The Mystery of Light

[Lalwendë]

Yesterday I watched a very interesting documentary about the properties of light and the search to define it, from being something divine to scientific understanding. The programme showed how the metaphysical and scientific properties of light are concepts which throughout history the church has tried to lay claim to, even to the point of imprisoning as a heretic one man who discovered what caused rainbows.

Descartes, sponsored by the Catholic Church, tried to show that the properties of light were mechanical, while Newton, a Protestant, was determined to prove him wrong. By way of various experiments, including staring at the sun for hours and thrusting a stick between his eyeball and skull, Newton eventually discovered that white light is composed of the seven colours of the rainbow. Amongst Newton’s critics were the Jesuits.

And Light is clearly of deep significance across many if not all religions. The old beliefs utilised the mysteries of light, as shown in the beam of light which enters the great passage grave at Newgrange on the shortest day. Light is particularly theologically significant to Christians and Moslems, and the idea of light has entered our collective consciousness as a universal symbol of the ‘good’ and the ‘wise’.

Here endeth my lesson. Of course, this has got me thinking about the nature of Light in Tolkien’s work. I posted on the CbC thread about Aragorn’s Light and what this might signify, but there are many other significant uses of Light within Tolkien’s work, including the Phial of Galadriel, the Two Trees (and interestingly, Ungoliant’s lust for that light) and the Silmarils. Why did Tolkien place so much significance on light? It cannot just be down to his Catholicism, as it is clearly a concept significant to all. I cannot in any way consider all these aspects here, so it might be a good topic for discussion, but I will start with the first thought which struck me.

In the light (sorry) of what was said about Newton on the documentary mentioned above, I immediately thought of Saruman and that rather enigmatic passage during The Council of Elrond where Saruman and Gandalf have their philosophical confrontation.

…For I am Saruman, the Wise, Saruman Ring-maker, Saruman of Many Colours!"

'I looked then and saw that his robes, which had seemed white, were not so, but were woven of all colours, and if he moved they shimmered and changed hue so that the eye was bewildered.

'"I liked white better," I said.

'"White!" he sneered. "It serves as a beginning. White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten; and the white light can be broken."

'"In which case it is no longer white," said I. "And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom."

In view of what I have just learned about Newton, I am now reading this with great interest. Tolkien is at the very least using those experiments as a metaphor here, perhaps one that is lost on most people. It is as though Saruman’s Light is being viewed by Gandalf through a prism.

But what has slightly worried me is that on the surface level it appears that Gandalf is saying that it is wrong to attempt such experiments as those which Newton carried out, and I’m not sure I entirely like that, as I do not necessarily view scientific knowledge as an obstacle to belief or faith.

Saruman (Newton) says that all colours are contained within the white Light, and that this very Light can be broken. Gandalf’s reply is that he is wrong, both morally, in attempting such an experiment, and scientifically, in that how can white be white if it is composed of other colours. What troubles me here is whether Tolkien himself is saying such a thing is wrong or if he is saying that it is wrong in the context of Middle Earth and the Divinity of Light there.

So, there’s a starter for ten on the significance of Light. Hopefully other ‘Downers are as interested in solving this mystery of Light as I am! Do you think I have interpreted this enigmatic passage about Saruman correctly or do you have another view? What other interesting references to Light are there? And finally, what is this thing about Light?



A few threads which I found to be relevant to this issue:

The Light in Frodo’s Face
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...ight+spiritual

The Phial of Galadriel
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...light+symbolic

CbC – Book 3, Chapter 2
http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthr...089#post363089

The link to a feature about the documentary I saw:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documen...es/light.shtml

Information about Newton:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/histori...on_isaac.shtml

[Estelyn Telcontar]

An excellent topic, Lalwendë! That reference to broken light of many colours has bothered me as well, since I love prisms and rainbows and think of the many colours contained in light as a positive thing. I'll be thinking about this in hopes of being able to contribute something worthwhile to the discussion!

[Guinevere]

Interesting ideas!
I have no explanation to contribute, only that I remember that in his poem "Mythopoeia" Tolkien is also using the "broken light" as a metapher, this time of Man's imagination, and in a positive sense:

man, subcreator, the refracted light
through whom is splintered from a single white
to many hues, and endlessly combined
in living shapes that move from mind to mind.

[Rimbaud]

Lal - I think I read this scene in a different fashion to you. For me, the conversation about colours is a superficial symbolism, the whole of the import hinging actually on the aphorism "and he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom".

This is not so much about white being 'good' and other colours being 'lesser', although that is the surface meaning - and little do you need telling why it would be read so. Neither do I think this is a comment on the appliance of science, which through the very deconstruction of perceived ideas, 'breaks things to see how they work'. Rather, I think this is about changing what is pure to suit your own ends, and thusly making that which was pure impure in turn.

