|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Feb 24 2009, 8:05pm
Post #26 of 161
(2554 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This is one of the most inexplicable editing decisions in the published Silmarillion
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Manwe himself was deceived by Melkor after his three ages in captivity in Mandos by going about doing good, giving aid and counsel: 'and it seemed to Manwe that the evil of Melkor was cured forever.'
Yes, well, I've always found that hard to swallow. Manwe seems very innocent and gullible. But at least Manwe was not deceived into doing great harm like Feanor or Celebrimbor are. Manwe is more like Treebeard, or the elves who kept Gollum captive, wanting to see their prisoners reform, and getting deceived by their better natures.
It is in Chapter Six “OF FËANOR AND THE UNCHAINING OF MELKOR” where we see Manwe acting in this way. This is due in part to a very odd editing choice in which Christopher replaced a newer passage with an older version. As I state in Arda Reconstructed:
We then find a curious and unfortunate example of older material replacing the newer version. Both the twelfth and thirteenth paragraphs (“Before the gates . . .” and “Then Manwë granted . . .”; Silm, 65–66) are taken from LQ §48, partly as emended in the second phase and partly as originally written in the first phase. The passage in which Manwë is shown to have been duped into believing that Melkor was cured because he did not comprehend Melkor’s evil was taken from the older version, replacing a much longer, emended passage. The emended passage acknowledged that Melkor’s evil was beyond full healing, but pointed out that since he was originally the greatest of the powers, his aid would, if he willingly gave it, do more than anything to heal the hurts he had caused. It goes on to state that Manwë judged that this was the path that Melkor was on, that he was treated fairly, and that Manwë was slow to perceive jealousy and rancor, since he himself did not experience these things (see MR, 273). Had the emended portion that was not used in the published version been taken up, things would have been a little clearer, and Manwë would not come across to many readers as being quite such a naive simpleton in his dealings with Melkor. Just to clarify, when I refer to "first phase" and "second phase" I'm referring to the work on the 'later Silmarillion,' with the first phase taking place around 1951, when LOTR was finished but not yet published, and the second phase taking place around 1958, after LOTR had already been published. I would dearly like to know what the rationale was for using the older version rather than the newer.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Feb 24 2009, 8:37pm
Post #27 of 161
(2547 views)
Shortcut
|
'Listening' to you expound on the problems of the construction of The Silmarillion & knowing the wealth of information Christopher Tolkien later released, I always wondered what a 'Quenta Silmarillion' would look like if somebody rewrote it using all the information at hand & Tolkien's most recent ideas.
Too bad it won't happen.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Feb 24 2009, 9:51pm
Post #28 of 161
(2533 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 12:24am
Post #29 of 161
(2560 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I have no desire to be creamed like the Spanish, or anyone else.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
So I will drop the question of questioning Tolkien based on Morthoron's questions.
As far as geographic psychology goes, you're right of course about people's tendency to straighten our and righten their internal maps. The Reno question is an old brainteaser gag - I don't remember when or whether I ever fell for it, but I don't any longer. Likewise with South America being east of North America. And did you know that ships transit the Panama Canal from Atlantic to Pacific by sailing east? Did you know that Brooklyn is south of Manhattan, not east of it?
I would, in one well-meaning effort to engage this last subject without getting creamed, suggest that it is not Tolkien's "perception" of Middle-earth that causes him to draw the map of Middle-earth with a lot of right-angled (or N-E-S-W oriented) features. That would align his relationship to his fictional map, with people's general relationship to real maps. But he is not perceiving it, he is determining it. He invented the land, and its map, unlike people who are uncertain about Reno.
As a trained mapmaker and deep student of landscape, he knew, of course, that real geography pays little attention to compass directions. But there is a very distinct sense of orthographic orientation in Middle-earth, as you point out. I have long maintained that this comes from his need to have the map illuminate and define pre-existing journeys. Journeys are the core of most of his stories, certainly the ones that required that maps be drawn. His strong belief was that journeys are most easily understood and symbolized when they follow the compass points, both because of the human quality of simplification you mention, and because the compass points have moral associations when linked to the Northwestern European cultural geography that underlies Middle-earth: West is good/safe, East is bad/scary, North is noble/severe, South is corrupt/comfortable, etc.
