Our Sponsor Sideshow Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Reading Room:
Did turin fight war of wrath?
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

-Glorfindel-
Registered User


Jul 4 2021, 12:36pm

Post #1 of 35 (1520 views)
Shortcut
Did turin fight war of wrath? Can't Post

This topic may have been discussed before. But in this article, I think the author says that Turin was both in the War of Wrath and in Dagor Dagorath. What do you think? Was Turin present in both of these wars?
https://middle-earth.xenite.org/why-did-tolkien-leave-out-the-second-prophecy-of-mandos/


"Glorfindel was tall and straight; his hair was of shining gold, his face fair and young and fearless and full of joy; his eyes were bright and clean, and his voice like music; on his brow set wisdom, and in his hand was strength."


squire
Half-elven


Jul 4 2021, 12:57pm

Post #2 of 35 (1501 views)
Shortcut
Yes and no [In reply to] Can't Post

As Martinez explains, the character and story of Turin changed over many years of rewriting.

In the earliest version of the legends, the Book of Lost Tales, Turin participates in the War of Wrath to overthrow Morgoth at the end of the First Age, following Earendil's mission with the Silmaril to plead for the divine intervention. This constitutes the end of the entire story cycle, and the end of the world as it was then imagined.

Later in the development of the legendarium, when the so-called Second, Third, and Fourth Ages became part of the world's history after the First Age, Tolkien imagined yet another "final battle" to end the world, the Dagor Dagorath. This kind of replaced the War of Wrath as the apocalyptic ending of the world, even as the War of Wrath remained in the story to explain the disappearance of Beleriand, etc. Turin's reappearance or reincarnation to fight his enemy Morgoth was thus transposed to the latter battle, at least in outline. Neither the earlier war nor the later one was ever written up as a narrative in detail.

So it's a question that needs some qualifications; one can't just speak of what Turin did or didn't do in Middle-earth without explaining which version of Middle-earth one is talking about.



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'.
Archive: All the TORn Reading Room Book Discussions (including the 1st BotR Discussion!) and Footerama: "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
Dr. Squire introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.


-Glorfindel-
Registered User


Jul 4 2021, 4:12pm

Post #3 of 35 (1488 views)
Shortcut
I have just one question [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
As Martinez explains, the character and story of Turin changed over many years of rewriting.

In the earliest version of the legends, the Book of Lost Tales, Turin participates in the War of Wrath to overthrow Morgoth at the end of the First Age, following Earendil's mission with the Silmaril to plead for the divine intervention. This constitutes the end of the entire story cycle, and the end of the world as it was then imagined.

Later in the development of the legendarium, when the so-called Second, Third, and Fourth Ages became part of the world's history after the First Age, Tolkien imagined yet another "final battle" to end the world, the Dagor Dagorath. This kind of replaced the War of Wrath as the apocalyptic ending of the world, even as the War of Wrath remained in the story to explain the disappearance of Beleriand, etc. Turin's reappearance or reincarnation to fight his enemy Morgoth was thus transposed to the latter battle, at least in outline. Neither the earlier war nor the later one was ever written up as a narrative in detail.

So it's a question that needs some qualifications; one can't just speak of what Turin did or didn't do in Middle-earth without explaining which version of Middle-earth one is talking about.

Actually what I wanted to ask was: Does turin fight both in the war of wrath and dagor dagorath when all versions are combined? that is, can we make the assumption that Turin fought both in the war of wrath and in dagor dagorath?


"Glorfindel was tall and straight; his hair was of shining gold, his face fair and young and fearless and full of joy; his eyes were bright and clean, and his voice like music; on his brow set wisdom, and in his hand was strength."


InTheChair
Rohan

Jul 4 2021, 4:42pm

Post #4 of 35 (1478 views)
Shortcut
It's basically up to you. [In reply to] Can't Post

If you wish to go by the latest record Tolkien put down, then i believe he did not fight in the War of Wrath, being most likely not reincarnated at that time.


