Perilous to us all are the devices of an art deeper than we possesses ourselves

Meanwhile, things begin to get out of hand in Valinor: leading to a grim story of oaths, battles, prophecies and treachery.


Many of the Noldor have returned to their city Tirion. Fëanor appears - this is an act of defiance, (because he is banned from being there and so is breaking parole). Fëanor delivers an impassioned speech, claiming kingship of all the Noldor, and urging them to return to Middle-earth, both to revenge their slain king, and for the opportunities they will find there (“he echoed the lies of Melkor, that the Valar had cozened them and would hold them captive so that Men might rule in Middle-earth”)Fëanor and his sons then swear a “terrible oath” (or, as Tolkien calls it in a letter

Quote

This commits them utterly, as they no doubt intend (“For so sworn,good or evil, an oath may not be broken , and it shall pursue oathkeeper and oathbreaker to the world’s end”) What on Earth possesses them to do something do extreme as this spectacular oath? Does it speak to that 'gap' of understanding between the Valar and the Firstborn? Feanors speech is so full of resentment (some of which on the face of it makes sense - almost like Saruman's speeches do!) against the Valar that I think the emotion takes him to this next level. Do we already sense as readers (remember “your first time” if you can) that this oath is going to backfire spectacularly? If we don’t pick that up ourselves, we get a hint before the end of the chapter: “their oath shall drive them, and yet betray them, and ever snatch away the very treasures that they have sworn to pursue”? ABSOLUTELY! Even on my first read - you just know nothing good will come of this, and in "Monkey's Paw" fashion it will be grimly unexpected!
It seems completely reasonable to believe that Fëanor is undertaking something he doesn’t have the power to do (and should he not realise this, the Valar are at pains to point this out). The glory of a quest of such daring seems to be a factor driving the Noldor on, despite the apparent odds. Should we contrast this with the great daring against seemingly hopeless odds of, say, the Rohirrim deciding to fulfill their oath to ride to the assistance of Gondor in Return of the King? Or is it more like the foolish - and most likely drunken - boast of Baldor son of Brego (Prince of Rohan who boasted that he would walk the Paths of the Dead, and whose remains are found there by Aragorn)? Are there interesting compare/contrasts to be done with other oaths from Tolkien's writings, or from other stories? Or should we think of Elrond determined that the Fellowship of the Ring should **not** be bound by oath? No, I think it's more of a striking out by the Noldor to 'come of age' and address the grievances and the confusing events that have happened. The Valar have been so unresponsive to the events, really, that I think Feanor strikes at just the right time and at a people who is looking for 'answers'; in the height of emotion (and for your science-head NoWiz, level of sympathetic stimulation and catecholamine release) physical action may seem like the only possible response. Not at all like Rohan - which represents a huge risk but is actually the mature FULFILLMENT of their culture and an honorable oath, not a primarily emotional response. Drunken Brego - no that I think is more directly arrogant; Feanor himself may have some arrogance issues, but I think its more fear and reaction against events and a clear focus of anger - the Valar - that inspires the Noldor. Another 'Oath" I think of is the Ring speaking through Frodo at Gollum, warning him off, on Mount Doom - having unintended consequences as well; as indeed Gollum is cast into the Fire but so is the Ring.
How is the oath "blasphemous"? Great question. It is blasphemous because it compels the Holders to seek their own goals, their own needs, over the needs of all others and even promises harm against the Divine in carrying it out.

After a debate, the greater part of the Noldor resolve to depart, and Fëanor drives them on in haste, fearing that he will lose them if there is a delay. As the Noldor set out a messenger from the Valar arrives to tell the Noldor that they may leave (i.e. refuting Fëanor’s allegation that they are effectively being held prisoner) , but that their quest has no chance of success. Morevoer, Fëanor is declared banished. This fails to calm things down. Surprise...!

What’s driving the Noldor? There’s a hard core (Fëanor & sons) bent on revenge and recovery of the Silmarils. In any case, Fëanor has just been banished by the Valar. But clearly Fëanor knows that the whole group is note behind this; and that his hold on the rest is shaky (so he is at pains to get them all committed fast). What motivates the others? A further group are interested in the opportunities that might await in Middle-earth - for example Galadriel “was eager to be gone...she yearned to see the wide unguarded lands and rule there a realm at her own will.” Others are more reluctant. Fingolfin (Feanors step- brother) is in the classic moderate’s bind that “he would not be sundered from his people that were eager to go, nor leave them to the rash councils of Fëanor”. I think they are motivated by 'the opportunities in ME' because of their desire to fully grow and mature, and not be pets or children of the Valar any more; a gain that gap in understanding that occurs when a 'lower' and less powerful people are watched over by a race of unique beings who, like them, do not age but do not form families, have real children of their own, and complete the cycle of growing up. Feanor's ideas fall on fertile ground because this has been coming for a long time, and with all the recent events the Firstborn are probably feeling this sense of constraint PLUS fear.