It is interesting to see how jumbled the Silmarillion map (Beleriand) is, compared to the LotR map. The reason for this, as far as I can tell, is that the Sil has a great many stories, with a great many journeys, most of which were written before the map had really come into being. So there is no one organizing principle; and in fact it really does look "pasted together", because it was pasted together.
On the other hand, the LotR map descends from the Hobbit map, with its single east-west there-and-back-again journey across all the necessary north-south barriers. LotR repeated the principle because it repeated the story, with the additional complication of displacing the final destination quite far to the south, since the Hobbit's destination already occupied the region directly east of Bilbo's home.
Mordor's wall of mountains only follows the logic of the overall moral geography of Third Age Middle-earth. Sauron is open to the East, where his support comes from; and closed to the North, West, and South for defense from his enemies. As a fortress kingdom, it makes perfect sense, no matter how silly it looks in terms of the real earth. I agree that we may assume that Morgoth (not Sauron) created it, although the suggestion in the story itself is that the land just naturally lent itself to Sauron's needs. What I would like to know is when and how the climate and soil were desertified; my belief is that prior to Sauron's occupation, Mordor was grassy steppe with fertile patches on the hillsides, like Anatolia or perhaps further east in central Asia.
Tolkien would, I think, be the first to admit that almost all of his geographic features, as expressed in the map, are similarly "exaggerated" to add drama to his story. What makes his maps "believable" are not the maps at all, but the highly realistic and artful landscape descriptions in the actual book, which the maps only serve to support like a crude framework.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Feb 25 2009, 12:42am
Post #30 of 161
(2534 views)
Shortcut
|
As a fortress kingdom, it makes perfect sense, no matter how silly it looks in terms of the real earth. I agree that we may assume that Morgoth (not Sauron) created it, although the suggestion in the story itself is that the land just naturally lent itself to Sauron's needs.
Well, yes...
If Mordor didn't offer the protection Sauron needed, he would've chosen somewhere else.
What I would like to know is when and how the climate and soil were desertified; my belief is that prior to Sauron's occupation, Mordor was grassy steppe with fertile patches on the hillsides, like Anatolia or perhaps further east in central Asia.
This makes perfect sense as Sauron destroyed the Brown Lands & there was even the green grass of Ard-Galen growing right up to the Gates of Thangorodrim before the Battle of SDudden Flame - So we clearly see the Enemy can and does create deserts out of fertile land.
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 12:47am
Post #31 of 161
(2537 views)
Shortcut
|
Please pass me the cream of crow soup.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Feb 25 2009, 2:06am
Post #32 of 161
(2521 views)
Shortcut
|
If you take the view that Middle Earth is essentially run by maiar, great and small, urging each seed to sprout and flower to bloom, and no rock, river, or tree is without one, then it would not surprise anyone for an earth-maia to introduce himself to the elves without anyone having met him in Valinor. Many different peoples have held a similar view about fairies, devas, nymphs, or guardian angels. Since Tolkien was steeped both in Catholicism and fairy lore, absorbing the same opinion from two perspectives at once, plus being well-versed in Classical Greek mythology (perspective #3) I would assume that his maiar behave in the same way. I would consider it rather odd if he omitted something so culturally natural to a man of his background.
Please offer some background on your proposition that there were Maiar for every flower, rock, river and tree. For instance, Yavanna created the Ents to defend trees. There weren't specific hamadryad, oread, limoniad or nereid-like Maiar inhabiting each and every bit of flora and fauna. One never gets the impression there were thousands of Maiar tripping over each other to claim their specific species of lichen, igneous rock or tree-shrew.
Read the ongoing serialization of MONTY PYTHON'S 'The HOBBIT', found here:
http://www.fanfiction.net/...y_Pythons_The_Hobbit
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 4:04am
Post #33 of 161
(2514 views)
Shortcut
|
To me your request sounds like, "Please offer textual proof that gravity exists in Middle Earth, that water always, consistently, flows downhill unless forcibly pumped or carried elsewhere." I merely pointed out that this world saturated with spiritual life would be consistent with the kind of world-view or concept of reality that Tolkien seems to exhibit overall. There is no specific text describing the obvious.