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 4 2021, 5:52pm

Post #5 of 35 (1477 views)
Shortcut
Andreth [In reply to] Can't Post

Did Túrin fight in the Wrath of War?

This response might seem familiar to you Glorfindel Smile

According to Tolkien's latest written idea (that we know of so far), I'd say "yes" . . . but we, the readers, don't know how the matter was going to be handled.

My total guess is that Túrin was not going to be mentioned in the actual Silmarillion chapter that deals with this War, and that Readers would then find/stumble across Andreth's prophecy in another source, possibly even in a marginal note to some other text, and then say:

Oh . . . very interesting!

And if JRRT was to publish this prophecy and make it a part of the internal world of Middle-earth, I'm not sure even Christopher Tolkien could say what his father intended to do with Túrin concerning an End of Times scenario -- like a Dagor Dagorath ("Battle of Battles") scenario, which generally speaking, had been revised from a Prophecy of Mandos to a Mannish Myth in any case.

Was Túrin going to appear in both a Mannish Prophecy (War of Wrath) and a Mannish Myth concerning the End of Days?

Well . . . he is a Man! Maybe Who Knows!


That said, in the following description, some of the wording might arguably suggest Túrin was not to take part in an End of Days scenario . . . but then again, if that scenario is a Mannish Myth, Túrin seems a likely candidate in any case: thus my Maybe Who Knows.

Christopher Tolkien writes:


Quote
"In this last reappearance of the mysterious and fluctuating idea the prophecy is put into the mouth of Andreth, the Wise-woman of the House of Beor: Túrin will "return from the Dead" before his final departure, and his last deed within the Circles of the World will be the slaying of the Great Dragon, Ancalagon the Black.

"Andreth prophesies of the Last Battle at the end of the Elder Days (the sense in which the term 'Last Battle' is used shortly after-wards in this text, p. 371); but in all the early texts (the Quenta, IV.160; the Annals of Beleriand, IV.309, V.144; the Quenta Silmarillion, V.329) it was Earendil who destroyed Ancalagon.] "

The Problem of ROS



(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 4 2021, 6:01pm)


-Glorfindel-
Registered User


Jul 4 2021, 6:07pm

Post #6 of 35 (1465 views)
Shortcut
He didn't reincarnate [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
If you wish to go by the latest record Tolkien put down, then i believe he did not fight in the War of Wrath, being most likely not reincarnated at that time.

He didn't reincarnate anyway. He went through the world circle and joined the war. Then he was kept among the mortals again.


"Glorfindel was tall and straight; his hair was of shining gold, his face fair and young and fearless and full of joy; his eyes were bright and clean, and his voice like music; on his brow set wisdom, and in his hand was strength."


InTheChair
Rohan

Jul 4 2021, 6:27pm

Post #7 of 35 (1456 views)
Shortcut
Unlikely [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
He didn't reincarnate anyway. He went through the world circle and joined the war. Then he was kept among the mortals again.


The War of Wrath is fought entirely within Arda. Specifically in Middle-Earth. It's difficult to see how Turin could have fought there without being reincarnated.

And to have him re-enter the circles of the World at that time, a mere 100 years after his death and departure, seems rather underwhelming given the thousands of years of history that make up the second and third ages.

The only way I can see Turin fighting in the War of Wrath is if Tolkien intended to transpose that name to the idea of the Dagor Dagorath.

For the event described in the Silmarillion I would hold it out of the quesiton, short of a major rewriting of the legends which was never completed


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 5 2021, 7:01am

Post #8 of 35 (1418 views)
Shortcut
Andreth's Prophecy [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
The only way I can see Turin fighting in the War of Wrath is if Tolkien intended to transpose that name to the idea of the Dagor Dagorath.

For the event described in the Silmarillion I would hold it out of the quesiton, short of a major rewriting of the legends which was never completed


If Andreth's Prophecy "must" come true, then I think Tolkien would only need to eliminate or revise the one line specifically describing Earendil slaying Ancalagon . . .

