Evil things

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

OK, so bodies do not have a choice in their motions. so that analogy is flawed. But I was trying to refute this:

Men's different freedom is mainly expressed in a way they die.

Yes, Men are given the choice to leave the World, but in it they can also change the Music within the World.

...to shape [the Atani's] life, amid the powers and chances of the world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is fate to all things else.

(The Silmarillion 1 - emphasis mine)

"of the world" is included in the same sentence as "beyond the Music of the Ainur." It just tells me that while in the world, Men have freedom of choice - within Eru's bounds, that is -, no matter where the Music seems to push them.

"Beyond the Music" in a quote provided indicates exactly what it does - that Men leave the World after they die,

This tells me that you think the World is the Music. I think the World, and everything that happens in it, is the result of the Music. Therefore, "beyond the Music" doesn't necessarily imply "beyond the World."

Must leave now - only working on a rented computer. And I'm running out of cash.

[HerenIstarion]

This tells me that you think the World is the Music

More or less so. I'd say I think the Music is pattern World is fitted into. Why it can not be merely it's result, is absence of time as we know it in the Halls of Eru. In a sense, therefore, Music is never ceased. So to say, the world is like train moving on rails, with elves having tickets on to the terminal station while Men keep jumping out of windows now and again. (or, in more civilized mental picture, having tickets on to intermediary stations). Music is rails.

what is evil? whose to say what is evil and what is not? is it evil to just be who you were born to be? look at gollum. before he found the ring he wasn't evil, he was malicious, but not evil. so are the maira evil?

[Nirvana II]

but where in Ainulindale does it say that things can't be Evil???i mean, it doesnt say that things should be evil, nor does it say that they cant.......hurgh.......just more freedom.........

[Nirvana II]

and no Sauron's Eye not all Maiar are evil....look at Gandalf....the Maia Olorin.........wisest of them all......

[davem]

Ok Heren, (if Ithat's not overly familiar )

Responses:
1:Elves and Men are in themselves the change in Music. The mere fact of their existence is change in itself.

(response)I wouldn't call them 'changes in the Music' as at the point they appeared the Music was still coming into being - so the Children are no more 'changes' than anything else in the Music. the kind of changes I'm talking about are changes that occur in Arda, after the Creation.

2. There is no textual evidence of conscious distinction made by Elves (like, hey, this oboe theme is more to my taste than that fiddle, let us follow it). They make their decisions according to their own wisdom, which is measured against standards equal for both Men and Elves. (see quote above)

3. There is no textual evidence of Valar conscious distinction after the Music is over. It is stated they 'just' sang along, and only after the were shown the vision, with a kind of an eye-opener the knew what they were singing was the World. Afterwards, they, just as elves and men, act according to their own wisdom (for instance, when Aule makes dwarves, or when Iavanna asks for Ents, realisation of "it must have been part of my song all along" comes only after the deed itself)

(r)(Taken together)

These distinctions would not have to be 'conscious' in any way, we would be talking about something along the lines of Jung's archetypes - pre-existing patterns of thought & behaviour, which would push the beings one way or the other in an attempt to bring into manifestation the themes of the Music. They would all, Valar, Maiar & Elves have a degree of freedom of thought & action in trying to manifest those unconscious themes. But they are not attempting to manifest any new themes, merely to actualise the ones already sung in eternity.

4. There is no textual evidence of conscious distinction by Men, or aknowledging something like "oh, some drum solo would suit in this score nicely", they equally act according to their own wisdom

(r)Of course, but they are not bound by the Themes already sung, so there is a degree of freedom of action for them which the other races do not posess. To quote from Flieger (Splintered Light p52) 'Beyond this 'gift' (ie Death) Tolkien through his God figure has conferred another power on Mankind: the virtue to 'shape their life' beyond the creational design of the Music 'which is as fate to all things else'. In bestowing this capability on mortals while withholding it from the immortal Elves, Tolkien has deliberately introduced a paradox, a world guided by both fate & free will, thus increasing the tension inherent in intersecting lives & their possible effect on one another & on events...A possible distinction between them (Elves & Men) may be that Men are given the power to act beyond the Music (that is, to alter external events or circumstances), while Elves, though bound by the Music, have the freedom to make internal choices, to alter some attitude toward themselves of other creatures of Eru. They may have power over their own natures, though not over external happenings.'

6. It is stated that Man and Elves are brethren, (even bodily the same, so the intercourse brings children), the only difference is made by Gift of Eru - i.e. Death, which frees Men from the confines of the world. i.e, inverting the statement, while they are alive, they are equally bound by confines of the world as elves are

(r)No, its clearly stated that Men have the freedom to act outside the Music, 'which is as fate to all things else' as well as the gift of Death.

7. Eru is stated to be the cause, and all else consequence. In case Men were able of bringing new things into being, the maxim is inverted (for instance, in case of Numenor), and Men are cause and Eru consequence, which is likewise never backed up by textual evidence (and, as far as my judgement reaches, impossible to be put into "consciously so [Christian- H-I] in the revision" piece of work

(r)Not at all. Eru has final say in any changes men attempt to initiate. "None may change the Music in his despite'', but he will permit change in certain circumstances, & so is always in control. In a sense men's choices are like 'offerings' to Eru, to be accepted or rejected - & this would still be the case even if Eru from his position 'outside' time, in Eternity, already knew what men would offer & what his decision would be. His omniscience does not negate men's freedom - knowledge is not control or power. Eru may know what will happen, & what men will 'offer' him, but he's not making those things happen, merely observing that they happen, & then making a decision on whether to accept them or not. So, both Eru & Men are free agents.

On to Magic

1. It is stated the all matter is Arda is Marred, for Morgoth have put forward part of his will into it. Therefore, all the incarnates have their Nature tainted from the very beginning of their existence

(r) I wouldn't agree - their hroa may be marred, but their fea is not, as it is not of the matter of Arda, but proceeds from Eru, & we can't find any evidence that Morgoth infected or corrupted the nature of Eru.

2. Both kindreds of Children (Elves and Man) have committed Original Sin in the dawn of their history, which affected their Nature in the drastic way making it even less perfect to start with then it would have been if merely tainted by Morgoth element in its matter

(r) I think 'original sin' is misleading, in that neither race 'originally' defied Eru or went against any commandment of his. Some defied the Valar(Elves), or turned to Morgoth (Men), but this is not the case for all members of either race, unlike with Adam & Eve, whose 'sin' is passed down to all their decendents. Those who did 'sin' were certainly affected in a profound way, but this does not make them corrupt, as they can still choose between the themes (Elves), or make moral choices & perform moral actions (Men). The Morgoth 'element does not corrupt their essential spiritual nature, which originates with Eru, & is therefore incorruptible by any outside force - though the individual may corrupt themselves.

3. If by Nature you meant their souls only, it is to be added that both elves and men percieved their true nature as union of the two (body (hroa) and soul (fëa)), and the body is not perfect to begin with


(r)But the Hroa is neither rational nor intelligent, & is directed by the Fea.

4 Not incarnate beings (such as Valar and Maiar), which do not have tainted bodies to begin with, so, it is to be assumed, their nature is perfect, are capable of becoming Evil. If their Nature be dominant factor of their actions, that would have been impossible. Therefore, again, what defines the being as good or evil, is its actions as measured agains standard of Good and Evil (given by Eru), and such a measurement is not nature in itself, but act of will.