I will concede that I might err in assuming that Tolkien thought in a fashion consistent with people all over the world who actually form relationships with trees and land and stars and the Creator behind it all, as he did, indeed with all aspects of the cohesive, living real world, and who loathe, as powerfully as he professed to loathe, the "modern" spirit of alienation championed by Saruman-like minds of gears. I might have erred, though I find it hard to believe, myself. I do not see JRR Tolkien at all as part of the Dominant Culture, hampered by their blindness. I see him as one of us. And in our world, angelic spirits guide, protect, and infuse everything. And every so often messed up, "Fallen" ones do the opposite.
Maybe I'm biased.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 4:32am
Post #34 of 161
(2515 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tolkien was powerfully conflicted
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien was powerfully conflicted between his Catholicism and the literary need for a kind of pantheism in his mythology. If you read the evolution of his ideas about the "Powers" or Valar, you'll see they start in the Book of Lost Tales as a rather colorful and emotional pantheon of mythological gods. Over time they are sucked dry of their independent lives and reduced, bit by bit, to a kind of higher class of angels working for the One God. As he himself put it about his mythological pantheon,
“The cycles begin with a cosmogonical myth: the Music of the Ainur. God and the Valar (or powers: Englished as gods) are revealed. These latter are as we should say angelic powers, whose function is to exercise delegated authority in their spheres (of rule and government, not creation, making or re-making). They are 'divine', that is, were originally 'outside' and existed 'before' the making of the world. ... On the side of mere narrative device, this is, of course, meant to provide beings of the same order of beauty, power, and majesty as the 'gods' of higher mythology, which can yet be accepted – well, shall we say baldly, by a mind that believes in the Blessed Trinity.” (Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, p. 284)
As went the Valar, so went the Maiar - which did not really exist as a "class" before the 1940s. You will be interested to know that, again, in the Book of Lost Tales the Valar are merely the leaders of an immense host of smaller spirits of all kinds, who encompass the roles played in European mythology by sprites, fairies, hobgoblins, etc. You might well believe these unnamed but evidently numerous creatures could have served (as you like to think) as nature spirits for every plant, grove, and nuzzling creature in the Great Lands (only later called Middle-earth).
However, this did not last. All mention of these things was systematically eliminated from later texts of the Silmarillion, just as most of the capricious and personal interference of the Valar in the world was cut. And so, as Morthoron points out, in Tolkien's later (final) thinking about his legendarium and its world, only selected aspects of Nature in Middle-earth are vivified explicitly by the spirits of the Ainur. Tolkien allowed plants and animals to have spiritual natures on a kind of "need-to-feel" basis. When a story demanded a "living" mountain or fountain or tree, he would spin some tale about how a morose and bodyless Elf or Maia might indeed have inhabited that particular entity.
Did Tolkien have a relationship with trees and land, as you say? Of course. But it was explicitly channeled through what you only add as an afterthought: through their Creator. In the end, as a devout sub-Creator, he refused to create a fictional world that diverged too radically in its spiritual underpinnings from what he believed God and Christ's primary world was like. If you were to concede that the Catholic Church of the early 20th century was somehow part of the Dominant Culture - I know I would - you might want to think of him as at least partially "hampered by their blindness." But I don't think he'd agree with you, on the blindness thing.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Feb 25 2009, 2:07pm
Post #36 of 161
(2491 views)
Shortcut
|
"I'll take door (link) number three please"....
Why must everything become paralysis by analysis?
I doubt Tolkien knew what Bombadil was in the context of a structured Lord of the Rings Middle-earth ordered World since he existed apart from Middle-earth & he just threw him in......
