Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...

[davem]

’For the Elves the world moves, & it moves both very swift & very slow. Swift, because they themselves change little, & all else fleets by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not count the running years, not for themselves. The passing seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an end at last’.

The phrase as my father wrote it was ‘because they need not count the running years’, but in copying I missed out the word need. Looking through my copy, but without consulting his own manuscript, he wrote in do; & do survives in FR.(CT, The Treason of Isengard)

Ok, now, the obvious response would be that the published version is correct - ‘the Elves do not count the running years’, but in the 50th Anniversary edition, just published, the original version is reinstated, & in that edition the Elves are back to not needing to count the years.

Based on the assumption that this is to stand as the ‘official’ version of the text from now on - the changes have been authorised by CT himself, & the new HB edition of LotR, out in December, will carry the 50th anniversary text (& we can assume that all subsequent HB & PB version will do the same) - what effect does this have?

First, I suppose we have to ask whether Tolkien saw do & need as meaning the same thing. Almost certainly he didn’t: he was a Professor of English, & would have known the two words have completely different connotations. To say the Elves do not do ‘X’ is not the same as saying they need not do ‘X’’. ‘Do not’ is emphatic, it implies that they never count the running years. Why? Because of some agreement (tacit or otherwise) among them? Because their brains function differently from those of other races, & they ‘can’t’ count the running years? Because they’ve lost the knack?

Whatever, Legolas, for the last fifty years, has been telling us that ‘the Elves do not count the running years’. From now on, because of a change not authorised by Tolkien, he will tell us that ‘the Elves do not need to count the running years’.

Not needing to do something implies a choice in the matter - the individual Elf is free to decide whether he or she will count the running years or not.

Ok, you may argue, this is not as great a change as replacing do with need in other situations - Gandalf’s letter to Frodo, for instance, if :

PS. Do NOT use It again, not for any reason whatever! Do not travel by night!

was replaced by: ‘You need not use it again. You need not travel by night’?

But is it that simple?

Yet, if Tolkien, in reading over CT’s fair copy of the manuscript, wrote in do rather than need, why would he do that? Had he had second thoughts, & decided that do expressed his understanding of the Elves’ experience of time better than the original need did - the chapter was still in flux after all? Or was he simply in a rush & didn’t bother to check the original notes (this is CT’s explanation).

For myself, not only do I think that the ‘original’ version sounds better in the context of Legolas’ explanation (need sounds too ‘speculative’ - not really much of an ‘explanation’ at all - he seems effectively to be saying ‘This might be the reason or it might not’), but it also goes against my own understanding of the position the Elves are in at the end of the Third Age - basically, it gives them too much control over their situation, by implying that they can make choices over their ‘perceptions’, which really implies they can choose the way they think about the world, & that to a great degree they could fit in & adapt - they need not be isolated, they need not leave Middle-earth.

Its this increased implication of having a choice in the matter which makes me uncomfortable in this change from [‘i]do[/i] not’ to ‘need not’. My own sense is that even if it was a choice originally not to count the running years, by the end of the Third Age it was a matter of choice no longer - the Elves did not count the running years any longer’

(Whatever Christopher Tolkien may say.)

[The Saucepan Man]

Well, I suppose one could say that the fact that Elves could count the passing years, but do not feel the need to do so, does not change their essential nature. Their lack of need in this regard still sets them apart from the other races. That they could record the passing years if they chose to do so still indicates that they have a wholly different outlook on existence and does not necessarily imply that they could alter this outlook. So, while they can alter their mindset to enable them to record the passing years in the manner of other races, they cannot alter it sufficiently to prevent the sense of grief and "alienation" (for want of a better word) that this causes them. Indeed, perhaps doing so only enhances those feelings.

[Mithalwen]

Well I don't think it is such a big deal - especially if you factor in the next phrase, "not for themselves" - the elvish idea of a year was a "yen" having as Sam observed more time at their disposal" . They do no need to count them because they are immortal and they are not significant units of time to them... I mean I personally rarely get more precise in time than 5 minutes becasue I don't need to...

[Boromir88]

I think I'll create a scenario to show everyone how, I think this works. Because, there is a clear difference between "needing" and "doing."

We don't need to go to Mcdonald's and grab a big mac, it's not like Mcdonald's is forcing us off the road into their parking lot. And in fact we don't need one to survive, but that doesn't mean we can't do that.

