Gods.
PS: forgive me if I don't reply to posts soon, i will be unsubscribed to this thread for a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tavish13
Shield Bearer
Alliance: Valinor
Last Visited: 02 Nov 2005
Joined: 04 Mar 2001
Posts: 438
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:04 am |
|
|
I can see interesting discussions on the nature of 'fate' and 'free will' starting here.
We know that Eru is all powerful. If he wanted, he could stop the evil of Melkor - but he doesn't. He must let this evil happen for a reason. Yet we know that the final vision Eru showed the Ainur will come to be. Things will turn out 'alright in the end'.
I think this reflects Tolkien's views on God and the world. Many people have been known to ask: "if there is a God, why does he let all the evil things in the World take place?" Perhaps Tolkien is saying that, although there is suffering and hatred, in the end everything will turn out alright.
Also, is it not true that you cannot know true joy unless you have sufferred to some extent? It's better to have loved and lost than not to have loved at all. In other words, the joy of Elves and Men will only be 'true' joy if they know the alternative - grief and hurt. Perhaps that is what Tokien thinks of 'God's plan', and therefore why Eru allows the evil of Melkor to take place.
Another point: to what extent are events in Middle Earth controlled by Eru? We know that his final vision will come to be, but are events all set in motion from the start with this in mind (ie. events are controlled by fate - the nature of true free will is debatable), or does Eru 'intervene' at many stages of history to make sure that his final vision comes to be (ie. people do have free will, but Eru will 'correct things' if someone makes a 'wrong' decision).
Just a few ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fingolfin_of_the_Noldor
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 15 Nov 2004
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 1817
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:19 am |
|
|
Yeah Rumil, it seems through the very last drafts was consistantly held to be the original incarnate originator.
Even when Tolkien felt that the traditions of the Silmarillion had been greatly impacted by Numenorean influences(in an effort to explain astronomical mistakes which would bound given the "flat-world" tradition within the mythology which the Eldar it seems would not have been apt to make) it does seem that Tolkien probably retained Rumil as the ultimate source in light of the preamble of The Annals of Aman
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:30 am |
|
|
Eeks!!.. I could have hardly believed there would be SO many different views on ONE subject.. This is going to be nice and loooong discussion.. I'm so happy....
I think the Ainur, like us humans in the real world, were just playing out roles. It is said that Eru had shown the entire earth, through all of time to the Ainur, except for that last bit of very important information ie; the climax. Hence, the fate of the world was decided. It seems to me that the world was created just to make the Ainur (Including Melkor) to be at peace with themselves and with each other, and to let them know that Eru is the all powerful. So, they are to strive and struggle till the end of the world when they learn to live together in harmony, and be able to make the great music without and disruptions this time around
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fingolfin_of_the_Noldor
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 15 Nov 2004
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 1817
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:47 am |
|
|
I think the Ainur, like us humans in the real world, were just playing out roles.
Exactly! On this I whole-heartedly agree as Tolkien makes direct reference to this in note iii text VII("Notes on motives of the Silmarillion" of the Myths Transformed section of Morgoth's Ring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 4:54 am |
|
|
OOC: I will be going offline now.. See you all tomorrow..Alex has left the building
|
|
|
|
|
|
Master_Gurloes
Rider of the Mark
Alliance: House of Cirdan
Last Visited: 14 Jul 2004
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 784
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:06 am |
|
|
Two topics (origin of the Sil/tie in with LOTR and the nature of evil) seem to be coexisting quite happily at present. However, I think we should perhaps keep other topics (including the comparative mythology one) back for just a little while, if others agree.
It seems to me that the world was created just to make the Ainur (Including Melkor) to be at peace with themselves and with each other, and to let them know that Eru is the all powerful.
I'm not sure I see it that way. There seems to be the implication that, in some way, The Children of Iluvatar are bound up with the purpose of the universe. Eru seems to have created the universe and Arda to house them. In this view Elves and Men become the center of the universe, at least as far as its purpose is concerned. And, at least for Men, part of that purpose seems to lie after The Great Music ends. Those who understand Christianity a bit better than me might comment on whether perhaps this reflects Tolkien's own belief - that Mankind has a central purpose in the universe?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Master_Gurloes
Rider of the Mark
Alliance: House of Cirdan
Last Visited: 14 Jul 2004
Joined: 11 Jun 2001
Posts: 784
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:18 am |
|
|
I think the Ainur, like us humans in the real world, were just playing out roles
And if that's the case, what room is there really for free will within Middle-Earth? Is Tolkien just glossing over a very difficult issue by stating that in every age there are also events which are 'new and have no foretelling, for they do not proceed from the past ... '. Were the Children of Iluvatar really 'strange and free, as observed in vision by the Valar?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tavish13
Shield Bearer
Alliance: Valinor
Last Visited: 02 Nov 2005
Joined: 04 Mar 2001
Posts: 438
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:25 am |
|
|
I agree, Master_Gurloes, Elves and Men do seem to be the 'centre of the Universe'. The Ainur, in a way, are in awe of the Elves (as the Elves are in awe of the Ainur), possibly because Elves and Men were (at first) completely knew to them. Eru did not involve the Ainur in the creation of his Children (in contrast to the creation of Arda). In a sense, the Ainur are in Arda to 'serve' the Children of Illuvatar - they await the coming of the Elves and perpare the world for them (as we shall see in later chapters).