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 2:38pm
Post #37 of 161
(2507 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Morgoth's Ring is my favorite book in the HoME series,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and indeed the only one I own. So I love Tolkien's late musings. But I think you will have to admit that he was contemplating radical changes to his legendarium, including getting rid of the whole story of the Two Trees, that would have require another fifteen years to complete. His musings do not read like a history, but like, well, musings of someone who has spent his lifetime inventing and reinventing a world. When Tolkien explains that Arda was Morgoth's Ring, it is the omniscient author speaking, not some obscure and biased historian. When Tolkien contemplates various explanations for the orcs as a race of irredeemable creatures, it is the conflicted Roman Catholic Author speaking, not some racist theologian or metaphysicist in Gondor. And the stories to which you refer are stories, not histories. They do not read like the Appendices; at their best, they read like the text of LotR.
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 3:13pm
Post #38 of 161
(2490 views)
Shortcut
|
...there are different kinds and qualities of Catholicism, and "indigenous thinking" may be found both within and without Christianity. There have always been, and always will be, Catholics who believe that every facet of nature has its own guardian angel, and the official stance is that this belief is a permissible variable, neither mandatory nor taboo. And there are certain pro-nature or pro-creation orientations that can find an equally comfortable home with Christians or Pagans, or other religions besides--why do you think there are so many devout people, of radically different religions, who all feel like Tolkien's writings speak to them on a spiritual level?
Tolkien might have struggled with what to call his in-story spiritual entities, what powers or limits to impose on them, and what natures to ascribe to them, but he strongly felt that he had to have them anyway, in some form or other. From this and numerous other indicators I hypothesize that he lived in a spiritually crowded world, full of angels, demons, saints, and divine intervention, and quite possibly allowing also for a diverse wealth of fairies as well (he played his cards close to his chest, but his non-fiction seems to take extreme care to neither definitively profess skepticism nor belief, yet provide tantalizing hints at belief.)
His overall behavior, both in his writings and in what scraps we know of his everyday life, are 100% consistent, by every indicator that I know about, with what is now called "Indigenous Mind" (indigenous in the sense of a close link to land and tradition, in a specific pattern commonly found among tribal peoples throughout the world, yet also found among non-tribal people who have regained or never let go of heritage dating back to tribal times)
As a Roman philosopher once said, "Romans believe that lightning comes from clouds bumping into each other. Etruscans believe that clouds bump into each other in order to create lightning." Tolkien thought more like an Etruscan than a Roman. He did not discard science, but felt that it served something greater rather than merely existing in a vacuum. Both his writings and his life display an expectation of chance being more than chance, of purpose behind it all. And he expressed this in ways consistent with someone who not only presumed a god to intend that lightning should strike, but also clouds that could consent (or not) to cooperate with this intention.
His personal relationships with trees, and his ardent defense of their rights, indicates someone who perceives some level of sentience not dependent upon neurology. He felt horrified when gardeners hacked at trees for reasons that had nothing to do with the tree's health. He knew perfectly well that trees do not have nerves that feel pain in the same fashion that we do, yet something about this outraged him; one can reasonably conclude that he felt offended by a violation of the spirit of the tree.
While this sort of thinking is unusual for Christians in this day and age, it does not contradict Christianity. Christianity only forbids the worship of created things; it does not forbid relationships with created things, by any means.
