|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ElendilTheShort
Gondor
Aug 5 2014, 11:54am
Post #26 of 37
(1193 views)
Shortcut
|
or more specifically their displacement in arda is the biggest tragedy in the mythology to me.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Aug 5 2014, 5:34pm
Post #27 of 37
(1187 views)
Shortcut
|
I try to use roughly in echo of Tolkien in his commentary to the Athrabeth: "2. There are on Earth 'incarnate' creatures, Elves and Men: these are made of a union of hroa and fea (roughly but not exactly equivalent to 'body' and 'soul'). This, he would say..."
But that's different from understanding the distinction. In a Glossay Tolkien defines fea: 'spirit': the particular spirit belonging to and housed in any one hroa, corresponding more or less to 'soul' and to 'mind' 'when any attempt is made to distinguish between mentality, and the mental processes of Incarnates, conditioned and limited by the co-operation of the physical organs of the hroa. It was thus in its being (apart from its experience) the impulse and power to think: enquire and reflect, as distinct from the means of acquiring data. It was conscious and self aware: self however in Incarnates included the hroa. The fea was said by the Eldar to retain the impress or memory of the hroa and of all the combined experiences of itself and its body.'
And when I write 'roughly' for spirit it's also because I know I am not employing Tolkien's longer explanation here. And as for 'body' I'm not sure. Tolkien's refers the reader to the fea explanation. Maybe it has something to do with the Houseless versus the Lingerers? The Houseless are the Elvish spirits whose bodies have died, while the Lingerers are those Elves whose fear/spirits have consumed their hroar, but it's noted: "Moreover, the Lingerers are not houseless, though they may seem to be. They do not desire bodies, neither do they seek shelter..."
In other words, does the distinction have to do with the fact that the Elvish hroa can become 'memory of the fea' and thus allows one to say that the faded Lingerers are not houseless?
In other, other words, I don't know 
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 6:17pm
Post #28 of 37
(1174 views)
Shortcut
|
I too, have never come across a blatant reference that would strictly prohibit a literal equation, however, there are a few possibilities I have considered.
Coming from a POV that sentient beings are composed of three parts, (body [physical/mortal], mind [psyche/reason], spirit [soul/immortal]) then we could theorise that the fear and hroar must serve these roles as well. I'd say that a case could be made to define the hroa as the 'body' with another extension that overlaps with the 'mind's' power of logic and reasoning. I take as my example the 'fading' of the Elves. In the Athrabeth, it is said that:
' ...when the process (already glimpsed by Finrod) called "waning" or "fading" had become more effective,...They eventually became housed, if it can be called that, not in actual visible and tangible hröar, but only in the memory of the fëa if its bodily form'
This capacity for 'memory' , if we can call it that, that allows for the memory of a fea to become a container for the soul/hroa, and the Elven fate to 'dwindle to a rustic folk of dell and cave', causes me to speculate that the hroa, once lessened, affected the native powers of the Elves, and made them unable to retain something of their former status or power. What it was, I do not know, but I speculate that it might have to do with 'memory'. If you remember how you made those rings or the way that Elven society worked, what is to stop you from remaking it?
The fea, on the other hand, could be seen to encompass the immortal 'soul', as the immortal part of an Elf's existence. It is different, however, in the fact that the typical Catholic view of the soul's separation from the body allows it to continue existence in another plane. The fact that the Elven fea would seem to be bound to Arda--thus the Elves' fear of dying with it-- seems to invert the norm. The fea is not free from physicality. There is also the point that Andreth and Finrod argue within the Athrabeth. Andreth saw the ideal state of Man as perpetual union of the hroa and fea, while Finrod proposed an alternative-- that the separation would allow the fea to free itself of the contaminated hroa.
All in all, it is very convoluted, and I've not done a good job explaining the difference that I see. I just hope some of this is intelligible....
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Aug 5 2014, 6:31pm
Post #29 of 37
(1170 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks for pulling those quotes together. If I understand Tolkien's points, I think he wants us to realize that in his world the 'spirit' and the 'body' must not be thought of as such separable entities as the English words tend to imply. They are far more closely intertwined than traditional English/Christian usages accept, so that the fea is effectively crippled without its hroa, and its memory of its hroa allows reincarnation to take place - obviously concepts that are alien to our mainstream usages of 'body' and 'spirit'.
Secondly, he does not say the fea is 'roughly equivalent' to the spirit (which is what you repeated for brevity's sake and what led to my question). He actually defines fea as spirit using the English word broadly. The 'rough' equivalence he wants us to distinguish is between fea and what we call the soul. The trap to avoid is thinking of soul and spirit as functional synonyms. The difference in his world is that fea includes both our concept of the soul (an immortal and potentially independently existing spirit) and also our concept of the reasoning mind (the reflective and inquiring aspect of our mental processes, which we tend to discount from being part of our spiritual natures).
And as you say, the difference between hroa and body is reciprocal to the distinction made about fea and soul/spirit: unlike our bodies which we hold in common with the bodies of beasts, a hroa only belongs to the 'incarnate' or as we might say sentient beings, i.e., those with a fea - because the two are so closely intertwined. Thus Tolkien's phrase 'roughly equivalent' becomes clearer: the two terms are closely equivalent when thinking of real-world humans and Middle-earth sentient peoples, but not equivalent at all to the general term body in the animal kingdom as a whole. My confusion is dissipating...