(r) no, because the contending themes within the Music pre-exist the manifestation of Arda, so each being, incarnate or not, divine or not, can choose which themes to attempt to actualise within Arda. They choose, but except for men, they cannot change or 'offer' up new possibilities.

[HerenIstarion]

edit: I've found myself unable to post the whole of my reply in one go (seemingly, it was too long, and I was getting error message of a kind). Therefore, it will be split into parts.

*************************

It is perfectly allright to call me H-I if you please

Now to more important matters: (and I believe we may be reaching some kind of consensus one of these days )

What do we define as change, after all?

Main Entry: 2change
Function: noun
1 : the act, process, or result of changing : as a : ALTERATION <a change in the weather> b : TRANSFORMATION <a time of vast social change> <going through changes>c : SUBSTITUTION <a change of scenery>

Such a thing may be possible only if passage of time is involved. That's why I was pointing at the change as 'in the eye of the beholder'. And that's why I totally agree with you on one point at least:

His omniscience does not negate men's freedom - knowledge is not control or power. Eru may know what will happen, & what men will 'offer' him, but he's not making those things happen, merely observing that they happen

Exactly. Total agreement here. That what I've been trying to bring across with all them ropes, ants and lumps of sugar back on preceeding pages of the thread.

but:

& then making a decision on whether to accept them or not

I can not accept, as then in a sentence given indicates passage of Time for Eru too, makes Him subject to change in a same sense as Children are.

What I've tried to indicate, is that change as percieved by elves or men is only a change in their point of view, as they are inside time, and passage of time in itself meaning change, but for Eru, it is what was meant to be, so to say, part of the original plan.

I wouldn't call them [elves and men] 'changes in the Music' as at the point they appeared the Music was still coming into being

Well, I would. Two points here:

1. I see the "was still coming into being", as implying passage of time for Halls of Eru. Eru, as it is, and his Halls, are outside time. For all we know, Music may be there still (and 'still' here does not reflect actual passage of time, but is used for the lack of better word). The history of the world and completetion of the Music, though, of course, the latter being the cause for the first, are not linked in a temporal way. So to say, I do not hold that first was Music, than it was over, and World began. It may be so, of course, but for all we know, it may be not, and those Ainur who were left behind and did not become Valar may be still singing it. Again, "still" used for the lack of better word.

2. Again, change is in the eye of the beholder. The Children were change of Music as seen by Ainur who were singing. Ainur ahve been given theme to sing, and than Eru introduced new theme, which looked as the change of actual score for everybody besides Eru, for whom it was part of original plan (that's omniscience for you)

Further on:

These distinctions would not have to be 'conscious' in any way, we would be talking about something along the lines of Jung's archetypes - pre-existing patterns of thought & behaviour, which would push the beings one way or the other in an attempt to bring into manifestation the themes of the Music. They would all, Valar, Maiar & Elves have a degree of freedom of thought & action in trying to manifest those unconscious themes. But they are not attempting to manifest any new themes, merely to actualise the ones already sung in eternity.
...
Of course, but they [Men] are not bound by the Themes already sung, so there is a degree of freedom of action for them which the other races do not posess

Well, well, Jung was a man of choice for Tolkien at his time among Jung's peers. I can well agree with the first part of it, but where we seem to be at variance (me at one side and you and Mr. Flieger on another), is the second part (concerning mortals)

I hold it as anything really new, original, can be brought by Eru, and Eru only. When I say by Eru, I do not necessarily mean by Him in person (so noneed for the spade), but through agents (elves and men and valar, and natural processes, such as tides). So, men are subject to same conditions whilst actually living their lives on earth, as elves are. After all, the Fate of the Noldor is mainly determined by the bloodshed they caused and by Curse of Mandos. Both elves and men are Children of Eru, so the kind of freedom they have is the same - to accept or disobey Eru. The main difference comes with the Death - Men are free to leave the world, while elves are bound to return to it even when their bodies are destroyed.

So the actual ground for [alleged] envy on behalf of elves and valar is the certainty that Men are not bound by the history of the world, whilst what fate awaits Eldar when the world comes to an end, is unknown. (About elven hope of it see quote (form AFAA) provided by me on the page 1 of the current thread)

The "shape their fate beyond" quotation, for me means that shaping takes place after actual death. So, they [mortals], though having 'a degree of freedom of action for them which the other races do not posess' also are not bringing new things of themselves, but actualising what was sung in the Music. Or, rather, what was brought into the Music directly by Eru, and not meditated by the Valar.

So, as a conclusion,I hold that the true freedom for all of them (maiar, elves, men) is the freedom of choice, not the freedom to give being to something new and than for that new to be accepted by Eru. After all, "freedom to leave" for men is to the big extent "freedom as compared to what happens to elves". No man was ever able to postpone his own death, so their true death is the same destiny for them as [temporal, while the world lasts] immortality is for the elves. So, though the statement does not eliminate freedom at all, Men are nevertheless destined too:

From Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth

This much only can I say: that among
us some hold that our [mortals - H-I] errand here was to heal the Marring of Arda, and by making the hroa partake in the life of the fea to put it beyond
any marring of Melkor or any other spirit of malice for ever. But
that "Arda Healed" (or Remade) shall not be "Arda Unmarred",
but a third thing and a greater. And that third thing maybe is in the
mind of Eru, and is in his answer. You have spoken to me of the
Music and you have conversed with the Valar who were present at
its making ere the world began. Did they hear the end of the Music?
Or was there not something beyond the final chords of Eru, which
(being overwhelmed thereby) the Valar did not hear? Or again
maybe, since Eru is for ever free, He made no music and showed no
Vision beyond a certain point. Beyond that point (which neither
Valar nor Eldar...) we cannot see or know, until, each by our own
roads, we come there.'

emphasis mine. Well, 'errand' and 'own roads' seem as good definition of destiny as any to me.

Davem
No, its clearly stated that Men have the freedom to act outside the Music, 'which is as fate to all things else' as well as the gift of Death

That being the point at which we seem to vary. I hold it that 'as well as' there reflects the truth better if substituted with 'by'

So, both Eru & Men are free agents.

Eru certainly is. Men are up to a point

Atrhabeth finrod ah Andreth, notes

The Eldar held that Eru was and is free at all stages. This
freedom was shown in the Music by His introduction, after the
arising of the discords of Melkor, of the two new themes,
representing the coming of Elves and Men, which were not in
His first communication. He may therefore introduce things directly, which were not in the Music and so are not achieved through the Valar. It remains, nonetheless, true in general to regard Ea as achieved through their mediation.
The additions of Eru, however, will not be 'alien'; they will be
accommodated to the nature and character of Ea and of those
that dwell in it; they may enhance the past and enrich its
purpose and significance, but they will contain it and not
destroy it.
Thus the 'newness' of the themes of the Children of Eru, Elves
and Men, consisted in the association of fear with, or 'housing'
them in, hroar belonging to Ea, in such a way that either were
incomplete without the others. But the fear were not spirits of a
wholly different kind to the Ainur; whereas the bodies were of
a kind closely akin to the bodies of living things already in the
primary design (even if adapted to their new function, or
modified by the indwelling fear)