I think Tolkien was one of us.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 3:32pm
Post #39 of 161
(2511 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Actually, he never comtemplated eliminating the Two Trees
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and indeed the only one I own. So I love Tolkien's late musings. But I think you will have to admit that he was contemplating radical changes to his legendarium, including getting rid of the whole story of the Two Trees, that would have require another fifteen years to complete. It is certainly true that he contemplated radical changes, including eliminating the "astronomically absurd" story of the creation of the Sun and the Moon, but rather remarkably these changes did not involve eliminating the story of the Two Trees. As Christopher says "why is the myth of the Two Trees (which so far as record goes he never showed any intention to abandon) more acceptable than that of the creation of the Sun and the Moon from the last fruit and flower of the Trees as they died?" His musings do not read like a history, but like, well, musings of someone who has spent his lifetime inventing and reinventing a world. When Tolkien explains that Arda was Morgoth's Ring, it is the omniscient author speaking, not some obscure and biased historian. When Tolkien contemplates various explanations for the orcs as a race of irredeemable creatures, it is the conflicted Roman Catholic Author speaking, not some racist theologian or metaphysicist in Gondor. And the stories to which you refer are stories, not histories. They do not read like the Appendices; at their best, they read like the text of LotR. Yes, the essays in "Myths Transformed" are simply the musings of a creator of world musing about the nature of his creation. They are not what I am talking about. But even in those musings you can see how he contemplated imposing the structure of how these stories exist within the world he created. For instance:
It is now clear to me that in any case the Mythology must actually be a 'Mannish' affair. (Men are really only interested in Men and in Men's ideas and visions.) The High Eldar living and being tutored by the demiurgic beings must have known, or at least their writers and loremasters must have known, the 'truth' (according to their measure of understanding). What we have in the Silmarillion etc. are traditions (especially personalized, and centred upon actors, such as Fëanor) handed on by Men in Númenor and later in Middle-earth (Arnor and Gondor); but already far back - from the first association of the Dúnedain and Elf-friends with the Eldar in Beleriand - blended and confused with their own Mannish myths and cosmic ideas. I certainly agree with you that at their best, the stories that I referred to read like the text of LotR (but mostly with a "higher" style). Tolkien, at his best, was after all a storyteller.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Feb 25 2009, 3:53pm
Post #40 of 161
(2478 views)
Shortcut
|
Dreemdeer, there is no tangible evidence that supports the proliferation of Maiaric spirits inundating every nook and cranny. Whether Catholics believe that several dozen angels can dance on the head of a pin (refer to Isaac D'Israeli or Thomas Aquinas for further information) or not, this was not the position Tolkien took; in fact, by the time of the writing of Lord of the Rings, the amount of Balrogs had decreased dramatically and their power increased manifestly. Corporeal manifestations of Maiar were far and few between, and personifcations of nature (Yavanna, Manwe, Ulmo, Osse, etc.) are even fewer.
Nevertheless, I do not believe the Elves of Eregion considered Annatar to be an Elf. The name Annatar itself, the 'Lord of Gifts', is too pretentious for an Elf in the first place, and in the second place, Annatar gives the impression that he is from Valinor, as he states plainly: "But wherefore should Middle-earth remain forever desolate and dark, whereas the Elves could make it as fair as Eressëa, nay even as Valinor?" Therefore, it seems that the Elves of Eregion were downright blind to allow Sauron into their midst, particularly after the stern warnings they received from Gil-Galad. His ability to deceive the Elves is integral to the making of the rings; however, as a plot point it does not seem plausible. As someone stated earlier, it does not seem possible that the Noldorin Elves we meet in the Lord of the Rings would be so easily deceived by Annatar, particularly since the greatest among them, like Gil-Galad and Galadriel, or even Elrond, had serious misgivings regarding his intentions.
Read the ongoing serialization of MONTY PYTHON'S 'The HOBBIT', found here:
http://www.fanfiction.net/...y_Pythons_The_Hobbit
|
|
|
Dreamdeer
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 4:20pm
Post #41 of 161
(2501 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Still seems plausible to me...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...even without the hypothesized spiritually dense landscape (although I'm not letting go of that, we will just have to agree to disagree. As I said, one cannot prove one way or another that gravity, evolution, or molecular theory works consistently in Middle Earth, either.) Now, I was born and raised in San Diego, and spent most of my life there. If someone here in Tucson were to come to me and say, "Hey, I'm from San Diego, too!" I'm not going to say, "You're lying!" just because I never met him. San Diego's a big place. Valinor is even bigger.
Or, let's be still more specific. I belong to the International Association for the Study of Dreams. I know the three founders, and most of the leading people involved in it--you'd think I'd be at least as informed, in my community, as the Noldor are in theirs. Yet if somebody unfamiliar comes to me saying that he, too, is a member, but his work hasn't gotten much publicity, because he feels that more could be done with dreamwork than the hierarchy really wants to deal with, I would not assume that he was lying--especially if he demonstrated knowledge of the inner politics of IASD, and showed himself really, really skillful in dreamwork. I might feel suspicious as to why he ran afoul of the Ethics Committee, like Galadriel or Gil-Galad, yet if I was a dissident, myself, I might find it easy to believe him a dissident professor, whose voice I have not heard only because the hierarchy has suppressed it. And that might count as a point in his favor to my rebellious heart.