To me, Arda seems to be the stage for Elves and Men to perform their play, with the Ainur as the people backstage, setting things up and making things run smoothly. Eru, of course, is the 'writer' of the script.
EDIT: This fits in with things that happen later in history. At first, the Valar attempt to 'take part' in the play (the First Age), but by the time of the LotR they have realised their mistake and are almost purely 'backstage'. Indeed, Eru physically removes them from the stage when the world becomes round.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fingolfin_of_the_Noldor
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 15 Nov 2004
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 1817
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:37 am |
|
|
MG, there is a difference between having a "role" and not having free will. Tolkien details in that note cited above how the Valar tend to begin to "fade" and become more impotent as time progresses as there is less for them to do they play increasing less a role in regard to the course of Arda Men having the increasingly greater
As I see itEru detined what would happen free will dictated how it would happen and as such I do not feel general roles and free will to be mutually exclusive
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:38 am |
|
|
So basically, Eru is God, Ainur are the angels and the Children of Eru are mankind? v The free - will and fate question is quite tangled up isn't it?.. If the Ainur and the Children have free will, how will Eru's plan come to pass?.. Shall we assume that the Ainur and the children are supposed to 'work' to make his plan work?..If so, then they will do so till the time when they don't know what is to be done (The part which was not shown to the Ainur)?.. If Eru's plan will work itself, and everything is but a part of his play, the where does free-will fit in? answers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandros
Mariner
Alliance: House of Earendil
Last Visited: 22 Jun 2003
Joined: 03 Mar 2002
Posts: 5424
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:40 am |
|
|
So its an 'All roads lead to Rome' situation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fingolfin_of_the_Noldor
Ranger of the North
Alliance: House of Fingolfin
Last Visited: 15 Nov 2004
Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 1817
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 5:47 am |
|
|
Perhaps something like that, I think but I doubt it is really that simple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
scirocco
released from bonds
Alliance: House of Feanor
Last Visited: 27 Aug 2010
Joined: 04 Oct 2000
Posts: 1952
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 7:04 am |
|
|
Well we're under way at last!!! Congratulations Novice for the idea and M_G for an excellent thread starter.
Whew! what a selection of posts. I'm going to have to go away and read them all again before I could even come close to an intelligent reply.
But I'd just like to re-emphasise a point that M_G touched on in the introduction: the status of Melkor. Although no longer counted among the Valar, The mightiest of those Ainur who came into the World was in the beginning Melkor. We should not lose sight of his latent potential behind the horror of his marring. Almost a central theme of the Sil as a work is destruction, loss and waste of that which is high and worthy. Melkor's fall into evil is from the greatest possible height; the greatest waste imaginable.
|
|
 |
The Eagle from
Bilbo woke up with the early sun in his eyes
J.R.R. Tolkien, July 1937 |
|
|
|
|
Falborn
Shield Bearer
Alliance: Stewards of Gondor
Last Visited: 05 Dec 2003
Joined: 30 Mar 2002
Posts: 395
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 7:07 am |
|
|
For those of you who have been posting... thanks, I have truly enjoyed reading your thoughts.
My current thinking is that the Music is as fate for the Ainur and the Eldar but not for the Atani. That as immortal beings, bound to the circles of the World forever acceptance of and submission to the Music is the destiny of the gods and the elves.
It seems natural the Melkor would seek to become, to emulate Eru even though Eru was an infinitely higher order of being. With all of his power Melkor could not accept that he was just a part of the music. It certainly makes Manwe's fealty to Eru into more of an accomplishment.
Eru has given them independent being with enormous gifts of talent, but they must understand and accept who they are and not attempt to be Eru himself, Who they love the most but Who is beyond them.
Tragic, really, like men who are given the gift of enjoying life on this earth for a time but whose enjoyment is marred by the fear of death.