. . . and if so, in my opinion [short version of it] Tolkien need not have even mentioned Túrin in the Quenta Silmarillion chapter that deals with this war.

The prophecy is actually later (externally) than the Earendil versions. Christopher Tolkien explains:


Quote
"In this last reappearance of the mysterious and fluctuating idea the prophecy is put into the mouth of Andreth, the Wise-woman of the House of Beor: Túrin will "return from the Dead" before his final departure, and his last deed within the Circles of the World will be the slaying of the Great Dragon, Ancalagon the Black.

"Andreth prophesies of the Last Battle at the end of the Elder Days (the sense in which the term 'Last Battle' is used shortly after-wards in this text, p. 371); but in all the early texts (the Quenta, IV.160; the Annals of Beleriand, IV.309, V.144; the Quenta Silmarillion, V.329) it was Earendil who destroyed Ancalagon.] "

The Problem of ROS


And JRRT's text (the one that Christopher Tolkien refers to in the quoted commentary) reads:


Quote
"For after the Last Battle and the overthrow of Morgoth, when the Valar gave to Elros and Elrond a choice to belong either to the kin of the Eldar or to the kin of Men, it was Elros who voyaged over sea to Númenor . . ."


So at least here, it's the name Last Battle referring to the War of Wrath, as in the Last Battle at the end of the Elder Days.


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 5 2021, 7:10am)


InTheChair
Rohan

Jul 5 2021, 4:42pm

Post #9 of 35 (1384 views)
Shortcut
Well, it's of course not possible to know for certain [In reply to] Can't Post

what revisions Tolkien intended to to if he had had more time.

I can't particularly say I like the idea of it though. To have Turin return from the Dead so soon (in whatever manner or device), where his primary purpose is only to slay another Dragon.

I am going purely on memory now, but didn't some of the predictions about Turin say that he would be there fighting Morgoth and avenge all that Morgoth did to his family?


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 5 2021, 7:08pm

Post #10 of 35 (1381 views)
Shortcut
A Prophecy Abandoned [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, in the Second Prophecy of Mandos, but that was abandoned . . .

. . . and with respect to an End of Days scenario appearing at the end of Quenta Silmarillion -- if it was "ultimately" to include Túrin splitting Morgoth into Dark Lord nuggets (or whatever he did to Morgoth) -- it was reimagined as a Mannish Myth.

Of course none of this was published by JRRT, but I'm following the "arrow of time" here, whether I like a later idea or not.


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 5 2021, 7:10pm)


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 5 2021, 7:22pm

Post #11 of 35 (1378 views)
Shortcut
Abandoned by whom? [In reply to] Can't Post

Abandoned by J.R.R. Tolkien, or abandoned by Christopher Tolkien?

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 5 2021, 7:46pm

Post #12 of 35 (1377 views)
Shortcut
John Ronald [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 5 2021, 8:24pm

Post #13 of 35 (1373 views)
Shortcut
As you well know, I'm not convinced [In reply to] Can't Post

The last paragraph of the Quenta Silmarillion in the published Silmarillion reads:


Quote
Here ends the SILMARILLION. If it has passed from the high and the beautiful to darkness and ruin, that was of old the fate of Arda Marred; and if any change shall come and the Marring be amended, Manwë and Varda may know; but they have not revealed it, and it is not declared in the dooms of Mandos.


This was, of course, not written as part of the Quenta Silmarillion, it was taken from the end of the Valaquenta, with the only change being that "SILMARILLION" replaces "Valaquenta". It replaces the last three paragraphs of the last version of the Quenta Silmarillion that was written and edited by Tolkien, which continued to contain "the Second Prophecy of Mandos".

Christopher states in his discussion of the Valaquenta that the text used for this paragraph shows that "The Second Prophecy of Mandos had now therefore definitively disappeared" (Morgoth's Ring, p. 204). He is referring, of course, to the fact that it states that "if any change shall come and the Marring be amended, Manwë and Varda may know; but they have not revealed it, and it is not declared in the dooms of Mandos".