And with this quote we gently move on to magic:

davem

I wouldn't agree - their hroa may be marred, but their fea is not, as it is not of the matter of Arda, but proceeds from Eru

Yes. But hroa and fea are integrated and affect each other. So, tainted hroa has its effects on fea, and vice versa - wicked fea has effects on the hroa it indwells. hence ugly Morgoth and Sauron, and change of Frodo's looks etc

[HerenIstarion]

Original Sin re:

davem

I think 'original sin' is misleading, in that neither race 'originally' defied Eru or went against any commandment of his. Some defied the Valar(Elves), or turned to Morgoth (Men), but this is not the case for all members of either race, unlike with Adam & Eve, whose 'sin' is passed down to all their decendents

Men did. Exactly like Adam & Eve, and the sin is passed down to all their decendants. It would be proper to give story in full, I reckon:

AFAA

'Therefore I say to you, Andreth, what did ye do, ye Men,
long ago in the dark? How did ye anger Eru? For otherwise all
your tales are but dark dreams devised in a Dark Mind. Will
you say what you know or have heard?'
'I will not,' said Andreth. 'We do nor speak of this to those of
other race. But indeed the Wise are uncertain and speak with
contrary voices; for whatever happened long ago, we have fled
from it; we have tried to forget, and so long have we tried that
now we cannot remember any time when we were not as we are
- save only legends of days when death came less swiftly and
our span was still far longer, but already there was death.
...

Then Andreth being urged by Finrod said at last: 'This is the tale
that Adanel of the House of Hador told to me.'

Some say the Disaster happened at the beginning of the
history of our people, before any had yet died. The Voice had
spoken to us, and we had listened. The Voice said: 'Ye are my
children. I have sent you to dwell here. In time ye will inherit all
this Earth, but first ye must be children and learn. Call on me
and I shall hear; for I am watching over you.'
We understood the Voice in our hearts, though we had no
words yet. Then the desire for words awoke in us, and we began
to make them. But we were few, and the world was wide and
strange. Though we greatly desired to understand, learning was
difficult, and the making of words was slow.
In that time we called often and the Voice answered. But it
seldom answered our questions, saying only: 'First seek to find
the answer for yourselves. For ye will have joy in the finding,
and so grow from childhood and become wise. Do not seek to
leave childhood before your time.'
But we were in haste, and we desired to order things to our
will; and the shapes of many things that we wished to make
awoke in our minds. Therefore we spoke less and less to the
Voice.
Then one appeared among us, in our own form visible, but
greater and more beautiful; and he said that he had come out of
pity. 'Ye should not have been left alone and uninstructed,' he
said. 'The world is full of marvellous riches which knowledge
can unlock. Ye could have food more abundant and more
delicious than the poor things that ye now eat. Ye could have
dwellings of ease, in which ye could keep light and shut out the
night. Ye could be clad even as I.'
Then we looked and lo! he was clad in raiment that shone like
silver and gold, and he had a crown on his head, and gems in his
hair. 'If ye wish to be like me,' he said, 'I will teach you.' Then
we took him as teacher.
He was less swift than we had hoped to teach us how to find,
or to make for ourselves, the things that we desired, though he
had awakened many desires in our hearts. But if any doubted or
were impatient, he would bring and set before us all that we
wished for. 'I am the Giver of Gifts,' he said; 'and the gifts shall
never fail as long as ye trust me.'
Therefore we revered him, and we were enthralled by him;
and we depended upon his gifts, fearing to return to a life
without them that now seemed poor and hard. And we believed
all that he taught. For we were eager to know about the world
and its being: about the beasts and birds, and the plants that
grew in the Earth; about our own making; and about the lights
of heaven, and the countless stars, and the Dark in which they
are set.
All that he taught seemed good, for he had great knowledge.
But ever more and more he would speak of the Dark. 'Greatest
of all is the Dark,' he said, 'for It has no bounds. I came out of
the Dark, but I am Its master. For I have made Light. I made the
Sun and the Moon and the countless stars. I will protect you
from the Dark, which else would devour you.'
Then we spoke of the Voice. But his face became terrible; for
he was angry. 'Fools!' he said. 'That was the Voice of the Dark.
It wishes to keep you from me; for It is hungry for you.'
Then he went away, and we did not see him for a long time, and without his gifts we were poor. And there came a day when
suddenly the Sun's light began to fail, until it was blotted out
and a great shadow fell on the world; and all the beasts and
birds were afraid. Then he came again, walking through the
shadow like a bright fire.
We fell upon our faces. 'There are some among you who are
still listening to the Voice of the Dark,' he said, 'and therefore It
is drawing nearer. Choose now! Ye may have the Dark as Lord,
or ye may have Me. But unless ye take Me for Lord and swear to
serve Me, I shall depart and leave you; for I have other realms
and dwelling places, and I do not need the Earth, nor you.'
Then in fear we spoke as he commanded, saying: 'Thou art
the Lord; Thee only we will serve. The Voice we abjure and will
not hearken to it again.'
'So be it!' he said. 'Now build Me a house upon a high place,
and call it the House of the Lord. Thither I will come when I
will. There ye shall call on Me and make your petitions to Me.'
And when we had built a great house, he came and stood
before the high seat, and the house was lit as with fire. 'Now,' he
said, 'come forth any who still listen to the Voice!'
There were some, but for fear they remained still and said
naught. 'Then bow before Me and acknowledge Me!' he said.
And all bowed to the ground before him, saying: 'Thou art the
One Great, and we are Thine.'
Thereupon he went up as in a great flame and smoke, and we
were scorched by the heat. But suddenly he was gone, and it was
darker than night; and we fled from the House.
Ever after we went in great dread of the Dark; but he seldom
appeared among us again in fair form, and he brought few gifts.
If at great need we dared to go to the House and pray to him to
help us, we heard his voice, and received his commands. But
now he would always command us to do some deed, or to give
him some gift, before he would listen to our prayer; and ever the
deeds became worse, and the gifts harder to give up.
The first Voice we never heard again, save once. In the
stillness of the night It spoke, saying: 'Ye have abjured Me, but
ye remain Mine. I gave you life. Now it shall be shortened, and
each of you in a little while shall come to Me, to learn who is
your Lord: the one ye worship, or I who made him.'
Then our terror of the Dark was increased; for we believed
at the Voice was of the Darkness behind the stars. And some
of us began to die in horror and anguish, fearing to go out into
the Dark. Then we called on our Master to save us from death,
and he did not answer. But when we went to the House and all
bowed down there, at last he came, great and majestic, but his
face was cruel and proud.
'Now ye are Mine and must do My will,' he said. 'I do not
trouble that some of you die and go to appease the hunger of the
Dark; for otherwise there would soon be too many of you,
crawling like lice on the Earth. But if ye do not do My will, ye
will feel My anger, and ye will die sooner, for I will slay you.'
Thereafter we were grievously afflicted, by weariness, and
hunger, and sickness; and the Earth and all things in it were
turned against us. Fire and Water rebelled against us. The birds
and beasts shunned us, or if they were strong they assailed us.
Plants gave us poison; and we feared the shadows under trees.
Then we yearned for our life as it was before our Master
came; and we hated him, but feared him no less than the Dark.
And we did his bidding, and more than his bidding; for
anything that we thought would please him, however evil, we
did, in the hope that he would lighten our afflictions, and at the
least would not slay us.
For most of us this was in vain. But to some he began to show
favour: to the strongest and cruellest, and to those who went
most often to the House. He gave gifts to them, and knowledge
that they kept secret; and they became powerful and proud, and
they enslaved us, so that we had no rest from labour amidst our
afflictions.
Then there arose some among us who said openly in their
despair: 'Now we know at last who lied, and who desired to
devour us. Not the first Voice. It is the Master that we have
taken who is the Darkness; and he did not come forth from it, as
he said, but he dwells in it. We will serve him no longer! He is
our Enemy.'
Then in fear lest he should hear them and punish us all, we
slew them, if we could; and those that fled we hunted; and if any
were caught, our masters, his friends, commanded that they
should be taken to the House and there done to death by fire.
That pleased him greatly, his friends said; and indeed for a
while it seemed that our afflictions were lightened.
But it is told that there were a few that escaped us, and went
away into far countries, fleeing from the shadow. Yet they did
not escape from the anger of the Voice; for they had built the
House and bowed down in it. And they came at last to the
land's end and the shores of the impassable water; and behold!
the Enemy was there before them.