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the Noldor are rebels, and the ones who remain in MIddle Earth into the second age are the most hardened of the lot. The idea of a maia taking their side would appeal to them. Having believed themselves hemmed in in Valinor, it would not surprise them to learn of a maia barred from their paths in the West, yet finding more freedom to contact them here.
Life is beautiful and dangerous! Beware! Enjoy!
|
|
|
Tolkien Forever
Gondor
Feb 25 2009, 5:02pm
Post #42 of 161
(2480 views)
Shortcut
|
Nevertheless, I do not believe the Elves of Eregion considered Annatar to be an Elf. The name Annatar itself, the 'Lord of Gifts', is too pretentious for an Elf in the first place, and in the second place, Annatar gives the impression that he is from Valinor, as he states plainly: "But wherefore should Middle-earth remain forever desolate and dark, whereas the Elves could make it as fair as Eressëa, nay even as Valinor?"
Very good deduction.....
Well put!
However, knowing Valinor does not mean one cannot be a Noldo.
Therefore, it seems that the Elves of Eregion were downright blind to allow Sauron into their midst, particularly after the stern warnings they received from Gil-Galad. His ability to deceive the Elves is integral to the making of the rings; however, as a plot point it does not seem plausible.
I find it totally plausible These Elves may not have been on the best of terms with Gil-Galad in respect to being on the same page with him, as they had left his kingdom. Also, Celebrimbor was the greatest Noldorin Elf ever in skill of hand after his Granfather Feanor, so he would be susceptable to the (true) line that Annatar was handing him about making Middle-earth as fair as Valinor. Thirdly, the Noldor had also received the aid of the Valar coming to them from the West at the end of the War of Wrath, so the way was not closed any longer. Finally, Gil-galad & Elrond themselves did not know where Annatar came from, but just 'doubted him' - no concrete evidence to back it up. I would guess they might have said something in their message of warning like "Be careful, we don't know who this guy Annatar really is, but we don't know anything for sure."
As someone stated earlier, it does not seem possible that the Noldorin Elves we meet in the Lord of the Rings would be so easily deceived by Annatar, particularly since the greatest among them, like Gil-Galad and Galadriel, or even Elrond, had serious misgivings regarding his intentions.
Let us not forget that these are the Elves that have lived through the deceptions of Sauron in the Second Age & all the grief and destruction that it brought about......
'Fooled me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me.'
They have had 4500 more years to not only learn from their mistakes, but grow in wisdom by the time we see them in TLOR.......
|
|
|
Aunt Dora Baggins
Immortal
Feb 25 2009, 5:36pm
Post #43 of 161
(2497 views)
Shortcut
|
at how nearly north and south the eastern edge of the Rocky Mountains run through Colorado:
link
And the San Luis Valley in the southern center of the state is pretty boxy. (It's hot and dry, but otherwise nothing like Mordor; it's a beautiful place with a rich ethnic heritage.)
In fact, if you reverse the map, tilt it a bit, and put the ocean at the 4500-foot elevation line, it looks a lot like MIddle Earth:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondence, with love from Bilbo; on a large wastebasket. Dora was Drogo's sister, and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"A Chance Meeting at Rivendell" and other stories
leleni at hotmail dot com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(This post was edited by Aunt Dora Baggins on Feb 25 2009, 5:40pm)
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 6:18pm
Post #44 of 161
(2484 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Perhaps the HoME stories you love
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
most resemble the story of Arwen and Aragorn in Appendix A, which you also love: they are stories, in a high style, and for the most part incomplete. They are different from the rest of the Appendices. And they don't resemble modern histories, although they may resemble ancient histories such as those written by Herodotus.