However, it is not (not surprisingly), so simple as that. At most, this shows that in one strand of the mythology that Tolkien was creating the idea of the Second Prophecy was not present, but there is simply no evidence that Tolkien intended to remove it from the text of the Quenta, or that that statement from the Valaquenta supercedes other statements written elsewhere in the Athrabeth, in "the Problem of Ros", and in other writings in which the prophecy was still present in different forms, and were written after the last version of the Valaquenta was written.

Plus, the actual ending of the Quenta makes a much better ending than the substitution that Christopher made, and (as I argue in my soon-to-be-published Tolkien Studies piece "Túrin the Hapless: Tolkien and the Sanctification of Suffering") it is intrinsic to an important aspect of Tolkien's writings. (How's that for a shameless self-plug?)

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire

(This post was edited by Voronwë_the_Faithful on Jul 5 2021, 8:25pm)


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 5 2021, 9:49pm

Post #14 of 35 (1366 views)
Shortcut
disentangling the Second Prophecy from . . . stuff [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
( . . . ) " replaces "Valaquenta". It replaces the last three paragraphs of the last version of the Quenta Silmarillion that was written and edited by Tolkien, which continued to contain "the Second Prophecy of Mandos".


Okay but "continued to contain" can be explained by Christopher Tolkien's warning about the later cursory corrections made to the end of QS with respect to final approval of content.

I won't quote that here, as I know you know what he wrote.


In Reply To
However, it is not (not surprisingly), so simple as that. At most, this shows that in one strand of the mythology that Tolkien was creating the idea of the Second Prophecy was not present, but there is simply no evidence that Tolkien intended to remove it from the text of the Quenta, or that that statement from the Valaquenta supercedes other statements written elsewhere in the Athrabeth, in "the Problem of Ros", and in other writings in which the prophecy was still present in different forms, and were written after the last version of the Valaquenta was written.


But I just read, for example, The Problem of ROS, and I couldn't find a reference to The Prophecy of Mandos. The late text includes the prophecy of Andreth, which refers to the War of Wrath, not Dagor Dagorath.

In The Later Quenta Silmarilion II, Mandos predicts things about the children of Indis and the coming of Earendil, but -- and for another statement that I think backs up Christopher Tolkien's claim of "definitively disappeared" . . .

. . . we also have Tolkien's notes to the Athrabeth Commentary (as no one calls it), specifically note 7 in which JRRT describes the End of Arda as the Elves imagined it, including that the End Times description at the end of the Silmamarillion (wow! I was going to edit this spelling but I didn't)

" . . . is of Numenorean origin; it is clearly made by Men though Men acquainted with Elvish tradition." JRRT

That is, not a Prophecy of Mandos. It had vanished Smile

Christopher Tolkien never claimed that an End Time scenario (or scenarios) was (or were) abandoned, but rather that the Second Prophecy of Mandos was gone.

Nor am I claiming (not that you said I was) that Túrin splitting Morgoth into nuggets of Dark Lord (a silly way to put it anyway) was certainly abandoned, only that I think the wording of Andreth's prophecy might indicate that Túrin was out, even with respect to a Mannish Myth . . .

. . . though that said, I also note how fitting it would be for such a myth to arise and include the mighty Turambar, considering his circumstances when alive.

And yes that was an excellent self-plug by the way Smile


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 5 2021, 9:57pm)


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 5 2021, 11:25pm

Post #15 of 35 (1357 views)
Shortcut
"A Foolish Consistency Is The Hobgoblin Of Little Minds" [In reply to] Can't Post