The image of a tree would be proper, I think, When one branch (or the roots themselves) of humanity is (are) infected, the whole tree is ill.

[davem]

Quote:

1. I see the "was still coming into being", as implying passage of time for Halls of Eru. Eru, as it is, and his Halls, are outside time. For all we know, Music may be there still (and 'still' here does not reflect actual passage of time, but is used for the lack of better word). The history of the world and completetion of the Music, though, of course, the latter being the cause for the first, are not linked in a temporal way. So to say, I do not hold that first was Music, than it was over, and World began. It may be so, of course, but for all we know, it may be not, and those Ainur who were left behind and did not become Valar may be still singing it. Again, "still" used for the lack of better word.

There is 'process' - the second theme arises as a direct result of Melkor's changes to the first, & same with the third. If Melkor hadn't introduced the discord, the Music would have continued as Eru first intended. Again, Melkor can change the Music (before 'Ea!), even if Eru knows he will do it, it is still Melkor's choice, & his choice is made as a result of changes he has personally gone through & decisions he has made. Finally Eru stops the Music, & shows the Ainur what it 'looks like'. Before Eru creates the Ainur there is neither time nor process, but once they appear, change begins - whether you want to call it 'time' or not.

The problem I have with the idea of Eru as the only source of real change can be summed up by the question - why bother? If he is simply manipulating events, & the only new things are put there by him, then there is no free will, & no real point. So, we fall back to the Hindu view, & everything is merely the dream of Brahma - or might as well be. I think the point is that not everything original comes from Eru, because we are real, conscious, responsible individuals, who can make choices, initiate events, & be judged not only on our moral choices, but also on our actions. If the Fea arises from Eru, then we are, in a small way, like our 'father' - makers & sub creators. We do have the ability to initiate - even if Eru knows what we will initiate before we do - it is our work, not his, or we might as well not exist.

Our fredom to act independently of the Music, is stated in Ainulindale, & really is the only thing that gives any point to Arda at all. The fact that it is not set, & can be altered - with Eru's agreement, is vital, or it might just as well have remained a heavenly symphony. Why bother doing anything if its all set out & cannot be changed. We would be nothing more than a 'sims' game played by Eru.

I also can't see what point there is in Men having freedom to act beyond the Music when they die - why put men into the world at all if they are only to be a mortal version of Elves, same limitations, only not around so long. The fact that men enter into the world along with the Elves, means they must also have a role within the world, something that they only can do. The very fact that men are driven to change the world, while Elves seem driven to 'perfect & then embalm' it speaks of a different psychological state, a different perception of the world. Men want to change things, build, create, evolve. Elves simply don't & seem mainly concerned with preventing change & stopping time.


As to the Athrabeth - I have to admit to being slightly uncomfortable with aspects of Tolkien's later writings - the ones from the 'Myths Transformed' period, as, for all their profundity, Tolkien seems to be mostly concerned with making his secondary world conform to the Primary one, even at the cost of throwing out some of his greatest creations.

Still, that said, we have to accept what the Athrabeth said. Yet, even so, what Andreth reports is merely 'a tradition', we don't know how old it is, where it arose, or what inspired it. Certainly it doesn't (unless you can find a reference I've forgotten) fit in with the original conception - not in its detail. Men seem originally to have come west seeking the 'Light'. It seems to imply a 'fall' of Mankind as a whole, but I'm not sure it would work, & would possibly cause problems in the whole mythology if accepted as canonical - like so many of his attempted later changes. Certainly, in the original versions, right up to this late period, we don't find a 'Biblical' type fall of a whole race in the legendarium. Falls seem to happen on a small scale - either individuals or groups. Even when he tells Milton Waldman that the 'Fall of Man is in the Background, it doesn't seem to figure or have any real prominence in the early & middle period myths, & one suspects that he said that simply as an acknowledgement that that's what the bible said.

But now I'm way off topic ( & you'll probably find a quote to disprove all that - its 18 months since I read HoME & I expect to be deservedly shown up for my ignorance .

[HerenIstarion]

If the Fea arises from Eru, then we are, in a small way, like our 'father' - makers & sub creators

Well, seemingly, I was putting wrong words around same thought. If we replace "Only real source of new things is Eru", with "Ultimate source of new things is Eru", the picture would be more precise, I believe. (Consensus approaching, beware!) I have never intended it to look like "Brahma Dreaming"
and Sims don't have option of choice, they are guided all through. Let me announce my mild agreement on this (with a remark (is it another part of the same thought expressed in different wording?) that whatever Men may be sub-creating on their own, is lacking real novelty (as it in the case of Aule and fathers of the dwarves,) unless blessed, made alive by Eru). You seem to say the same thing, the difference is in definition - I hold it that, since it requires direct animation by Eru, it makes Him the source of new things by definition, not the actual creature which were engaged in the process of subcreating. But, as I come to think of it now, does not matter how it is described - as done now and than approved (from the point of view of the creature inside time), or known to be going to be presented and approved from the very beginning (as omniscience of Eru makes us suppose), for both are same thing seen from different standing points. Truce here it is, than (more below)


Now for:

why put men into the world at all if they are only to be a mortal version of Elves, same limitations, only not around so long

The errand of Men is stated in AFAA to bring healing of Arda about. That's why elves believe their incurable longing is the effect of comparison they are constantly making of what they see here and now with some, if it may be put so, built-in pattern of "how it should look like"

The brevity of their life span in later works is associated with the Fall (as a race), for "wise among men" hold that in the original design Men were meant for life indestructible - union of fea (of Eru) and hroa (of the matter of Arda) so unbreakable that it would be able to lift, bring up the matter, i.e. thing temporal, to the eternal world of flame imperishable. (elves in this scheme are supposed to function as a kind of memory cells - to remember and remind others of the first world, when the Arda Remade is brought into being) But men are so weakened by their fall that death is given to them as a release (thus Tolkien's conception of Fall and Death as a consequence both differs and calls up at the same time to Christian myth, were death is a punishment, and at the same time, a release). Vague legends of the first men even indicate that Eru Himself may enter Arda one day as an incarnate Human and thus ensure its bringing up (which was originally designed as the task of Men but they are no longer able to perform is as they are consdue to their Fall). Such a legend, when heard of by Finrod, makes his heart 'leap forth with joy', sign held by elves as an indicator of ultimate truth of thing said (even when the hearer lacks knowledge as stored in his brain, such a sudden joy is "of recognition" the heart is able to)

Limitations re:
But limitations are not the same - men go when they die. Where to, following the statement that the whole legendarium is presented as legends of the elves, is not known. But while they are here, the quote of "nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men" implies similar limitations - men and elves are supposed to act alike, modifying their behaviour of any instant according to 'in doubt a man of worth will trust to his own wisdom' - i.e., make a choice. So the true freedom comes down to the choice between given options,(and actions following such a choice, to eliminate possibility of accusations of brahmanism , but the choice comes first - remember Fëanor and his refusal to give up Silmarilli) and is similar in both cases (of elves and men)

Ability of sub-creation is not a sign of freedom, for:
The subcreator is limited by the whole load of drawbacks - his hroa being one and the main of them

Ability of sub-creation is not a sign of special human freedom for:
Dwarves and Elves alike are able of it.