As Davem says "needing" suggests there is a choice to choose whether to "count" the years or not. "Needing" suggests, it's not "necessary" that they do so, but they can. Where "They don't count the years," simply means, they don't do it, there's no choice in it, they just don't do it. Tying it back with Mcdonald's, we don't need to stop and grab a big mac, it's not going to keep us from dying, but just because we don't need one, doesn't mean we can't go and get one. If we were to say, "I don't go to Mcdonald's to get a big mac," that means I don't do it at all, there is no choice. Where if I say, "I don't need to go to Mcdonald's," would suggest, it's not "necessary," that I go to Mcdonald's but that doesn't mean I can't still go to Mcdonald's.

[davem]

In CT's note on the final words in LotR he writes:

In all the texts of 'The Grey Havens' from the earliest draft Sam said to rosie when he returned to Bag End 'Well, I'm back.' 'Well. I've come back' does not mean the same thing.'

So, he clearly recognises that a particular phrasing, a particular choice of words, affects the meaning of what's being said. That being the case, & for all SpM says, I still wonder how he can justify this particular change. As B88 points out, there is a significant difference between 'do not' & 'need not'.

If I'm right (& its only speculation) that this edition is to be seen as definitve - though it seems from comments in the new foreword that this edition has been recorded electronically by Harper Collins as just that - it means that these changes are authorised by CT to stand from now on, & will be in every subsquent edition.

It may seem a trivial point - maybe Mithalwen is right. I suppose my own feeling is that, as we have so few comments about Elven psychology ‘from the horses mouth’ so to speak, these lines of Legolas’ are significant, & I can’t help thinking we need more justification for the change than CT has offered us so far. If this is to become the standard text, then pretty soon it won’t be possible to buy the original version - the only one Tolkien authorised. I know one could argue that Tolkien made more significant changes between the first & second editions of LotR , but he made those changes. It seems to me that this is different. This edition, as I pointed out recently in the Canonicity thread, contains between three & four hundred emendations. Most are of spellings (with others like the change from ‘smaller than the other’ in Aragorn’s reference to Pippin to ‘smaller than the others’). This one, though, I feel actually alters Legolas meaning not just his words.

[Nimrodel_9]

Hmmm... I would have to say need sounds right. They need not count the years because they are immortal. They live forever, and can only die from wounds in battle or a broken heart. Time really has no effect on them. That is it does, but it takes so long that it wouldn`t be noticable to a mortal, or perhaps one of there own. Counting the years would be a waste of time. Darn. Now that I think about it, counting the years wouldn`t be a waste of their time, seeing how they have so much of it. I guess what I`m trying to say is, why count the years if you are going to be around forever?

This brings up another idea. Do you suppose most elves knew their own age? I guess if they knew the year as it was to the race of Men (I can`t really decide how to word it), when they were born, they could always figure it out. My mind is slow today. Any ideas?
Nimrodel

[Mithalwen]

Well I just feel that it is possible to read far more into a phrase than the author ever intended. However, I accept that this is an interesting exchange, and if I remember rightly Paul Kocher discusses it at length in his book "master of middle earth". However, I think that there are enough "original" edition out there to mean it will be accessible to many, and I imagine, the changes will be documented on the net even if they are not listed in the books.

Also, I feel that CRT would not have authorised the changes if he did not think the alteration were closer to his father's intentions that what is there currently. It will not have been a frivolous decision. Given that he is now eighty (or near enough) it is his last chance to put things "right". Whether it is the correct choice we will probably decide for ourselves,but I am not sure anyone is better placed than CRT to make it. Clearly Davem is right in pointing out that do not and need not are not quite the same thing but I think the "not for themselves" tightens the distinction. I think I prefer need not because elves in mirkwood who interract with mortals must use mortal reckoning for convenience .. so I think it is a clarification .... but we will see..

edit italicised

[Boromir88]

I think we can pretty much all agree there is a difference between need not, and do not. This clearly effects whether the elves, do or don't count the years.

I do agree with SpM on this point.

But I do not think that this difference alters the essential nature of Elves.

It effects whether they "can" or if they just plain out don't count the years, but I don't see it effecting the nature of the Elves. I also, agree with SpM, in saying that the correct word should be need. Since, they do need to count the years, to have certain interactions with mortals. SpM, makes this clear with his quote from Celeborn (nice quote SpM). So the correct word would have to be "need not."