Again, most of my comments in this present discussion were intended to apply to the Appendices, and especially the Appendices other than the story of Arwen and Aragorn, which is more of a story, and less of a mock-history. The mock-history is what I see as part of Tolkien's "game" (Letter 160). I have other reasons for my discomfort with the story of Aragorn and Arwen -- as Tolkien himself recognized, it doesn't really fit into the hobbit-centric story of LotR, and as Tolkien failed to recognize, to me it seems classist and borderline racist. But I still like it better, and find it more susceptible to literary criticism, than the rest of the Appendices.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 6:29pm
Post #45 of 161
(2480 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Where would I find each of these stories?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You mentioned Athrabeth (that's HoME X, Morgoth's Ring, right?), LACE and the associated extended story of Miriel and Finwe (also Morgoth's Ring, right?), the various different and conflicting stories associated with Turin and with the Nirnaeth, the Wanderings of Hurin (Unfinished Tales, Children of Hurin, The Silmarillion -- any others?), the coming of Tuor of Gondolin (Unfinished Tales, any other?), the Shibboleth of Feanor (HoME XII, Peoples of Middle-earth, right?).
I think the Shibboleth of Feanor is the one I haven't read at all, although I don't think I've given proper attention to Athrabeth, either. You were focusing on late writings -- I've also heard that The Fall of Gondolin, from The Book of Lost Tales, Volume 2 (HoME II) is a good read.
And if you have any other recommendations, early or late, I would be interested.
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 6:30pm
Post #46 of 161
(2473 views)
Shortcut
|
[Perhaps the HoME stories you love ]most resemble the story of Arwen and Aragorn in Appendix A, which you also love: they are stories, in a high style, and for the most part incomplete. That is quite true, and a good observation. Even the Annals of Aman and the Grey Annals, which were originally supposed to be more in the style of the Tale of Years appendix that we are discussing this week, expanded into long narratives (so much so that much of the published Quenta Silmarillion is taken from them, rather than the Quenta as written by Tolkien.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 7:56pm
Post #47 of 161
(2471 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"The Wanderings of Húrin" is in HoMe XI.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The War of the Jewels, the second part of the two-volume "Later Silmarillion" subset of The History of Middle-earth -- following on Morgoth's Ring. Both books contain "Silmarillion" texts that Tolkien wrote in the 1950s, in the form of:
1. revised tales to the "Quenta" mode that he had developed in the 1930s, and that are well known from the Silmarillion of 1977;
2. chronological "Annals" that are in original intention more record-like but which in places expand to become nearly indistinguishable from the "Quenta" stuff; and
3. miscellaneous essays by Tolkien, both in his own voice and as imagined documents.
The two volumes are divided not by the date that Tolkien wrote them (as is the case with most of the HoMe volumes) but by the chronology within the imagined stories: texts that pertain to Valinor and the time before the Noldor depart are in Morgoth's Ring; texts that pertain to life in Middle-earth are in The War of the Jewels. (This is an approximation. For instance, the Athrabeth, a conversation in Beleriand between elvish Finrod and mortal Andreth, is found in the first volume.)
"The Wanderings of Húrin" is a substantial but unfinished story that tells of Húrin's experiences in Brethil, where his son had killed Glaurung and met his doom. It has a much more immediate tone than most "Silmarillion" material.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Feb. 23- Mar. 1 for The Tale of Years.
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Curious
Half-elven
Feb 25 2009, 8:16pm
Post #48 of 161
(2459 views)
Shortcut
|
sure it is worth buying HoME volumes II, XI, and XII because of individual tales within them which have been recommended, but perhaps I will get them from the library.
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Feb 25 2009, 11:06pm
Post #50 of 161
(2454 views)
Shortcut
|
It looks like N.E.B. has mostly answered your questions before I could respond. I'll just add a couple of things. The the various different and conflicting stories associated with Turin are only partly described in The War of the Jewels (along with UT, and CoH). Christopher states that that is the one area of the first age stories that he doesn't not completely cover in HoMe. As for The Fall of Gondolin in the second volume of the Book of Lost Tales, it is of interest because it is the only extended version of the fall of Gondolin that Tolkien ever wrote. But I personally am not especially enamored of the extremely archaic language used, or some of the more absurd features (metal dragons, anyone?).
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
|
|
|
|
|
