Tolkien

[Child of Immanuel]

Okay... I stand corrected (this time for real).

[twyrch]

Child said:

Okay... I stand corrected (this time for real).

LOL!

[ducklauncher]

That was a really interesting essay. I don't know that it should necessarily be discredited so easily; I think he meant to say that he had no tendency toward ambition, which would not necessarily be true for the rest of the Valar. It's a shaky theory, as is any on the subject, but it is interesting, isn't it?

[twyrch]

ducklauncher said:

That was a really interesting essay. I don't know that it should necessarily be discredited so easily; I think he meant to say that he had no tendency toward ambition, which would not necessarily be true for the rest of the Valar. It's a shaky theory, as is any on the subject, but it is interesting, isn't it?

Oh yes... All theories about him make me think.... When I think of Tom Bombadil, I think of the magician in care of the Dufflepuds in C. S. Lewis's Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

Both are an enima, but in Lewis's story, you find that the magician had once been a star and when young enough, would go back to the heavens...

Perhaps, Bombadil is one of the Ainur who did not travel to Earth with the original Valar.... Perhaps he came later to keep the balance....

[dinadan]

twyrch said:

Perhaps he came later to keep the balance....

That's an interesting option; Tullkas is supposed to be the last of the Valar to come to Eä--but since Morgoth could be cast out, maybe another could come in...I'll have to think this over.

[Dred]

I believe when the references are made to Morgoth being cast out, it was made in reference to the world and not to the much larger scale of the location from which the Valar originally came from.

Morgoth was still in the same plane of existence as the other Valar and middle earth but not able to return to the exterior location in which Iluvatar is to be found.

I'm not sure about the idea of who Goldberry and Bombadil might be. It definitely puts an interesting twist onto who they might be. I doubt very much though that it is any of the Valar or any of the Ainur. I think the concept of not getting involved would keep them from being involved even as much as Tom and Goldberry are. Having said that, I really don't have any good ideas about who they might be in an altar ego sense.

[Riothamus]

Just a little site I found from another message-board some time ago and never did post. Very funny psedo-commentary. Enjoy:

www.mcsweeneys.net/2003/04/22fellowship.html

Chomsky: The film opens with Galadriel speaking. "The world has changed," she tells us, "I can feel it in the water." She's actually stealing a line from the non-human Treebeard. He says this to Merry and Pippin in The Two Towers, the novel. Already we can see who is going to be privileged by this narrative and who is not.

[dinadan]

It's time to ressurect the T-man board here, and all this Tolkien trivia has got me ready to talk about Tolkienish things again.

So, let's talk...about....the justice (or injustice) of mixed-race treatment. For example, Elrod and Elros' parents were mixed race, they chose to be Elves, so Elves they were. Granted, Elrond and Elros were born before their parents made their choice, so it seems only fair that they got to make choices as well. Elrond chose to be an Elf, Elros chose to be a man (but he still carried Elven and divine blood). All well and good.

But Elrond's children also get to make a choice as to what race they wish to be, which hardly seems fair. Both of their parents were Elves--although, through Elrond, they carried mortal and divine blood, which is often cited as why they got the choice as well. But, Elros' children (and presumably Aragorn and Arwen's) never get the choice. Apparently, once you choose Human, you disinherit your heirs of choosing their race--sucks to be from Numenor, in other words.

So, the question is this: is this ethical at all?

...

Also, vaguely realted to this....the fate of Beren and Luthien is well known, but Tuor and Idril got lost at sea and were never heard from again. Any speculation on them? Do you think they might've been allowed to live out mortal lives somewhere in Aman or Araman, then die (kind of like Beren and Luthien did), or were they separated by the differing Fates of their races?

[Tegid]

(In the interest of full disclosure: I have a very different concept of fairness from what most other people I come across have, and I also do not regard fairness and justice as being remotely synonymous.)

I would say it is ethical and just, for the necessary and sufficient reason that it is the way that Iluvatar, the Author of ethics and justice in that mythology, determined that it should be. That is the framework in which I am constrained to make all such evaluations. From that starting place, I would then want to seek understanding into that Author's ways and reasonings. I could try to use my own framework in this world to evaluate and judge that one, and I might come to the same conclusions or I might not; regardless whether I did, I would be wrong because my foundation would be wrong.

If I start with men and elves both being uniquely the children of Iluvatar in a way that the Valar and Maiar are not, and that they both and separately have their own special destiny at the end of things as they join in the song in Iluvatar's presence (and all that will mean, whatever that may be), then I need to look at all that transpires from their awakening till that time in this light. This being their end, is being human a bad thing? Is being elven an enviable thing? Ultimately, I don't see that. They would each be serving Iluvatar in their appointed places at that time; to fill any other position then would be as wrong as Melkor's discord at the beginning or Sauron's rebellion after that.