Tongue

The Second Prophecy was an integral feature of Tolkien's core mythology literally from its creation in the aftermath of World War I through to the last edits that Tolkien made to the concluding section of the Quenta (cursory though they may be). It was such a core part of the mythology that Tolkien wrote in his famous letter to Milton Waldman that Christopher used as the preface to the second edition of the published Silmarillion "This legendarium ends with a vision of the end of the world, its breaking and remaking, and the recovery of the Silmarilli and the 'light before the Sun' – after a final battle which owes, I suppose, more to the Norse vision of Ragnarök than to anything else, though it is not much like it." Clyde Kilby in his fine little book about his time working with Tolkien to try to publish the work also strongly emphasizes that point. Just because Tolkien played around with different ideas in different comparatively minor writings does not mean that he abandoned such a crucial portion of his core legendarium

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire

(This post was edited by Voronwë_the_Faithful on Jul 5 2021, 11:30pm)


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 2:54pm

Post #16 of 35 (1314 views)
Shortcut
and Beren Camlost [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
( . . . ) Just because Tolkien played around with different ideas in different comparatively minor writings does not mean that he abandoned such a crucial portion of his core legendarium


But the point was/is, Christopher Tolkien did not claim his father abandoned a Ragnarokian scenario.

Nor am I. You see the distinction, yes?

A Mannish Myth is not a prophecy from a "god" and the Andreth prophecy at least arguably casts some measure of doubt regarding Túrin's role in a End Times scenario -- so far I assume you agree with that much, or if not, you didn't contest it.

And very generally speaking: Tolkien is Tolkien Smile

From the start of his mythology, for example, and for decades after, JRRT imagined a specific mode of Elvish reincarnation -- until he didn't and revised it. It only takes a sentence to destroy a much written about earlier idea . . .

. . . but in any case, Mandos not uttering a prophecy about X means just that, nothing more. What are we to make of the marginal addition to the end of QS "and Beren Camlost" . . .

Who knows. But whatever it might have been, Mandos himself wasn't going to say Smile


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 6 2021, 3:05pm)


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 6 2021, 3:37pm

Post #17 of 35 (1312 views)
Shortcut
Mannish Myth versus Elvish History [In reply to] Can't Post

Like you, I've been thinking (and writing about) these questions for a long time. This is what I wrote at the Hall of Fire almost 14 and half (!!!!!) years ago:


Quote
I'm not saying that I think that Túrin actually did earn compensation because of his great grief, although I think that was Tolkien's original perspective when [he] first included the Second Prophecy as part of the Silmarillion saga. It is my opinion, in analyzing the body of Tolkien's work as he left it (thus including as much of Túrin's story as we have seen, rather then just the fragments in the published Silmarillion, and the statements made in the Athrabeth) that the Second Prophecy is meant to be taken as -- exactly what you just said: speculative hope rather than the harbinger of what-is-to-come. I see no other way of interpreting his specific comment that it was a myth of Númenorean origin, and specifically distinguishing it from Elvish histories. I think it is tied into the Númenorean obsession with immortality; if Túrin can escape the Doom of Men, then so can they. But I recognize that is large leap is certainly will not be accepted by all.

https://thehalloffire.net/...c.php?p=62055#p62055

I'm not sure how much I still believe that (I have, after all, just written an entire paper essentially arguing that "Túrin actually did earn compensation because of his great grief") but I thought it was interesting to run across that old comment.

But I don't think that we need to choose between Andreth's prophecy and the Second Prophecy of Mandos, at least as I see Tolkien's legendarium. Tolkien's lack of consistency of part of what makes his legendarium so impressive. Jason Fisher (who used to post here as visualweasel), in an essay published in the book The Silmarillion: 30 Years On made a comparison between Christo­pher Tolkien and Elias Lönnrot, compiler of the Kalevala, noting that each smoothed out complex, irregular source material into a coherent text. The difference, of course, is that with the Kalevala (as with other mythological traditions), the source material consists of different versions of the included tales written by different authors. Tolkien in his unorganized, unchecked brilliance, managed to replicate that kind of mythological body of work as one author. For me, both Andreth's prophecy and the Second Prophecy of Mandos are essential to the legendarium; I feel no need to chose between them.