On the other question, In Morgorth's Ring, the Ainulindale has a completely different source, but I don't know if this is part of the discussion yet. Thank you Romestano for the "Notes on Shire Records". Great post!
EDIT: I don't know if this is the place to bring it up, but I am very struck that Manwe, Melkor and Nienna were created as siblings by Eru: Fealty, Rebellion and Sorrow (allegory?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
naias
Ranger of the North
Alliance: default
Last Visited: 20 Oct 2008
Joined: 23 Mar 2002
Posts: 1684
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:32 am |
|
|
I will just go back for a while
It is trully impressive that even from the beginning, while the First Theme was being played, Evil was introduced into it as a "discord". And what is most interesting is the choice of words Tolkien uses to introduce Evil to us.He actually does not use the word itself.He rather describes it.
Melkor separates himself from his Creator, he wants to do things his own way and he even comes to the point of questioning Iluvatar's all-might and wisdom "and it seemed to him that Iluvatar took no thought of the void, and he was impatient of its emtpiness"
Melkor wants power and glory for himself and to create things of his own.
It seems that Evil becomes a synonyme to Pride.The Greeks called that Hybris and meant "to equal your self with the Gods", which was the ultimate Sin.I believe that Tolkien was very much interested in the idea of Pride and it's power to determine our History as well as our personal lives.
Another interesting point is that while the World is created through the first and second themes where all Ainur (including Melkor) take part,the Children of Iluvatar are created in the third theme where only Iluvatar himself and Melkor take part.This not only puts Elves and Man in the center of Creation but also tells us that Good and Evil potentialy co-exist in our souls from the beginning of creation.
So free will is imo the potential.We are not born Good, we are not corrupted to Evil.Both of them exist in us and it's our choises that make the difference.
That needs more thought
Naias
|
|
|
|
|
|
ArPharazon
Mariner
Alliance: House of Beren
Last Visited: 29 Jan 2005
Joined: 13 Dec 2001
Posts: 6360
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:36 am |
|
|
I don't think we are truely going to resolve the question of free-will, or of the origin of evil on this thread!! Some of the finest minds the Christian church has produced have been grappling with questions like this for 2,000 years. But it's fun trying!!
JRRT was a devout and practising Christian who knew his Bible, so it might be worth looking in there for clues to what may have influenced him. The biblical Jehovah (old Testament) rather than new, is depicted as being wrathful on occasion; and the Bible is not clear from whence the serpent came into Eden or why it took the approach it did - deceit/treachery. But the temptation was the Tree in the centre of the Garden - the tree of the KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL.
Now Jehovah did not COMPEL his creations to eat of the fruit of that tree - they made a choice. They might - as clearly Manwe and others did in Ainulindale - have remained unaware of evil. But Melkor did eat of that fruit.
Also, in Job, God has a conversation with Satan, and they appear to agree that the latter will tempt one of God's most loyal followers - Job. there is no explanation for this - it just is (probably an allegory).
JRRT probably hated the Book of Job, but he seems to have gone along with the basic concept of both that book and Genesis, that evil exists and attracts an agent - but that that force does not always (or only) wreck evil in the end.
Some of you may have seen my discussion in the Books forum of the Valar as "forces of nature".
There, I wrote (slightly edited for context): "To answer the question posed by the thread, we must surely first ask ourselves, what is "evil" in this context?
Let me give an example to try to show what I am getting at. In Letters, JRRT is explicit that Sauron was not wholly "evil" even at the beginning of the 2nd Age. His failing was a desire to restore and perfect Arda more quickly than would naturally be the case, and using technology (always a no-no for Tolkien). Quite how Tolkien squared this with the horors that Sauron had perpetuated in the 1st Age, I am uncertain - but that was his view. He certainly believed that Sauron had genuinely reformed.
Now - can we use this example to see Melkor in a different light? He too wanted to shape Arda to his own design, and wrecked the plans and structures of his "siblings". But is this necessarily "evil"? I have argued elsewhere that the Valar should perhaps be seen in the context of the creation of Arda as forces of nature - Manwe = wind and air; Yavanna = nature, etc. In this way, Melkor would be the forces of chaos.
But can a force of nature such as a tornado, or an earthquake be regarded as evil? Surely they just are, and have conseqences? If Melkor is seen as chaos personified, is he not simply following his nature?
Equally, how much (in our world today) does the sun know of rain. Both co-exist, and from a human perspective clouds can hide the sun from sight - but they never touch it. Does the sun hate or resent the rain? No - because it actually knows nothing of it. For all the clouds there can be can never stop the sun shining. Now, see Melkor as the clouds and a storm lashing the earth, and Manwe as the sun, and tell me where knowing evil enters the equation?
