Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
03-08-2007, 07:56 AM | #1 |
Pittodrie Poltergeist
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: trying to find that warm and winding lane again
Posts: 633
|
Fair Fight
Skimming through my newly aquired copy of Morgoth's Ring, I noticed in the Annals of Aman, that because there was only one of Melkor against the many of the Valar, they sent forth Tulkas alone to fight Melkor. This seems a stupid bit of chivalry when the fate of Arda is at stake. What would have have happened if Melkor had defeated Tulkas? Would Orome or someone else fought then? Would the Valar have formed an orderly queue waiting for their chance to fight? The Valar completly lost their advantage of being many against one.
SImilar idiocy is shown by Sauron when he sends his wolves one by one to get killed by that mangy mutt of the Valar. Is this the same chivalry shown in this instance? I doubt it because Sauron was the master of treachery but maybe he still followed the Valar's equivalent of the samurai code or something
__________________
As Beren looked into her eyes within the shadows of her hair, The trembling starlight of the skies he saw there mirrored shimmering. Last edited by hewhoarisesinmight; 03-08-2007 at 02:12 PM. |
03-08-2007, 08:28 AM | #2 |
Guard of the Citadel
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oxon
Posts: 2,205
|
Sauron knew that Huan would anyway kill the wolves since I believe he knew about the prophecy. He expected that he would be the greatest wolf of all times in his wolf form, however that "honor" belonged to Draugluin.
As for the Valar...I am not sure what to say I guess many of their deeds seem idiocy, but at a closer look show much wisdom from them. Of course many led to the deaths of thousands, but as long as it was fair it seems the Valar had no problem with it. I personally also don't like their ideas, but I guess it is hard as lesser beings to understand how a spirit of their level would handle.
__________________
“The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.”
Delos B. McKown |
03-08-2007, 08:34 AM | #3 |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,996
|
rattling teeth
Before throwing about words such as 'idiocy' perhaps we should read Tolkien's own words on the subject of heroic versus chivalric behaviour. They are available in his essay The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth, Beorhthelm's Son, especially in the section discussing the Old English word ofermod.
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
03-08-2007, 09:12 AM | #4 |
Eagle of the Star
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sarmisegethuza
Posts: 1,058
|
It is worth mentioning that in the Converse of Manwe and Eru, also found in HoME X, it is stated Eru was active on the part of the good guys regading this war: "Eru would not have permitted Melkor so greatly to damage Arda that the Children could not come, or could not inhabit it ".
__________________
"May the wicked become good. May the good obtain peace. May the peaceful be freed from bonds. May the freed set others free." |
03-08-2007, 09:29 AM | #5 | |
Laconic Loreman
|
Thanks for bringing ofermod up Bethberry; I would never have thought about that if it wasn't for you.
To give a little background to the word ofermod here, it's like an excessive pride (to the point of arrogance or foolhardiness). Several of Tolkien's characters demonstrate ofermod (Denethor, Boromir, Sauron to name some off the top of my head). Pride, spirit, and confidence are good things to have, but too much could be your own downfall. Our very own Lalwende brought this up to my attention (thanks Lal) : Quote:
And thanks Bethberry, I think you're definitely on to something with the word ofermod. Though, as far as I know, that word never appears in Middle-earth related texts...it's still quite clear that Tolkien uses heroism, chivalry, excessive pride, throughout the Lord of the Rings. And we can see it in his characters like Sauron, Denethor, Boromir, Saruman (and probably more that aren't coming to my mind right now).
__________________
Fenris Penguin
|
|
03-08-2007, 10:49 AM | #6 |
Haunting Spirit
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 78
|
Hmmm, it may be interesting to note that the word ofermod sounds very similar to the Dutch word overmoed, which in modern Dutch has the same meaning Tolkien ascribed to ofermod. It seems quite likely that the professor was right on this one.
__________________
'I am the Elder king: Melkor, first and mightiest of all the Valar, who was before the world, and made it. The shadow of my purpose lies upon Arda, and all that is in it bends slowly and surely to my will.' |
03-08-2007, 10:52 AM | #7 |
Cryptic Aura
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 5,996
|
What I find interesting about Tolkien's discussion, Boro88, is his contrast between chivalry (and a related excess of selfish pride) and heroism. He seems to be suggesting a difference between the Old English heroic epics and the Middle Ages' chivalric literature. And Tolkien adds in not only the psychology of the individual warrior, but also the status of the men 'above' and 'below' the leader: how much does a warrior hero owe to his tribe and the men who fight with him? The knights of the Round Table, to my recollection (and it's been some years since I read the various versions of Arthur), aren't beholdin' to a social group, but to themselves, as much as they are knights of Camelot. They are individualists.