It is rather a sign of a being having a fëa, than.

cheers

[davem]

H-I, I kind of hope we're not reaching a consensus, as I'm enjoying this (I won't speak for anyone else having this inflicted on )

As to Fea & Hroa. The point is, the existence of the Fea is not dependent on the hroa, but the hroa is dependent on the fea. The hroa can die, but the fea does not also die, so fea is dominant - even to the extent that it will eventually burn away the hroa. So, fea can exist without hroa, but hroa cannot exist without fea. Which means that fea, even in elves, is dominant, because it proceeds directly from Eru, which hroa does not. So the being's nature is more truly expressed through Fea rather than hroa, which serves it, rather than being an equal partner.

As to subcreation - why do Elves not invent stories? They seem merely to reiterate the past, & attempt to re-create it - another example of their inability to think & act 'outside the box'? Men can invent stories, sub create 'secondary' worlds which never existed in the 'primary' world - as Tolkien does with ME- which reflects a freedom of thought, & hence of action, which is not found in Elves.

Even if Eru has to make their sub creations 'real, give them form, it doesn't mean he originated them, merely gave them form. The alternative would be to make men a kind of aspect of Eru, Men are the part that think the thoughts & Eru the part that makes them 'real' within Arda.

As I said, the later writings are a problem - in the Athrabeth, the early statement that the fall of man is off stage & in the background is turned on its head, & placed centre stage, & the main reason for Eru's incarnation. We end up with a change from one of Tolkien's primary concepts - Death as a 'gift' becomes death as a 'realease from suffering'.I ts the same with a lot of the stuff in Myths Transformed, which is an attempt to force the Legendarium to fit with modern scientific notions

[HerenIstarion]

Dear davem, I'm as well enjoying this clash, like of which I haven't had for ages, so do not fear the consensus, we can well shift subject once more (which I'm inclined to do right away), as we have already lost titular 'evil things' of the thread someplace around page 2 , unless some board authority feels inclined in his/her turn to close this thread for being completely off topic.

On the other hand, that is one of the outcomes of the debate (and fine by me at that) - new topics arisen to be inflicted upon innocent and unfortunate bystanders in a shape of a protracted discussion. So, my kind sir, let us break some more toothpicks around new subject(s):

As to Fea & Hroa. The point is, the existence of the Fea is not dependent on the hroa, but the hroa is dependent on the fea

Fair enough. And true too. But, nevertheless, it does not mean that hroa is under the complete control of the fëa, even with elves (and in the case of the Maiar - Gandalf, for instance). And for humans that is not the case whatsoever. Ever pondered how much of one's 'harmony with the world' comes as a result of good digestion and a large dinner recently consumed? Besides, the whole novelty of the existence of the Children is stated (see my previous) in union of fea and hroa. The Divine Conception of Children was based on having two in harmony, so you can not have an elf or a human in a form of fëa only - it'd be either a ghost or an apparition of a kind. In later writings you are so unhappy with , it is stated that Men are supposed to lift up their material bodies into eternity of the spirit, as was already said.

Besides, hroa can well exist without fëa (or the kind of fëa we usually mean under the name thereof) - the case being animal originated orks, animals and plants. But that last remark takes root merely in my nastiness, for I understand you were talking about people of free will in the case, so do not pay heed to it

But those were minor points. Main clasp still to come:

Subcreation re:

As to subcreation - why do Elves not invent stories? They seem merely to reiterate the past, & attempt to re-create it

Several weak points in your argument, as far as I'm any judge (or why do I believe the ability of subcreation is expressed equally in all Children of Eru, even in those of adoption - i.e. dwarves):

1. Where is it stated that ability of sub-creation has to be expressed mainly as an art of literature? Music is better example, I believe. The main subcreative act - the Music of The Ainur - is not expressed in words but in melodies. It is truth of our world that in the beginning there was a word, but for ME in the beginning there was a note. Both Elves and Dwarves are known to create music. (and elven is more perfect than anything humans have hitherto shown ability of contriving.

2. For all we know (for what we have to ponder about is History of Middle Earth, and not history of its scribes), elves may be capable of literature as well (they certainly are good at poetry), and Galadriel may have been holding soirees for elven literati every second Friday, and Elrond may have been equivalent of elvish Nebula Prize holder for his stories about mysterious flying crystal bowls or something.

3. Clause 2 was pure speculation of course. But, if we listen to Professor himself on the subject, in his On Fairy Stories he states (unfortunately, I do not have the book along to provide you with the direct quote) that elves are better at fantasy than humans are, and fantasies created by elves are perfect at suspending disbelief, so the human observer inside one is unable to say whether is he/she in the primary world or in secondary one. Subcreation in its full for you to enjoy.

4. Besides all of the above, both Elves and Dwarves are quite capable in Architecture and Arts (and more so than humans but Numenoreans). It is too as good expression of sub-creative ability as any. It is such a good example, that existence of carved orkish knife of Grishnakh's on the fields of Rohan lead me to believe him to be one of the fëa-having orks as opposed to main bulk of pure parrots

So, if all Children of Eru are capable of subcreation, which I do believe is the case, such an ability can not be the proof of special human freedom

later writings re:

Yes, much is altered in Tolkien's later writings. The difficulties arisen from such a situtation are usually solved by yours truly on the following ground - the whole of the legendarium is presented as collection of legends and stories by different authors. There is no need for different authors to agree on every point they recount. Joan of Arc's story described by pro and contra oriented chroniclers may differ to the great extent. So, there is a place in my head both for flat earth, two threes theory and round earth within solar system as well. But I usually tend to lean harder on what is written later, true.

[davem]

Fea & hroa may be totally integrated in Elves, but that doesn't imply 'equality'. In all cases, even the'animal originated' orcs, the hroa is a vehicle for the animating 'force' & cannot think or act for itself - either the fea directs it, or some external force does. An hroa without a fea or directing will would just stay where it was. The 'corruption' of Morgoth which runs through matter would set 'limits' on the way it could function, & may influence the fea in choices it makes, may even, as it would have some degree of 'negative' effect on the functioning of senses & brain function, affect thinking, but Fea proceeds from Eru, & has some kind of innate sense of (to put it crudely) 'right' & wrong', so the individual would still be either attempting to actualise Eru's themes or Morgoth's - even if they made mistakes, they would be trying to bring one or the other into being.