I don't want to push these parallels too far - I don't think for a moment JRRT had them in mind - but I think that when dealing with "angelic" or unearthly powers such as the Valar, we should pause and consider whether they too need to be perceived in a different way than just to use human concepts such as good and evil.
Consider - Manwe and the other "good Valar" acting out of the purist motives could still do "evil". Look at what arose from their calling the Elves to Aman and insisting they stay there, simply because the valar were being over-protective. This may have been a REACTION to Melkor, but he had no hand in that decision.
I do hope you realise that I am (almost literally) being the "devil's" advocate here. I do not believe that what I have said is the only interpretation. But I believe this angle needs to be explored.
Yes - Melkor can be depicted as evil and the other Valar as good. But maybe both were simply acting in accord with their natures - the way they were made and the roles they HAD to play, according to the Music.
And yes - over time, Melkor became to be more and more to resemble just an earthly ruler, a tyrant, and a Dark Lord, and in this guise he was truely malign, sadistic and did much evil. But he has degenerated. While the forces of good increasingly withheld themselves - though they might have acted. Were their responses to the departure of the Noldor - the curse and what followed - good??? If so, by what interpretation?" (End of quote from my previous posting).
To summarise: In viewing our world, are continental drift, collisions between tectonic plates and earthquakes EVIL? They may have bad effects, but they are not intentional. Maybe we have to consider the origins (not the later conceptions) of Melkor in this way.
That's enough theology for now - I'll be back though.
Great posts everyone - this new venture is living up to all expectations. Well done Novice See I couldn't keep away!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandiewine
Shield Bearer
Alliance: The Shire
Last Visited: 29 Aug 2010
Joined: 09 Jun 2001
Posts: 250
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:43 am |
|
|
Hi everyone. To remind, this is my very first time reading Sil, so everything is completely new to me. Thanks all for the great posts.
Nerdanel said (lots of paraphrasing): Eru is incapable of evil; some good things couldn't be reached except through the battle against evil. Also, evil was the absence of good, so it doesn't take special creation to appear. By going to the void, Mekor became influenced by the absence of Eru.
Alexandros said: If Eru was all good, then Melkor should never have been bad. Is it possible that Eru too had a dark side, maybe anger, maybe pride.
Again, everything is new to me, so I can only rely on what I read. I'd like to make two quotes from the text and then state my assertion.
1. Then Illuvatar said to them: 'Of the theme that I have declared to you, I will now that ye make in harmony together a Great Music. And since I have kindled you with the Flame Imperishable, ye shall sho forth your powers in adorning this theme, each with his own thoughts and devices, if he will."
2. "But as the theme progressed, it came into the heart of Melkor to interweave matters of his own imagining that were not in accord with the theme of Illuvatar; for he sought therein to increase the power and glory of the part assigned to himself."
Eru told the Ainur to propound on the theme he set forth. Eru encouraged the Ainur to show their powers and gave them freedom to use their own thoughts and devices in doing so. The freedom did not extend to the introduction of a new theme. The choice to introduce one's own theme is, I think, what we are calling evil.
Melkor was the only one to propound on a theme other than the one Eru set forth. From the introduction of this new theme came discord in the music. Why did he do this? Nerdanel gave a good answer, I think. I don't think we can deduce that Eru has an evil side from which Melkor's evil tendencies sprang. For Melkor to simply be displaying character traits (pride, the deisre to be greater than he his, the desire to be Master of all) he inherited from Eru, we would say that Eru also had these character traits. If we accept that Eru is the largest, source entity in existence, it would be impossible for him to have the capacity for pride, or the desire to be greater than he is, the desire to be Master of all)...because he already is these things. The concept of a being greater than the greatest being does not exist. Therefore I think Eru is perfectly content in his station. Is that perhaps why he smiled after Melkor's initial disruption?
|
|
|
|
|
|
ArPharazon
Mariner
Alliance: House of Beren
Last Visited: 29 Jan 2005
Joined: 13 Dec 2001
Posts: 6360
|
|
Posted: Mon May 27, 2002 8:51 am |
|
|
Some excellent ideas in your post Brandiewine. Your last paragraph in particular raises something I had not considered before - that if Eru/Iluvatar is greater than all (omnipotent, omniscient etc) then he is unchallengable and need not know the concepts to which you refer, even while bringing them into being.
Do I interpret you rightly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Goto:
|
|
| Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next |
|
|
| The time now is Fri Sep 3, 2010 8:21 am ... All times are GMT - 8 Hours
|
|
| |
Give Master_Gurloes a Premiere Membership!