This point of Tolkien's seems appicable to the initial post of hwaim where he points out that the fate of Arda is at stake. EDIT: ofermod is a well discussed word in OE studies, and its meaning highly contested. We should get Squatter in on this, as possibly he is the most recent student of OE on this forum.
__________________
I’ll sing his roots off. I’ll sing a wind up and blow leaf and branch away. |
03-08-2007, 01:29 PM | #8 |
Spectre of Capitalism
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Battling evil bureaucrats at Zeta Aquilae
Posts: 987
|
For some reason I am reminded of the 80's made-for-TV version of The Scarlet Pimpernel, in which Monsieur Chauvelin (played by a much-younger but still-estimable Ian McKellen), held defeated at swordpoint by an ever-so-British Sir Percy Blakeney, mocks the mercy of his opponent (who lets him live to return to humiliation by his superiors) by saying, "Oh, you British and your stupid sense of fair play..."
__________________
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. ~~ Marcus Aurelius |
03-08-2007, 03:31 PM | #9 | |||||||
Spectre of Decay
|
Ofer the top again
EDIT: Cross-posted with half the forum
Quote:
Some of you may recall Joy's thread about The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth [1], in which I made one or two points about Tolkien's views on the subject and related them to The Silmarillion. In that post I accepted Tolkien's opinions about what ofermod means, partly because that clarified some of the actions of his characters and partly because I'm still not qualified to argue with him about linguistic matters. However, I do know of some people who are so qualified, and I happen to have some photocopies of their opinions on the subject left over from my course. Tolkien's is neither a generally accepted one nor is it immune from criticism. He does not even identify all of the occurrences of ofermod in the Old English corpus, but semantics are on his side. In the world of Anglo-Saxon literary studies, ofermod has been overdone. Since Tolkien's article was printed, a bewildering number of distinguished Anglo-Saxonists have published their opinions on the disputed lines 84-90 of The Battle of Maldon; yet still no definitive conclusion has been reached as to whether the word is meant to imply overweening pride, overconfidence, high-spiritedness or great courage. Helmut Gneuss [2] identifies five distinct meaning groups for the word as given by past reviewers and editors: Quote:
Armed with Schabram, Gneuss informs us that there are four occurrences of ofermod in Old English, and that in all cases other than Maldon they translate the Latin word superbia. To take but two examples, in Genesis B, Lucifer is se engel ofermodes (the angel of pride) and in Instructions for Christians, the phrase from Maldon is even repeated: Quote:
Quote:
Short time means that I must skip Gneuss' examination of Germanic cognate words and go straight to his conclusions: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
-- [1] I should note here that Tolkien has used an archaic spelling; the rest of the world refers to the Ealdorman at Maldon as 'Byrhtnoth', as in the manuscript. [2] Helmut Gneuss, 'The Battle of Maldon 89: Byrhtnoð's ofermod once again'. Studies in Philology LXXIII.2 (April 1976), 117-37. [3] Hans Schabram, Superbia. Studien zum altenglischen Wortschatz. Teil I: Die dialektale und zeitliche Verbreitung des Wortguts (München, 1965). [4]Old Saxon ('v' for crossed 'b') ovarmôd, ovarmôdig: 'proud, superbus'; Old High German ubermuot, ubermuatí and derivatives: 'pride, proud'. But this may mean superbia through semantic borrowing, returning to its original meaning in Middle High German (Werner Betz, Deutsch und Lateinisch. Die Lehnbildungen der althochdeutschen Benediktinerregel (Bonn, 1949). [5] Paul Cavill, 'Interpretation of The Battle of Maldon, Lines 84-90: A Review and Reassessment', Studia Neophilologica 67 (1995), 149-64
__________________
Man kenuva métim' andúne? Last edited by The Squatter of Amon Rûdh; 03-08-2007 at 03:33 PM. Reason: Putting this post in context |
|||||||
03-08-2007, 02:19 PM | #10 | |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17
|
Quote:
I'm just curious why Tolkien makes it a point to repeatedly state how powerful Melkor is. I don't think we ever see clear examples of why he's so powerful. |
|
03-08-2007, 02:21 PM | #11 |
Pittodrie Poltergeist
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: trying to find that warm and winding lane again
Posts: 633
|
Doesn't he spend all his power making dragons and the like? I think Tolkien is trying to show that the evil squander their power.