As to sub creation, In the Fairy Stories essay Tolkien seems to be saying that the 'highest' form of sub creation is the creation of 'secondary worlds' in emulation of our creator - He creates, we 'sub create'. He gives life to sentient beings in this primary world, we give a 'secondary' form of life to creaures in 'secondary' worlds of our creation.

We find a complete lack of any mention of Elvish novelists & storytellers in ME, but why would Tolkien not have at least one stroryteller, at least one great Elvish epic. Elves don't create mythologies, & for someone with such a love of mythology as Tolkien, why is this? Yes, they have poems, but these are recountings of historical events, not new ones. They sing & compose, but to what extent is this merely recounting in 'sound' of what they have experienced? Feanor creates the Silmarils, but not jet engines -ie he produces artifical jewels, which are simply the result of taking the idea of naturally existing jewels to the ultimate extreme. The Elves do that, attempt to perfect what exists, not bring into being wholly new things. They are attempting to manifest, make real, the themes of the Music which run through the creation. Men, in their 'true' subcreation, bring into being things which never did exist & were not laid down in the Music, even in potential.

Architecture & other arts are intended to 'perfect' this world, & not bring wholly new secondary worlds into being, & perfection of this world, in accordance with their understanding of the Music is what drives Elves' every action. I wonder to what extent his statements in fairy stories about Elvish dramatic skill can be applied to the Elves of ME, as in the essay the fairies he is talking about seem much more like the Elves of folklore - but I take your point on board & will think about it.

At the same time, when the Fellowship enter Lorien, they aren't sure whether they're in their own world or have been transported back to the Elder Days: but the Elves there have not made a totally 'new' thing in Lorien, they have simply attempted to recreate the way (they believe) the world once was. So, again, we're not dealing with them 'sub creating' a 'secondary world' but reiterating what was, or what they think 'should' have been, actualising the Music in the world.

So, this 'Elvish Drama' they find themselves participating in, & which they find absolutely convincing ,is in many ways a 'fantasy', woven by the magic of the Elven Ring, & so not 'real' or 'natural' it is nature turned into 'Art' & embalmed by magic. But that does not make it a 'lie' on the Elves part, as they aren't attempting to 'deceive' the Fellowship - well, no more than they are attempting to deceive themselves. It's a kind of subcreation, but dependent on magic to be convincing, whereas men's sub creation is a product of pure imaginataion, & is passed from mind to mind through story, with both storyteller & hearer 'co-creating' the secondary world - the storyteller supplies the story, but the imagery is supplied by the listener or reader from their own experience - hence the 'secondary world'is made up from the 'leaf mould' of the hearer's mind. So, not only is the 'secondary' world is made to seem more 'real' & convincing because of the 'primary' world elements the hearer has used to build it up in their imagination, but the 'primary' world is also made more 'magical' as a consequence of elements of it being used to form the 'secondary' world. Elvish 'enchantment' doesn't seem to work in the same way, as the person entering into the Elves' world is not a co-creator in the same way, & loses a lot of their 'freedom' in the process.



The problem with taking the later writings as being the products of different hands, is that so often they completely contradict other writings - this is fine, when one set of writings is, say, by Men & another by Elves. But when two contradictory writings are both by Elves, a problem arises. The Sun, for instance - did it pre-exist the earth, or was it produced from the last fruit of Laurelin? Elvish accounts say both, & one must be wrong. To step outside ME for a moment, its clear that this kind of contradiction was the reason Tolkien never finished the Silmarillion, & got sidetracked into philosophical & metaphysical debate - however insightful & beautiful some of that dabate may be.

[HerenIstarion]

No lowering of arms, indeed

Fea proceeds from Eru, & has some kind of innate sense of (to put it crudely) 'right' & wrong',

With what we gently land into the already quoted criteria of "in times of doubt man must trust his own wisdom..." etc.

By the way, it is not crudely put, it is how I believe it is.

Sub creation re (again):

Now that I think of it, (and if we hold AFAA as the truest account of what there is), it seems to me humans are also sub-creating in the same mode as elves do (for I agree with your points of [ME] elvish sub-creation as intended on preservation). Just humans are sub-creating in a mode of 'what should be', i.e., comparing what they see here in the primary world with what the Arda Remade will be like. So, again, we are as near a consensus as it may be. For, in a sense, the things they are [re]producing may indeed be called new, since they are not there as yet. But again, the novelty is in the eye of the beholder - for if we try to be so daring as to look from Eru's point of view, such a novelty is again a part of original plan, in which Man's part is to help bring Arda Remade about.

To put it more straight - the elves model in their subcreation things as they have been and men things as they might yet be. The modes are similar, sources apart. But from the eternal plane - where the whole Universe with all of its might have beens is laid bare before Eru, who have created it all, there is no mention of anything really new again

I operate with mental images better with words, seemingly, so let us have another picture - imagine a child bringing its father some gadget bought as present. It may gladden father's heart to get it, and it is new thing in his homestead, but if we investigate deep enough, it may be found that money the gadget was bought with was given by the father to his child just the other day. So, in a sense, father has bought his own present. And expression of child's freedom in this picture would be that child was able to buy, for instance, cigarettes for the same money. It was not limited in its actions in that aspect, for there was no instruction, but act of free will (even if it was expressed as crudely as 'pa, give me five bucks, I'm going to buy you a present') and though the purchase of the present would have been in accordance with father's will, and one of tobacco would have been not.

but dependent on magic to be convincing

But suppose for an instance that you share my theory as of magical ability in ME being as natural as being good at throwing darts or cooking omelets? Than the whole point is again - humans and elves are sub-creating in the same way, just their inspiration source is different. Replace 'magic' up there with 'literary skill', and the general meaning is not changed a bit.

and, can't stand the temptation, so here comes a sidekick:

but not jet engines

Which are to the great extent repetition of the propelling principle well known to some obscure octopussies down there on the ocean floor. And sonars used by bats and dolphins for thousands of millenia. And so forth. So, apart from the wheel, which must have been known to elves too, we are at large repeating what is natural too. By the way, natural jewels are hardly distingushible from mere pebbles. It takes some work on them to look like jewels...

But that does not have much to do with our current topic, so sidekick it must remain

[davem]

Of course, if we go with Meister Eckhart, then God is seen as constantly creating Past, Present & Future - so the past is not something that 'was' & is 'set', but is being 'created' constantly - so God is a permanent creator of all things - even us, including our past. God is constantly creating me, as I was, as I am, as I will be. I am continually being created by God. & so is everything else. For Eckhart, God is only 'aware' of us, of anything, to the extent that it reflects His mind & will - so in a sense, He doesn't 'register' evil, as it is not of Him. He only 'creates' & sustains what is good. What this would mean for an individual would be that if the individual was to give themselves over wholly to evil, so that there was no 'good' att all in them, God would no longer be aware of them, cease to create them, & they would then cease to be.

To get back to the Legendarium, this would mean that if an individual was to align themselves completely with Melkor's theme, Eru would no longer 'hear' them (because effectively, we are all 'singing' one theme or the other by our very existence & the choices we make. So, with Sauron & Saruman, at their death, they disappear in smoke blown away on the Wind. They have committed themselves to 'singing' Melkor's theme, till in the end Eru no longer hears them, is no longer aware of them, & He is no longer aware that there is anyone there in need of being created - so they just 'cease'. It is not 'judgement, condemnation & damnation' it is simply that they have made their 'existence' invisible.

