The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - What should be changed in a New Silmarillion?

Aiwendil · 04-11-2001, 06:57 AM

<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones
Posts: 12</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: What should be changed in a New Silmarillion?

Good questions.

First query: I think that if anything of the Aelfwine story is kept, it is probably best not to place it in an appendix, but to make it explicit. The question here is the transmission of the legends, which raises some problems. Even after Tolkien had decided that these were Numenorean legends passed on through Elrond to Bilbo in his "Translations from Elvish", he kept writing things using the Pengolodh-Aelfwine framework. But I think it's necessary to decide on one of these two methods of transmission - CRT seems to have chosen the Bilbo method.

About the second prophecy of Mandos: At no point in his life did JRRT intend the complete absence of this prophecy (the result we have in the 77). It is frequently argued that he changed his mind on the prophecy and that it cannot be considered canon in any way. However, when he did change his mind, it was not to eliminate the prophecy, but merely to alter it. He decided that Turin would come back at the end of the first age to slay Ancalagon. This obviously presents great problems for the narrative: in the previous versions, Earendil slays Ancalagon; I have to agree with CRT that this older story should be followed, and the later prophecy about Turin not introduced. However, if we go back to that far in his conception of the Great Battle, then we go back to a point where he did consider the prophecy of Turin canon.

Many are fond of saying that in Tolkien's late works there is no prophecy about the end of Arda. There is, though. In his essay on the Istari, found in UT, there is a fragment of alliterative verse that very clearly mentions the Dagor Dagorath as the ending of the world. Thus, it seems, he never even abandoned this idea. To leave out the prophecy would cleary contradict everything Tolkien wrote.

Second query: This is a matter I tried to bring up before; it's really a question of what you intend this Silmarillion to be. If this is to be THE "Quenta Silmarillion", then the longer tales cannot be kept. Tolkien never intended them to be; these were the longer stories from which the Silmarillion was drawn. If this is to be merely a chronological compilation of everything canonical - that is, a canonical history of the Elder Days that does not purport to be THE Silmarillion, then the longer tales should be kept. However, in the latter case, I would say that ALL the longer stuff should be kept - the Athrabeth, Laws and Customs, the Statute of Finwe and Miriel, Aldarion and Erendis (if a second age history is to be attempted), etc. What's the point of having appendices if the whole book is really one large appendix?

Third: I think that most of the editorial changes he made from the stuff in Morgoth's Ring was unnecessary. The Silmarillion already varies greatly in style - from the beautiful heights of the Ainulindale to the dark narratives of Turin and Tuor. I don't think its a problem to keep these changes.

</p>

04-11-2001, 06:57 AM	#2
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pile o' Bones Posts: 12</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE> Re: What should be changed in a New Silmarillion? Good questions. First query: I think that if anything of the Aelfwine story is kept, it is probably best not to place it in an appendix, but to make it explicit. The question here is the transmission of the legends, which raises some problems. Even after Tolkien had decided that these were Numenorean legends passed on through Elrond to Bilbo in his "Translations from Elvish", he kept writing things using the Pengolodh-Aelfwine framework. But I think it's necessary to decide on one of these two methods of transmission - CRT seems to have chosen the Bilbo method. About the second prophecy of Mandos: At no point in his life did JRRT intend the complete absence of this prophecy (the result we have in the 77). It is frequently argued that he changed his mind on the prophecy and that it cannot be considered canon in any way. However, when he did change his mind, it was not to eliminate the prophecy, but merely to alter it. He decided that Turin would come back at the end of the first age to slay Ancalagon. This obviously presents great problems for the narrative: in the previous versions, Earendil slays Ancalagon; I have to agree with CRT that this older story should be followed, and the later prophecy about Turin not introduced. However, if we go back to that far in his conception of the Great Battle, then we go back to a point where he did consider the prophecy of Turin canon. Many are fond of saying that in Tolkien's late works there is no prophecy about the end of Arda. There is, though. In his essay on the Istari, found in UT, there is a fragment of alliterative verse that very clearly mentions the Dagor Dagorath as the ending of the world. Thus, it seems, he never even abandoned this idea. To leave out the prophecy would cleary contradict everything Tolkien wrote. Second query: This is a matter I tried to bring up before; it's really a question of what you intend this Silmarillion to be. If this is to be THE "Quenta Silmarillion", then the longer tales cannot be kept. Tolkien never intended them to be; these were the longer stories from which the Silmarillion was drawn. If this is to be merely a chronological compilation of everything canonical - that is, a canonical history of the Elder Days that does not purport to be THE Silmarillion, then the longer tales should be kept. However, in the latter case, I would say that ALL the longer stuff should be kept - the Athrabeth, Laws and Customs, the Statute of Finwe and Miriel, Aldarion and Erendis (if a second age history is to be attempted), etc. What's the point of having appendices if the whole book is really one large appendix? Third: I think that most of the editorial changes he made from the stuff in Morgoth's Ring was unnecessary. The Silmarillion already varies greatly in style - from the beautiful heights of the Ainulindale to the dark narratives of Turin and Tuor. I don't think its a problem to keep these changes. </p> Last edited by Aiwendil; 03-12-2009 at 02:37 AM.