So I'm not sure about this, but if I'm right then the lesser animals and probably plants of Middle-earth might be said to have bodies or forms which cannot be said to be hroa, since those creatures also lack a fea. They may have, of course, a 'means of acquiring data' in the sense of lower-order animal minds (and plant minds? not clear) that organize their behaviors and aid in their survival, but that is a class of mind that is not a fea.
Well anyway that's as far as I get this time around. Thanks again for helping!
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 & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Aug 5 2014, 7:31pm
Post #30 of 37
(1156 views)
Shortcut
|
Glad my quotes helped. I've wondered about this myself and your post is very interesting. If you think of anything else please add it.
I'll be on the lookout for any other Tolkien tidbits that I think might be relevant, but anyway for now I must ponder and consider the matter -- which doesn't mean I'll be able to add anything enlightening here... but there's always hope!
|
|
|
IdrilLalaith
Rivendell
Aug 9 2014, 9:51pm
Post #31 of 37
(1129 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Combination of Finrod's and Andreth's views
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The fea, on the other hand, could be seen to encompass the immortal 'soul', as the immortal part of an Elf's existence. It is different, however, in the fact that the typical Catholic view of the soul's separation from the body allows it to continue existence in another plane. The fact that the Elven fea would seem to be bound to Arda--thus the Elves' fear of dying with it-- seems to invert the norm. The fea is not free from physicality. There is also the point that Andreth and Finrod argue within the Athrabeth. Andreth saw the ideal state of Man as perpetual union of the hroa and fea, while Finrod proposed an alternative-- that the separation would allow the fea to free itself of the contaminated hroa.
Catholicism hopes for a combination of both Andreth's and Finrod's ideals. Yes, Catholics believe that the soul continues even after death, but they also see this as ultimately unnatural. Humans are meant to have both a soul and a body perfectly united.
Catholics believe that after the end of the world, all humans will get their bodies back. Of course, it's not like angels will just dig up rotting corpses and say, "Here you go! Enjoy!" Rather, humans will have what's referred to as a glorified body--like that of Jesus after He rose from the dead. In other words, with will be a perfect union of hroa and fea (as Andreth saw) and a freedom from contaminated hroa (as Finrod saw).
My point in all of this is that in the truly Catholic viewpoint (which Tolkien certainly had), there is a close connection between body and soul. A lot of other Christian religions tend to demonize the body and put it below the soul. Remembering that Tolkien held that belief can, I think, be helpful when thinking about hroar and fear.
TolkienBlog.com
|
|
|
PhantomS
Rohan
Aug 10 2014, 2:10am
Post #32 of 37
(1168 views)
Shortcut
|
|
the 1/3rd is not a real problem
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
the real problem is that not all Dwarf-women are wed and have children; the Appendix about them states that "many (Dwarf men) never marry, being engrossed in their arts" and many Dwarf-women do not marry "because they cannot have the one they want". 1/3rd women is not a problem IF the women produce children or even multiple children. If only half of them even try, then maybe only have one or two then the race will be in trouble.
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Aug 10 2014, 2:30am
Post #33 of 37
(1113 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thank-you for the clarification!!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Would that be the currently held teaching of the Catholic Church, or might it have changed? Just curious...
Thank-you again for the insight! It makes so much sense!
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
IdrilLalaith
Rivendell
Aug 10 2014, 2:44am
Post #34 of 37
(1136 views)
Shortcut
|
But John Paul II's work known as Theology of the Body certainly deepened Catholic thought on the subject. Catholics who really understand their faith (as Tolkien certainly did) are more likely to embrace both soul and body, as opposed to other religions (at least Christian religions).
Glad it was helpful!
TolkienBlog.com
|
|
|
Hamfast Gamgee
Tol Eressea
Aug 16 2014, 11:15pm
Post #35 of 37
(1090 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I can't really see Dwarves fading away
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Though possibly they became as one with Gold, like a gold statue, technically alive, but unable to move or interact a kind of living death, a bit like in a Sci-fi film I once saw
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Aug 17 2014, 12:14am
Post #36 of 37
(1091 views)
Shortcut
|
Do you think Tolkien had any such idea, though? As picturesque as it is, it seems to come from another type of fantasy world, as you acknowledge. I am trying to think of any suggestion, in any of his books, that the Dwarves would suffer such a fate. With the destruction of the One Ring at the end of the Third Age, whose effect on the Dwarf-lords' rings was to aggravate their greed for gold, I should think gold would diminish as a motivator of the race of Durin.
As I have recently mused, I think the only clue Tolkien gives about the Dwarves' fate in the Fourth Age, beside the vague generalization about 'fading' which is universal to all the races besides Man, is Gimli's revelation that his race can be brought over to the 'Elvish side' in terms of living a life of aesthetic appreciation in places like Aglarond. As Galadriel says in a parallel context, because of his discovery of love Gimli will have power over gold, but it will have no power over him. I take Gimli as the representative Dwarf of the Age to come.
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 & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Cari
Bree
Aug 17 2014, 12:27am
Post #37 of 37
(1140 views)
Shortcut
|
I remember reading somewhere awhile ago, though I do not remember where. It was a theory that the Dwarves turned into stone after awhile if I remember right. If anyone has read something similar please correct me.
(This post was edited by Cari on Aug 17 2014, 12:28am)
|
|
|
|
|