So what about in the meanwhile? Even the Valar marveled to look into the mystery of those two races, and Iluvatar took pains to teach them not to look at their apparent weaknesses or differences, but to focus on their destinies. He also made it clear that, while elves on earth had more skills and longer life, there was a confinement to this world and a psuche bent that would, as long years and ages passed, prove to be very much not an unmitigated blessing. On the contrary, with all the weakness and short-lived mortal existence of men, elves would eventually come to envy men deeply because the weariness of the world would become unbearably heavy upon them.

Keeping the end in view is a hard thing. Some don't ever learn it. Numenor fell precisely because they couldn't see things this way. Their biggest sin was not that they heeded Sauron; it was that they did not heed Manwe. They lived as though this life was it; they came to fear death greatly, rather than holding to the idea that they were here to serve their time, then fall asleep and go to the destiny that Iluvatar had for them, a destiny which He chose not to let the Valar nor the elves or men know yet, but which He assured the Valar was real.

So do we view the human destiny as tragic because their lot is weakness, their lives are short? Iluvatar never thought their lot was inferior. Do we think of the elven life as the one to favor, with its longevity and ultra-enhanced skills and abilities? Iluvatar never considered their lot as superior. Do we envy a human or elf whose blood is part Maia, knowing that the Maiar do not have the special position as children of Iluvatar that men and elves will forever enjoy, or would we prefer to have a little extra power now for, oh, such a brief time when all is said and done, and be (in a way) less a child of Iluvatar forever? (Note that Luthien was never given the opportunity to choose to be a Maia -- and thereby to leave being in a race of Iluvatar's children altogether.)

The elves had more insight into their temporal destiny than men had. The half-elven shared this insight, and were required to choose which of the two temporal destinies would be their lot; they had sufficient understanding to help guide them in making such a momentous decision. Was one decision right and the other wrong? No; see the previous paragraph. But a decision apparently had to be made, because a single temporal-ages-long destiny was to be their fate, not a dual fate of remaining on the earth until the world is changed, and also going to the place men go between now and the time of the song.

Men, however, did not have this insight into their temporal destiny, and the difference between theirs and the elves'. At this point I can only speculate that they could not be given this choice simply because they would not have any real idea what it is they were choosing between. Perhaps in that ignorance, their temptation to choose the elven destiny for wrong reasons (power, skills, mental abilities, and especially for long life) would be too strong for them to have made the decision in light of the more enduring things. We can see in the latter half of the Second Age that the Numenorean kings would almost certainly have made the elven decision, and how darkened they were!

It's interesting to think that maybe Aragorn and Arwen's immediate offspring might also have been required to choose. If so, knowing what we do about son Eldarion, we can speculate that he, sharing elven insight in the way that Elrond, Elros, Elwing, and Earendil did, made the same choice Elros did. Perhaps it would have been through realizing that he came to the kingdom at such a time as that, and knowing that the temporal doom of the elves was indeed the burden that the Valar had been warned about, rather than the boon it might have been considered to be in earlier ages.

I may not have answered the question the way you meant, but if so, it is in part because I can't quite see the issue as elf=good destiny / human=crummy destiny.

[dinadan]

I think maybe you misunderstood where my questions were leading. Perhaps a better question would have been "What can we say about an ethical system where this is right?"

Now, let me say first off, I don't endorse the idea that the elves are any "better" or "worse" than men. Fate is Fate, and you have to make of it what you will. But, first we need to make some distinctions; Eru, the One, who in Arda is called Illúvatar, is not the great I AM, God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob--too many differences. First and foremost, the God of the Abrahamic traditions (we'll call him JCI God) created the world directly, ex nihilo, himself alone. Eru created beings who created the world. The JCI God is kind of a hands-on tinkerer in his creation (or, he was before the Incarnation--but since we're talking about young worlds, let's talk about him as OT God), whereas Eru is very much hands-off. He directly interferes with the world with the downfall of Númenor, and then only because the Valar beseeched him to do so. These two Creators are way different, and we shouldn't hastily ascribe characteristics from one to the other.

That being said, I think we can benefit from understanding something about what a supreme being, who obviously represents the supreme good, is like by examining his actions in response to things.

For example. the Fates of Illúvatar's Children...

We know that the Valar are not permitted to change the Fates of the Children--Mandos was not, although he interceded with Manwë on behalf of Beren and Lúthien after being moved to pity by her song (Sil, ch.19). But, not being permitted and not being able are two different things. It's clear that Manwë was able to change Lúthien's Fate by givingr her a second, mortal life. But, we're told that the Valar cannot withhold the gift of Death from Men (Sil, ch.19)--but they could delay it (which is what happened when they allowed Beren to go back and be mortal again with the now-mortal Lúthien). So, it looks like, to me, the way it works is that the Valar do have the power to make the Elves mortal, but not make mortals Elves. Or do they?