And yes, Tolkien is Tolkien. Smile

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 4:43pm

Post #18 of 35 (1307 views)
Shortcut
Musti the Magic Dog [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
And yes, Tolkien is Tolkien. Smile


Aha! We agree! Smile


I see what Jason's getting at, but for me the "unchecked brilliance" he's talking about (if those were his words) is really the not-unnatural result of a story in the hands of someone creating a Secondary World. And in those hands for decades. So many variations were not made in the interest of art, and Tolkien was an artist, and if one really starts looking at them, they pile notably high . . . too much salt in the soup, so to speak.

Or at least, salt Tolkien did not intend.

So my major point is this: Tolkien is being brilliant when he does introduce purposed inconsistencies and variations to echo something like the Kalevala. I say focus on the inconsistencies that Tolkien deemed would create this Primary World like feeling, rather than willy-nilly smashups that simply arise from a man changing his mind as he tries to find out the "truth" of a given story.

That's why I'm quite in favor of a multi-perspective legendarium in the context of a Numenorean slash Bilbo transmission. There's an art to making such a legendarium . . .

. . . a kind of Elvish craft, one might say Wink


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 6 2021, 4:54pm

Post #19 of 35 (1305 views)
Shortcut
My words, not Jason's [In reply to] Can't Post

It's been a long time since I've read that book (time for a revisit), but it is hard for me to imagine Jason talking about Tolkien's "unchecked brilliance". Wink

I agree that Tolkien did not intend to spice his soup with that particular degree of spice. But authorial intention is only one factor. It is not the only one.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 6:04pm

Post #20 of 35 (1297 views)
Shortcut
Past People [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, Jason's approach -- which I've seen from others -- seems to work well as a general theory, but get down to the details of what he's really suggesting, and in my opinion you've got a very inconsistent, arguably not-so-brilliant (to borrow your words) Secondary World.

Subjective, yes. And admittedly I'm stating that in the sense of artistically creating a Secondary World, I guess.


And while one can say authorial intention is only one factor, to my mind we already have a confluence of art and authorial intention with respect to echoing the variations of something like Kalevala.

That's why I'm always bringing up the (in my opinion) "too much" ignored Drowning of Anadune, or the Awakening of the Quendi -- and when I raise the latter text for example, often enough folk respond with something like: "but Tolkien abandoned that pre-existing sun idea from Myths Transformed."

Did he? Not according to the Third Edition Hobbit anyway; and I think he ultimately embraced it rather -- not necessarily for Quenta Silmarillion, but for the multi-perspective legendarium as a whole.

Of course now I'm starting to repeat myself and I'm arguing with unnamed "people from the past" so I'll shaddup here.

Smile


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 6 2021, 6:18pm)


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 6:24pm

Post #21 of 35 (1286 views)
Shortcut
missed my edit time for this [In reply to] Can't Post

Subjective, yes. And admittedly I'm stating that in the sense of artistically creating a Secondary World, I guess -- I mean, other authors rewrite and rewrite and rewrite when trying to create believable Secondary World.

And some folks might edit posts a lot too . . . erm, like me Smile


squire
Half-elven


Jul 6 2021, 7:04pm

Post #22 of 35 (1292 views)
Shortcut
I'm a little confused [In reply to] Can't Post

You wrote, "So my major point is this: Tolkien is being brilliant when he does introduce purposed inconsistencies and variations to echo something like the Kalevala."

My reaction was huh? When did Tolkien deliberately introduce inconsistencies purely for artistic effect, to mimic the so-called real-world folk legendariums?

As I have understood these things, Tolkien's constant revisions were always in the service of achieving the best Secondary World and accompanying set of legends that he could - as a work of art by him, the author. Consistency was important, though hard to maintain due to the complexity of the project. And of course he was not a finisher.

It was only after thirty or forty years of constant restarts and revisions that he began to recognize the unintended nature of the body of work buried in endless boxes in his garage: as CT put it,
"...my father came to conceive The Silmarillion as a compilation, a compendious narrative, made long afterwards from sources of great diversity (poems, and annals, and oral tales) that had survived in agelong tradition; and this conception has indeed its parallel in the actual history of the book, for a great deal of earlier prose and poetry does underlie it, and it is to some extent a compendium in fact and not only in theory." (Silm. Foreword,1977).