Meanwhile, what is motivating the Valar? Manwe is “aggrieved” to be accused of evil intent towards the Eldar, or of holding them captive. And the Valar do not believe that Fëanor can hold the Noldor to his will. If the Valar have a plan to put things right, they do not articulate it. Is there something of a teenager/parent confrontation here?- the Noldor as the teenagers, no longer content to live under the parental roof and parental rules with these old fogeys who don’t get it? And the Valar as the parents, too affronted by the challenge to their rule (and too cocksure that the teenager will back down) to offer compromise or a win-win outcome? Yes, there is a coming-of-age conflict here, plus the gulf as I stated above. The Valar have always sort of both idealized and infantisized the Firstborn, without seeing their complexity and recognizing their differences - nor have they ever seemed to grasp that because the Song has darker notes, the Firstborn have the latitude to behave in ways they may not like very much. Is this part of the weakness of the Valar not having the 'full picture' - maybe. Potentially the one having the fullest sense of all that could happen in creation is probably Melkor, being given great power and knowledge. Of course he isn't playing for their team anymore...
Perhaps the miscalculation is a two-way one:, I was impressed by Brethil's suggestion that

Quote

(Thanks NoWiz) It's also a parental-type relationship: the Noldor and Feanor know they can act out without the Valar moving violently against them because they KNOW they are loved, and they know the Valar to be good. That gives them a certain amount of latitude that of course they can never have with a true Enemy. Alternatively, let’s consider Fëanor ‘s case as if he’d just made himself the Leader of the Opposition. let’s ignore his wilder points for now - Melkor is not part of a conspiracy with the rest of the Valar. But it does seem that the Valar have not been terribly competent as an administration. They have partitioned Arda and brought the Eldar to the nice bit. The grand bargain seems to be that the Eldar will be protected and looked after in return for obedience (the rest of Middle-earth will have to look after itself for now, it seems). But the Valar have just proved themselves unable to keep their side of the bargain, miserably failing to defend themselves against an act of war, by one enemy they let escape, and another they seem to have been unaware of. Do you agree/disagree with these analogies (or have others)? That's what I meant above by how the kernel of truth (like Saruman's truth) appeals while emotions run high; they HAVEN'T kept everyone safe, true, by underestimating Melkor as well as the Noldor (I see a Theme....!). And since the mind of Eru always strives against 'flatness', its not surprising that the Eldar as the Firsborn of the song might begin to chafe under this 'kept' status.
Should the Valar have handled things differently? - e.g. revealed their plan, been conciliatory, taken steps to rebuild trust in their leadership? Yes, some revelations might have helped build the trust. But if they are being paternalistic, they will not see the need for that.
**I want to remind Finwe ("as in the Reading Room contributor known as..." )That he felt Manwe had a plan, albeit one with a miscalculation : time to tell us your thoughts, my friend** Indeed, share!

Realising that his host will need boats, Fëanor leads them to Tuna and tries to negotiate for the boats of the Teleri. But, echoing back Fëanor’s own sentiment about not being able to repeat one’s finest work, the Teleri will not give the Noldor their boats. Nor do they want to aid them in other ways. The Noldor seize the boats by force, ironically aided by Fingolfin’s part of the Noldor host, who join the battle without understanding the cause of it. Does anyone have an argument to support Feanor about this, or is this simply inexcusable? Do we have any more sympathy for the late-commers misunderstanding the situation and joining the battle, perhaps later realising that that was wrong? Nope, at this point I can't excuse or support it, as much sympathy I might have for Feanor before this. Its such an egregious breaking of the peace both as a Firstborn and as a craftsman, especially when they are described as like 'gems of the Noldor'; of course that might have just made Feanor more angry. I get so frustrated with Fingolfin's host just leaping in - its so unlike anything the Eldar have been known to do! I think it just massively underlines the chaos of the day.