This would perhaps account for the way Arda is to be renewed at the end. Eru will command the Music to be re-sung, desclare the Music to all present, but the themes will all be ones that reflect his 'mind' & nature. He will no longer be aware of, or sustain any contrary themes, so Arda will be renewed. But new things, things no in the original Music will be included, because the will be in accord with the Music, & therefore in accord with the mind of Eru.

I see magic as 'natural' to Elves (&Valar & Maiar), but not to Men, so I would still say that men's 'subcreation' is not the same as the Elves' - Men sub create secondary worlds without it, Elves seem to depend on it. So we have too different kinds of subcreation, but, as you say, with the same motivation. But Elves subcreation can be for the Elves alone - or even for an individual Elf - ie, it can bew complete without the need for any co-creating mind. The Elves sub create Lorien for themselves, men may wander in, but it is not created for men. Galadriel's desire is for a realm where flowers & trees do not die', not to create a place where others will believe they don't. Men's (as Tolkien's) sub creation requires the co-creation of an audience. In other words, the difference between the two kinds of sub creation is the lack of a need for active participation of the viewer in creating the Elves' art. Their art simply is, whether there is anyone to witness it or not. Human subcreation (in its 'highest' form - the creation of a secondary world in the mind) requires participation from the reader/hearer to make it effective. So, the Elves merely require 'magic' - natural though that may be to them - men require other participating minds.

Its true that natural gems look like rocks, but the gemstone does exist in potential within the stone, it only has to be brought out & cut. A jet engine, does not exist in potential - the flight of a bird or the movement of a ship would not inspire the mental leap to a jet engine, or the explosive power of a volcano would not inspire the mental leap to a gun or to a nuclear bomb - not to those commited to actualising Eru's themes. They may exist in potential in Melkor's theme, but that would require a commitment to that theme, which the Elves never made - not even Feanor & his sons.

But now I look like contradicting myself - because these 'new' things I'm saying only men can create could have been present in potential in Melkor's theme. Yet, perhaps the answer is that Elves (&Valar & Maiar) are attempting to actualise the themes in their 'purest' forms, without excess variation & invention, while men can take what the themes contain, & are willing to experiment with them, & explore what is possible - after all, while the Noldor create the greatest gems, they do it out of a desire to bring greater beauty into the world - it has little 'practical' application. Morgoth seeks to destroy, to consume Arda, Sauron to control it. Men, on the other hand, are seeking to experiment, to change, to open new possibilities.

So, even if every potential possibility is contained in the contending themes, only men will have the freedom of thought to make use of those possibilities.

[HerenIstarion]

Well, if I were calling up to Eckhart, it was unconsciously so, for I've tried to lean on Tolkien for the most part . It may be counted as a compliment to yours truly, if my conclusions somehow parallel his. Thanks a lot

Magic re: point taken. It may well be the case. So, it may be summarised as:

Magic is natural to those who exhibit ability to it (the group to contain elves and [incarnate] maiar) [It is my personal opinion that such an innate ability should not be called amgic at all]. It is, as any innate ability is, one of the tools in realization of creatures' likeness to its Creator in things it is entitled to, among which is subcreative capacity. The ability to subcreation is inherent ot all children of Eru. Elves remodel the Past, with Preservation in view as the main ends of it. Men seek Change in their subcreative excersises (reasons to be given below).

Participation of other minds in human subcreation re: may well be the case.

Jet engines re: nastiness and sidekicks get traditional reward of competent rebuff. But, on the other hand, if we again lean on Tolkien, such a thing as a jet engine would have been clearly condemned as Morgoth's invention indeed. (cf steel dragons and machines in the siege of Gondolin in the first versions of the story and description of technocivilisation allegedly invented by goblins in later times as stated in The Hobbit, also Mythopoeia, or Philomythus to Misomythus)

Freedom re:

So, even if every potential possibility is contained in the contending themes, only men will have the freedom of thought to make use of those possibilities.

in which we come back to Atrabeth again, where those possibilities and freedom of thought in actualasing those are, by implication, stated to be the built-in image or pattern the men carry inside them of the Arda Remade:

'Is it, then, a vision of what was designed to be when Arda
was complete - of living things and even of the very lands and
seas of Arda made eternal and indestructible, for ever beautiful
and new - with which the fëar of Men compare what they see
here? Or is there somewhere else a world of which all things
which we see, all things that either Elves or Men know, are only
tokens or reminders?'

Sounds even a bit platonic, then . The most explicit hint of Heaven ever to be found in Tolkien, as far as I know.

Being textual evidence, it can not be gainsaid. So, I again stress upon novelty as in the eye of the beholder - new things men bring about being new this side of the turnpike. Hence human longing, inability to stay quiet at most blessed places, constant seek for something new, to be enjoyed briefly and than thrown away, for everything reminds, but nothing is the real thing. And which may well underlie all of human subcreation. And such a disharmony being the result of the Fall (for otherwise, the bringing of 'new' things would be conscious, with the clear purpose in mind, but for the Fall, of which (in ME) the Death is a release.

But well, I have to agree, this side of said turnpike of death inevitably looks new even when Men are not conscious what are they about at all. But it is intended novelty - intended by Eru with direct insertion of human theme into the great Music before time.

So, human ability of novelty is destined as well as elven ability of preservation. Both are stated as each races' respective function. When I'm designed to do new things, and new things I do are designed by the same to design me, with clear goal in mind (of bringing Arda Remade into being) are they new to Him who designed them? For they are certainly new to me, and my mates (and if this novelty you've tried to indicate, than we have nothing to argue about in this respect). But back to design and function - extending it more, I conclude that the only freedom I can exercise when talking about my functioning is either to do it or not (when I'm an incarnate fëa, that is, I can only function without so much leisure or so much burden as the choice is, when I am an ork).

Choice, choice is the only true freedom.

Freedom to shape my life beyong the fate of Arda is built-in and predestined - for if men were tied inside old one, how could they participate in building of the new one? But as such a function is not percieved by any man of ME when alive, as they are mainly concerned with doing s of Arda, and [such a function] is rumored to be the lore of few wise men among them, then, I assume, function of 'Arda Remade builder' unfolds itself after death. Hence death, logically, is seen as means of freedom to shape one's fate beyond that of Arda and its main expression for all we know

Cheers

[davem]

Quote: Elves remodel the Past, with Preservation in view as the main ends of it. Men seek Change in their subcreative excersises (reasons to be given below).

This is central:as Flieger says, lves are effectively 'facing' into the past, yearning for what has been lost - one of Feanor's appeals is to a memory of Cuivienen, about which were wide lands which a free people might inhabit. It is a pull they all feel back to what
was. I would interpret this as being down to their innate sense of the Music - the further back one goes, the closer one gets to the Ainullindale. They are being pushed 'forward' in time, away from this ideal 'place/state' by Men, & specifically by the changes they introduce, which the Elves feel are somhow 'alien' - ie not contained in the Music. So Men are moving forward, with time, into the future, while Elves are being 'pushed backwards' into the future, away from the only place they could truly feel at peace.