In short, the sense of the thing being an edited compilation is an unintended effect of his long struggle to achieve the best Silmarillion in his own ever-changing eyes; it was never the cause of his seemingly endless variations. He never sat down, for instance, to rewrite the Turin tale, or Valaquenta, or Beren & Luthien, with the thought that this new text would be a good contribution to the effect of The Silmarillion being a compendium, with artful changes and contradictions to please the taste of the discriminating reader of historic folklore (!) someday in the finally-published future.

At least, this has always been my understanding. Thus I ask, most respectfully given the erudition that abounds in this thread, about this brilliant practice of Tolkien "introduc[ing] purposed inconsistencies and variations". Where? When? And how do we know they were "purposed" to "echo something like the Kalevala"?



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'.
Archive: All the TORn Reading Room Book Discussions (including the 1st BotR Discussion!) and Footerama: "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
Dr. Squire introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 8:06pm

Post #23 of 35 (1286 views)
Shortcut
purposed inconsistencies [In reply to] Can't Post

I think we have some "small" and large examples. A couple small ones:

Galadriel's name being later confused with Galadhriel -- thought to include a tree word. Or the inconsistent with each other but in-story tales of The Elessar.

A large one is The Drowning of Anadune, where Tolkien considers what things about the Fall of Numenor might arguably be confused in a Mannish account.

And while The Awakening of the Quendi, for example, might have been initially part of a re-working of the "older stuff", when Tolkien re-characterized the Legendarium, such a text fits right in, as is, as an Elvish based text. With this text it's hard to say, but Tolkien does make sure to give it an in-story Elvish textual history -- and thus, it's not a Mannish or Mixed text.

And its inconsistency is a pre-existing Sun. And its brilliance, in my opinion, would include that this hails from an Elven Children's Tale mixed with counting lore.

Of course in his private papers Tolkien has no need to note everything for himself. For example, Maglor casting the Silmaril into the sea (Quenta Silmarillion) versus (Lay of Leithian recommenced) Maglor also being drownded. All I can say here is that this seems like an inconsistency that could easily arise in my opinion, and these are two different texts as well, of course, but no I can't say for sure JRRT intended this.

Nor would I want to "invent" an inconsistency that JRRT didn't think was good art . . .

. . . though I "almost" did there . . . and there Wink



Quote
In short, the sense of the thing being an edited compilation is an unintended effect of his long struggle to achieve the best Silmarillion in his own ever-changing eyes;


If you're interpreting that quote from the Foreword as Tolkien agreeing with Jason Fisher then I must disagree. As I read it, the Silmarillion seen as a compilation refers to the nature of the one text. I note one of the title page statements to Quenta Silmarillion from the early-ish version in The Lost Road: "This is a brief history drawn from many older tales . . ."

In other words, I'm saying that's how Tolkien saw the book, aside from the external changes made while trying to get to a finished work.


(This post was edited by Elthir on Jul 6 2021, 8:18pm)


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Jul 6 2021, 11:29pm

Post #24 of 35 (1268 views)
Shortcut
Don't conflate me with Jason [In reply to] Can't Post

I seem to have added an unnecessary complication to the discussion by citing Jason Fisher's excellent piece in The Silmarillion Thirty Years On." I would not want him to be burdened with having my - perhaps wrong -- ideas attributed to him. He is fine scholar and a finer human being.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Elthir
Grey Havens


Jul 6 2021, 11:40pm

Post #25 of 35 (1268 views)
Shortcut
my apologies [In reply to] Can't Post

I assumed you had brought up the Fisher essay because he'd made a similar stance or conclusions, but rereading what you said, I see that this is not necessarily so.

My disagreement still stands however . . . if Squire means what I think he means Wink

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.