The Noldor sail away, mostly survive a storm, and encounter a further messenger from the Valar, possibly Mandos himself. This messenger gives a prophecy, or curse. They are left in no doubt that Fëanor and anyone following him will not be allowed back into Valinor; and that they are not going to have a successful or pleasant stay in Middle-earth. Its not clear to me whether this is a prediction, a prophesy or a curse (or several of those). my dictionary has "prophesy" as meaning either "prediction" (like Fredegar Bolger's doctor telling him what's likely to happen if he won't cut down on the pies), but also its what a prophet does (divinely inspired revelations about the future). Mandos is supposed to have knowledge of the future, so in this case, it’s credible that this is a magically reliable prediction (thought that of course opens up a philosophical can of worms about fate and free will. Or should a philosophical cam be filled with philosophers, rather than worms?)
A curse, though is "a solemn utterance intended to invoke a supernatural power to inflict harm or punishment" so what is going on here? The Valar are warning the Noldor of what will happen? Or that the Valar are giving out punishment (or both?) Some of it (that any of the Noldor why die will be stuck in Mandos - don't pass go don't collect £200) sounds like threats rather than prediction. Prediction? Prophecy? Curse? All of those? Are the Valar trying to help here, or to punish? Or both? I see it as prophecy, in that it has divine knowledge of the future, but not as punishment - that will come as a result of the actions, not from the Valar or even Eru.


A section of the host under Finarfin (Feanors second step-brother) turns back at this, is pardoned, and returns to Valinor. The rest carry on to Helcaraxë, where there are not enough ships to ferry the whole host across. Suspicion is awakening, and part of the host, under Fingolfin is beginning to “murmur” and blame Fëanor for the hardships they are suffering. In a sign of awakening suspicions, no part of the host is willing to let any other part set off first in the boats. Fëanor and his sons betray the rest, seizing the ships and sailing away with their faction, and then burning the boats on arrival in Middle-earth. Fingolfin’s faction, left behind, can see the flames from the burning boats and know they’ve been betrayed. They take a long, hard land road, and finally arrive in Middle-earth eager to find Feanor again and have their revenge.
Such paranoia; almost like children who have ventured too far and are beyond their judgment. Also I can't help but hear the 'murmurings' as the words of those who have been so gently kept in the palm of the Valar, experiencing the 'freedom' for the first time, and realizing it has its disadvantages! (Okay, so maybe the grass IS greener on Tuna!) Feanor sums this up when he says "let them whine their way back to the cages of the Valar!"
So, nice one Feanor! His list of allies grows thin. He has fairly terminally annoyed the gods. He's had fatal falling a out with each of his two step-brothers, and carried out an act of war against the Teleri, a tribe which has branches occupying Middle-earth (the Sindar, Nandor and Laiquendi being parts of the Teleri tribe which did not go to Valinor.) The Fall is going down, on Feanor's watch indeed.
I do have one final question, however - why is it "On The Flight of the Noldor"? I'm supposing "flight "comes from "fleeing" - but what are they fleeing? I think they are fleeing 'the cages' as Feanor puts it - without making a judgment as to the right or wrong of those (gilded?) cages. Does "flight' refer to a caged bird stretching its wings for the first time?

Completely brilliant post, Brethil.
I was thinking about Feanor's argument that:
1) the Valar Melkor has done us wrong
2) these others are also Valar
3) therefore they will do us wrong, if they haven't already
4) so we had better act against them, before they act against us!

Step 3 is questionable, but all the rest follows logically. So it's a classic trick. Replace Valar with another demagogue target (Jews, blacks, gays, Catholics, Protestants, Moslems: who is it handy to stir the mob against this time?) And there you have a miserably recurring scene.

I like your comparison of Feanor's speech to Saruman's--right on target. They had similar names too: Curufinwe and Curunir, and were both Aule-types. How can Aule be so good and his groupies be so bad and misleading?

I've had another thought about the Oath: I think it was so extreme because Feanor is in effect saying the Valar are irrelevant, and the Noldor are taking their place in pursuing Morgoth (which they are). And that's also blasphemous.

This is so superb!
"The Valar have always sort of both idealized and infantisized the Firstborn, without seeing their complexity and recognizing their differences - nor have they ever seemed to grasp that because the Song has darker notes, the Firstborn have the latitude to behave in ways they may not like very much."

I've had another thought about the Oath: I think it was so extreme because Feanor is in effect saying the Valar are irrelevant, and the Noldor are taking their place in pursuing Morgoth (which they are). And that's also blasphemous.

For once the inaction of the Valar has a purpose! And I can forgive Manwe for miscalculating later, because at least he was calculating something.