[davem]

Sorry, but 'do not' is emphatic, 'need not' isn't. What I like about 'do not[/i]' is that its actually quite mysterious - why would it be that they do not count the running years? Perhaps because by the end of the Third Age Time itself has come to seem an 'enemy', a thing to be avoided, in thought at least. Perhaps Time is something they have decided to have as little as possible to do with. Time may pass in the 'world outside' their realms, but within them (& within their own minds) it has no place. Time takes away everything they love, time will drive them into exile from Middle-earth (only the Noldor are 'going home' when they pass into the West, the Sindar will be leaving the only home they've ever known.)

So, the words Legolas uses in relation to Time are significant, in that they reflect his (& other Elves') attitude to the running years. 'Do not' is a stronger expression than 'need not'. 'Need not' is too passive - it expresses a kind of unconcern with Time, as though its irrelevant to Elves - they can take notice of it or ignore it, as they choose. But it seems to me that Time & what it means to Elves is a central theme in Tolkien's works. Why are they so driven to 'embalm', to stop time, to hold back change, if Time & the change it brings isn't a central concern to them?

[Aiwendil]

Davem wrote:

'Do not' is a stronger expression than 'need not'. 'Need not' is too passive

And yet, one cannot alter the fact that Tolkien wrote "need not". I still think it highly improbable that Christopher's accidental omission of the word "need" should precisely coincide with a change that his father was going to make anyway. In all likelihood, he either intended "need not" or felt that there was no significant difference between the two.

[Lalwendë]

I have to say that such tiny differences in wording can, and do make an immense difference to the meaning of a text. In my work, much time is spent mulling over the meaning and context of words, to the extent that the writing of just one sentence in a document can necessitate a meeting and much heated discussion. This can be an utterly depressing thing to have to sit through, but I fully appreciate the importance of it. If I was to write that people are 'entitled' to something then it might mean hordes of people demanding that very entitlement, and thus costing the taxpayer x millions of pounds more than they should have paid.

To put the actual words being debated into this context, if I was to write: "the responsibilities of the Department do not include answering letters" then this would mean that any letter which is received can be sent straight back without a reply - and this would further mean less staff would be need to be employed as it was not in the Dept's remit. But if I was to write: "the responsibilities of the Department need not include answering letters" then this is nowhere near emphatic enough and any member of the public could argue that in fact the Dept ought to be answering those letters. I'm sure anyone who knows about Law will also appreciate this!

There is a saying where I work "You don't have to be a pedant to be a policy officer but it helps". I think this can also apply to writers, especially where they are attempting to express such complex concepts as perceptions of time and space.

[Boromir88]

I have to say that such tiny differences in wording can, and do make an immense difference to the meaning of a text.

Exactly Lalwende, also the tone in which you say it is important. When we are on the internet "posting/iming/e-mailing..etc" you don't get a tone, so it's hard to understand how I'm coming across. It could seem as if I'm angry at someone, but really I'm not. Depending upon the tones that one uses, influences what type of mood one is in, and it's hard to do that when you are communicating over the internet.

There is obviously a difference between the "do not" and "need not," as SpM has given us some wonderful examples the clear word should be "need not." The question is whether this effects the nature of the elves.

The destinction is elves simply "don't count the years," or they "need not count the years," which implies, they don't need to, but suggesting that some elves do indeed count the years. So, the way I think it is, it has an effect of whether the elves do not, or need not count the years. But, that doesn't effect the elves very nature because, whether they "do not," or whether they "need not" both come off as, counting the "passing years" isn't a big deal of theirs. "Do not" clearly comes off as elves simply don't count the years, it's not something that's important to them. "Need not," to me, I see as, ok they don't "need" to but they may, if they wish to have interactions with mortals. Still, it comes off as not a big deal to them. SpM, has already pointed out that there are those elves who do "count the passing years," again to have interactions with the humans. But, then there are those elves, who just don't care about mortals, and simply don't count the years.

Lothlorien
"Welcome!" the Elf then said again in the Common Language, speaking slowly. "We seldom use any tongue but our own ; for we dwell now in the heart of the forest, and do not willingly have dealings with any other folk. Even our own kindred in the North are sundered from us. But there are some of us still who go abroad for the gathering of news and the watching of our enemies, and they speak the languages of other lands."

So, some elves NEED to do things like "count the passing years," and speak other languages, if they wish to gather news from outer lands, or have interactions with other languages. But, then there are those who NEED NOT to, which means they can, but they simply don't care about communicating with mortals, or others not of their kind, so they don't speak in the other languages, and they don't count the passing years. To me, this shows as if it's not a big deal to the elves, if they want to communicate with other peoples, then they NEED to do these things, but if they simply wish not to, then they NEED NOT do it. It just comes off to me as not an important thing amongst the elves, and not something that effect their whole nature.