There's a lot of ways in which the Beren and Lúthien tale can be given some leeway because of Lúthien's status as being half-Maia. This is not so clear with Tuor and Idril, or their child, Eärendil. Eärendil is given the choice of being mortal or being an Elf--and there's no Maiar heritage involved with him (as with his wife Elwing). So, maybe this is the way it works: if your non-mortal heritage is more than or equal to half of your heritage, then you get the Choice. That would allow Elrond, Elros, their parents, and Elrond's children (but not Elros', because, presumably, he married a human woman) to be given the choice. This would also, perhaps, prevent Arwen and Aragorn's children from being given the Choice, since untold generations had passed between Aragorn and Elros (although, with the inbreeding that the Númenoreans did, and later the survivors of Arnor and Gondor--which had to have happened), there is the remote possibility that Eldarion could have been more Elf+Maia.

Although, assuming the first scenario is true, it is possible to speculate that if Eldarion married one of Thranduil's people who came south to dwell during Aragorn's reign, his children would be given the Choice even though he had not. This makes for terribly confusing geneological study--but the purpose of this is to determine the logic of who gets the choice and who does not. I think I've laid out a fair case for how it's done.

Now, my other point (throwing in Tuor and Idril at the end) is this: we're told that Mandos is the reason Beren and Lúthien got special dispensation, because her song moved him to pity and he's never been moved before or since. BUT, although we don't know what happened to Tuor and Idril after they put out to sea for the last time, we can presume that they both died--Tuor because he had to, being mortal, and Idril from grief (Elven women seem to do that a lot when their mortal husbands die). This would put them in exactly the same situation as Beren and Lúthien--and Mandos has already been moved about this kind of case (in other words, there's precedent for it). If it was unfair/unjust (either/or here--I don't want to get into another argument like Riothamus and I did over Justice and Fairness) for Beren and Lúthien to be sundered forever, then surely the same must hold for Tuor and Idril--unless Lúthien's Maia heritage is what did the deed for her. In which case, that looks strangely like nepotism--and we know that the Valar are capable of error and mistake and poor judgement. If Melkor isn't proof enough of this, then Aulë's creation of the dwarves, or the Valar's consistently poor handling of Middle-Earth should be. So, while it may be true that Eru is, like the JCI God, incapable of error or poor judgement, his agents here in Arda are. And we're told that they (the Valar) were given judgement in the case of the Peredhil. So, it's possible that this inconsistency in the treatment of the first two marriages of between Elves and Men could be unethical--even within the framework of the novel in which, as you said "the Author of ethics and justice in that mythology determined that it should be." You would be 100% right if he judged it directly, but he didn't. And by allowing his agents in Arda, which are capable of misjudgement, act in his stead, it makes possible this very claim for unethical--and perhaps unjust--treatment. Because it's possible that Lúthien bewitched Mandos the way she betwitched Morgoth (with a song); even if Mandos were acting inerrantly, if his agency were compelled to her will (because of her Maia heritage), then conclusions I've drawn are the same; differing treatment was given to her because she was related to the Maiar and the Valar.

...and I'd like to say that this kind of thing is so much fun; I love debating these kinds of issues/questions/etc.

[Dred]

I must compliment you both on your logic and discussion points. You both raise good points and argue your sides very well. I haven't gotten into the real in depth look at this issue. This gives me a great deal to think about now.

[laurelin]

You make some interesting points.
However, I don't think you can compare Tuor and Idril with Beren and Luthien just on the basis of blood. It was Luthien's song that provoked Mandos's pity, and changed their (Beren and Luthien) destinies.
The other choices are definitely a matter of blood...I agree that neither man nor elf has a better destiny than the other, but every member of a race must have one of them. The half-elven were given the choice, but the choice did not erase the connections to other bloodlines. Elros was given a lengthened life, because of his elven blood. Elrond's choice meant that the choice was passed onto his children, becasue of his human blood. They both had to chose the destiny of man or elf, but they remained half-elven.

[dinadan]

laurelin said:

You make some interesting points.
It was Luthien's song that provoked Mandos's pity, and changed their (Beren and Luthien) destinies.

But, Lúthien's song was enchantment--weaving the "themes" of Illúvatar together in sorrow and whatnot, it's the same sort of trick she used with Morgoth. And without her Maiar blood, she'd not have been able to.

[laurelin]

Point taken. I suppose in that way, it would be her Maiar blood that made the difference. If we're talking about the foundation of ethics, I don't think her maian blood was directly related to the fact that she was given a choice; I think it had more to do with what she did to receive it, even if that involved her maian heritage.

[dinadan]

Granted.

But it still seems that there's something wrong with permitting Lúthien to die and leave the world, and not Idril. Do you think Idril's grief in Mandos was any less acute than Lúthien's would have been?