That is to say: Saruman believes that the constituent parts of colour, of light itself, were greater than the whole. However, Gandalf argues that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in creation.

[Aiwendil]

I think that Rimbaud is correct; the discussion of light here is entirely metaphoric. However, the analogy with science is not wholly out of place. Science itself is not evil. But Gandalf tells us exactly how Saruman left the path of wisdom: he broke something to find out what it was. Gandalf's injunction can hardly be applied to Newton, whose experiment was quite innocent. But to actually break something, to destroy it, in order to learn about it - to trade the thing itself for knowledge of the thing - that is folly. The pursuit of knowledge is not at fault, but the pursuit of knowledge at the expense of the world is.

[Lalwendë]

There's plenty of food for thought already here, excellent!

Now, if the use of the breaking of light into many colours is indeed metaphorical, then why did Tolkien choose this metaphor? Did he himself disagree with what Newton did? Did he see it as wrong in some way? I'm asking these questions from the angle that Tolkien was a Catholic, and clearly Light as a concept would have been important to him. Throughout his work I keep coming across Light as a concept of Divinity or purity.

What is troubling me is that according to Newton, white light is not pure, it is the sum of the coloured light. And in effect, Newton did break the light to discover its properties. Yet Tolkien uses white Light as a symbol of purity and says that Light should not be broken. And the fact that he also used this metaphor in Mythopoeia would suggest it is a scientific theory he was well aware of.

[drigel]

i see the interesting angle as:

Saurman starts (and was sent forth originally) as white. He "constructs" the prism that breaks his white to many colors. Its still starts white, but to the physical world it has been broken up in to different colors. I wonder if there is a metaphysical symbol here as well.

[davem]

I think the best starting point is Flieger's Splintered Light. the Light begins as a single pure source of life & holiness - the Secret Fire. It appears first in Arda in the Lamps which Melkor breaks. Its next appearance is in the Trees, but there it is not the pure, single, unwavering light of the Lamps, it is now twofold, Gold & Silver & more imporatantly it fluctuates. When the Trees are killed, it survives in threefold form, in the Silmarils, & in the Sun & Moon. So, as Flieger points out, we have an increasing fragmentation, a splintering, of the Light.

Language comes into the equation also - the High Elves, the Calaquendi (lit Cal = Light & Quendi = speakers) speak the langauge of Light, while the Moriquendi speak the language of the Darkness. On the Noldor's return to Middle earth Thingol forbids the use of Quenya & demands that the exiles speak Sindarin. So, the splintering & subsequent lessening of the Light brings about a kind of linguistic devolution. There's a movement from the pure Light towards the darkness due to this fragmentation, & an equal linguistic movement from Quenya to the Black Speech, a language in which all 'light' & beauty is absent.

I think the Breaking of the White Light is to be understood in theological rather than scientific terms.

My own feeling is that the argument between Gandalf & Saruman is the argument between theology & science. Saruman is a 'scientist' & thinks of light as a physical phenomenon, a thing which can be broken up into its constituent elements, while Gandalf is a 'theologian' & thinks of Light not as photons but as the physical manifestation of the Secret Fire, the Holy Spirit of Eru. In other words Gandalf has retained his 'spiritual vision' - he remembers the Music - while Saruman has become lost in a materialistic worldview. In short, there is light & there is Light. Saruman's breaking of the white light is wrong in Gandalf's eyes because Saruman is following the path of Melkor, & exacerbating the shattering of Arda which Melkor began.

Everything is becoming 'dark'. Its interesting that Gandalf claims to be a servant of the Secret Fire, while Saruman is clearly attempting to become its master. He is attempting to manipulate it to serve his own ends. Gandalf is attempting to get Saruman to understand his 'sin', because Saruman (he hopes, I suppose) doesn't actually understand what he is really doing. The Light is Holy in Middle earth, because it is the Light of God. IF we could run the story of Middle earth backwards we'd see a movement towards greater & greater Light, culminating ultimately in Eru Himself. What we actually see is a movement away from the Light, through increasing fragmentation, towards darkness - not simply an absence of Light, but its opposite, its negation, symbolised in creatures like the Nazgul - & set forth in the confrontation between them, nine fragments of 'nothingness' & the Light symbolised by Glorfindel who drives them back with a combination of the Light of Aman in his face & the Light's physical manifestation - fire. There is no symbolic difference between mundane fire & the Secret Fire in this sense - & that's why the Nazgul fear fire - in Middle earth the most mundane things can be 'holy' or unholy - & this is what Saruman has either forgotten or is denying.