__________________
As Beren looked into her eyes within the shadows of her hair, The trembling starlight of the skies he saw there mirrored shimmering. |
03-08-2007, 02:27 PM | #12 |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17
|
Maybe you're right. I don't have the Sil in front of me now, but I remember when Feanor slams his door in Melkor's face in Valinor that Tolkien said something like "he slammed his door on the most powerful resident of Valinor". Had Melkor made the dragons at that point? I forget
|
03-08-2007, 02:50 PM | #13 |
Guard of the Citadel
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oxon
Posts: 2,205
|
He is the most powerful overall.
Eonwe is the greatest as far as fighting with weapons is concerned. Tulkas is the greatest wrestler. But Melkor was the greatest of all. But you are right, by using his powers to corrupt and for other evil purposes he did lose certain powers, for example he was no longer able to change his form and was "stuck" in the shape of an evil lord.
__________________
“The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike.”
Delos B. McKown |
03-08-2007, 02:52 PM | #14 |
Pittodrie Poltergeist
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: trying to find that warm and winding lane again
Posts: 633
|
Here's another side track, if Eonwe is the best at weapons then wouldn't he beat his master Manwe because in the Annals of Aman it says that Manwe has a sword
__________________
As Beren looked into her eyes within the shadows of her hair, The trembling starlight of the skies he saw there mirrored shimmering. |
03-08-2007, 03:07 PM | #15 | |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17
|
Quote:
1) wage war successfully 2) be successful in personal combat 3) create/shape the world Melkor seems to be inadequate in all these things. He loses many, many wars in the Sil. He loses a fight to Tulkas, and makes a seemingly poor showing against Fingolfin, though he does eventually win. And as I remember, he never really took part in creating the world, since he was off in the void searching for the flame while the other Valar were creating the earth. So what has Melkor ever done to deserve the title of "most powerful Valar"? |
|
03-08-2007, 03:08 PM | #16 | ||
Laconic Loreman
|
As hewhoarisesinmight mentions, Morgoth squandered a lot of his power into Arda so he could twist, manipulate, and do what he wanted to it. As is noted in The Silmarillion:
Quote:
Also, we must look at wording that's used. Tolkien uses 'greatest,' 'mightiest,' 'most powerful,' frequently and you kind of wonder well what does that mean? Melkor being called the 'mightiest' or 'greatest' Vala doesn't mean he is unstoppable and the best at every single attribute. But taking Melkor as a whole he was the 'mightiest.' Let's look at Tulkas: Quote:
Being the 'strongest' and taking delight in 'wrestling' it comes as no surprise that he was able to beat Melkor in a wrestling contest. Morgoth was 'great' in several traits (which is probably why in the beginning he was the 'mightiest')...Tulkas was the best at one thing (strength) so in a deeds of strength he was able to beat Melkor. I'm sorry if that's a bit confusing, it's hard for me to get out what I'm trying to say. But try this real-life example if I was too jumbled (I hope your familiar with baseball?): The best pitcher in baseball is Roger Clemens (I know when we're dealing with this stuff it's debateable, but just bare with me here). Roger Clemens abilities overall and what he's done throughout his career I believe he is the best pitcher. Joel Zumaya can throw the fastest fastball (he can get into the mid 100's). Taking this example, eventhough if Clemens is by far the more accomplished and better pitcher...does this mean that if it was a contest of who can throw the fastest that Roger Clemens would beat Joel Zumaya (and everyone else)? No, because Zumaya can throw faster (and indeed he can throw the fastest)...but overall Clemens is a much better pitcher. Tulkas beat Melkor, because strength and wrestling were Tulkas' specialties but this doesn't make Tulkas the 'greatest' of the Valar. I hope that helps get across my point a bit more.
__________________
Fenris Penguin
|
||
|
|