This leads increasingly to a 'mis-use' of magic, which, while it may be 'innate' was intended to be used for subcreation, not to halt time & 'embalm'. Their sub creations become increasingly 'fixed', & less truly (in a primary or secondary sense) alive . The sense one gets is that a 'perfect', in Elven eyes, subcreation would be a world which was frozen in a state of eternal 'perfection', unchanging, one which they would simply stand in awe of forever. But this is a denial of life - which includes change & mortality. Change beyond the world is an alien concept for Elves, simply because the remain within the world, so the world is all they have, & all their hopes are bound within the circles of the world. Men's perspective (conscious or unconscious) takes in this 'extra' dimension, that beyond the world there is 'more than memory'. There is a continuation of life, & of sub-creativity beyond the world.

Even the Elves most 'metaphysical ' speculation is limited to Arda - Men & Elves will live in harmony within Arda remade. Their minds are incapable of concieving an existence beyond the circles of the world. Beyond an existence within Arda Marred lies only the possibility of an existence within Arda Remade. Their minds, bound by the Music, can only concieve of eternal existence in an Arda of some kind. They can concieve of a world which is 'forever beautiful & new' (impossible, because nothing can be forever new, unlesss it is constantly changing, & that would require one 'beautiful thing' to be ceaselessly replaced by some new 'beautiful thing'. They cannot concieve of beauty in flux, in mutability, because the idea of a 'good' change to something new & unthought of is alien to them. The only 'change' they would consider 'good' would be a change that took them 'back'' to the way things were.

Men certainly can, & do, seek to bring into being things contained in Melkor's themes, because both themes contain 'potentials/possibilities'. But in a sense, they are not bound by the Music, so while an Elf would have to choose one theme or the other to actualise, men have the freedom to pick & choose, & would be judged by Eru not on which theme they align themselves to & attempt to make 'real' but rather on what they do with what they take from either theme, because Elves cannot introduce change into the world, so they have a choice only between 'good' & 'evil', whereas men can bring good out of evil, as can Eru.

Men's role in rebuilding Arda is played out both while in the world & beyond the circles of the world. Even if Eru knows everything Men will do before they do it, that knowledge is not necessarally contained within the Music. Eru must know things not contained in the original, or changed themes, if men can introduce change in Arda. So Elves & Valar do not know the whole mind of Eru, or the whole fate of the World - they do not know what happens to Men after death, so even to the Valar not everything is known, or can ever be known, about Arda - even if to Eru it already is.

Quote:Hence human longing, inability to stay quiet at most blessed places, constant seek for something new, to be enjoyed briefly and than thrown away, for everything reminds, but nothing is the real thing. And which may well underlie all of human subcreation. And such a disharmony being the result of the Fall (for otherwise, the bringing of 'new' things would be conscious,

Not necessarally. It could be down simply to the fact that Men were never 'told' what the 'ideal' was & are struggling to find out, making many abortive attempts in the process. Or it could be that Eru has only granted them a general idea of the kind of thing he wants, & is leaving the final form to them.

[HerenIstarion]

from "this leads to" down to "The only 'change' they would consider 'good' would be a change that took them 'back'' to the way things were"

All of that may be the case, of course, and it sounds highly plausible (to the extent that I myself was considering almost the same, if not in same terms). But, and but again, if we still stay with Tolkien and haven't passed on to general philosopy, it is to be remembered that the only explicit textual evidence of what and how is to be after the completion of the Arda Marred is given in the quote provided in my previous. So it is to be trusted that for ME as imagery world (and for ours too, maybe) that is the truth, and the Arda Remade will indeed contain things eternally new. Still more, Finrods wording does not imply that 'forever beautiful and new' means 'unchanged'. Implication is assumed by you (I believe), as influenced by whole bulk of your own preceeding argumentation (which you are to be commended upon, by the way, kind sir) Eternal and indestructible need not mean frozen, just not subject to time and enthropy. So, as you yourself in one of your previous were defending the point that change is possible even without, or outside time, I believe it can be assumed here too?

"New" may mean also a bit more than it seemingly does - that the healed creatures will be given harmony with their milieu, so each instant of their lives they will retain capacity of perception everything as 'new' enabling them to appreciate everything they are given, invoking wonder and gratitude mixed with joy and happiness where previously, 'thanks' to Morgoth and as a consequence of the Fall, there were longing and boredom

Elf would have to choose one theme or the other to actualise, men have the freedom to pick & choose, & would be judged by Eru not on which theme they align themselves to & attempt to make 'real' but rather on what they do with what they take from either theme, because Elves cannot introduce change into the world, so they have a choice only between 'good' & 'evil', whereas men can bring good out of evil, as can Eru.

Here we come back to points we've got over up there. Seemingly, I was inattentive back than, for either I don't quite follow you, or your argument is wrong (or looks so to me):

For all I know, only Valar and Maiar are actually bound by what was sung, and at that they actualise exactly what each of them was singing at the time. That is not binding to the uttermost limit, rather defining, for they are capable of repentance (Sauron almost repents) That's why I have brought forth statement of world being fitted into pattern which is Music.

At that, Men and Elves are direct insertions of Eru, Eruhini, his children, the whole mode of being of which (i.e. union of eternal fea with temporal hroa) seems to be symbolic, indication of future arrangement, when matter will cease to be temporal and be equally eternal, and seems to set the direction of they development. At that, they have distinct functions - elves of preservation and memory, men of working future order out. Where it makes obligatory for elves to follow one thread only and for men to be free and picky, I fail to see.

Least of all I would accept "men can bring good out of evil", for men doing evil are evil (i.e. means are not justified by the end for the doer, or, Hitler's murderer may have averted much sorrow, but that would not have made him holy, he would still have been murderer). It is Eru who brings good out of evil, and in unexpected way, usually. But the 'tool' i.e evil-doer whos deeds resulted in new good, is not considered responsible for the good, he is still to be condemned on behalf of his evil deed. At that inverted commas around words Good and Evil are unwarranted, for both concepts are not mere conventions, but 'real thing' - either comply with [built-in by Eru as part of fea] standard or not. Which is matter of choice. And brings us back down to mere choice (hum) in whatever action elf or man takes, and which therefore is uttermost expression of freedom. And if goodness is the same (as, agian backed up with direct quote by Aragorn up there) for both and compliance to it is defined by choice, than the modes of their existence are similar, with the difference of men not being bound inside temporal field of Arda, which difference is expressed through death.

It could be down simply to the fact that Men were never 'told' what the 'ideal' was

may I be forgiven If Iutter minutely triumphant "aha!" first? For here you indirectly pour water on the Fall theory's mill wheels. Why, do you reckon, they were not told about the thing which is the main motive of their existence (apart from explicit Christian idea to be free beings other than God to be loved by Him), but for the Fall?

leaving the final form to them

May be, may well be, regardless of the Fall

PS. Since we are neck deep in philosophy by now, should we ask moderator to split our discussion (for we two are only participants for a while now) from the main thread starting at post where it began or a bit earlier, say, and make of it separete 'philosophy' thread? For title "Evil Things" is quite misleading. Your opinion?

[davem]

Quote: So it is to be trusted that for ME as imagery world (and for ours too, maybe) that is the truth, and the Arda Remade will indeed contain things eternally new. Still more, Finrods wording does not imply that 'forever beautiful and new' means 'unchanged'. Implication is assumed by you (I believe), as influenced by whole bulk of your own preceeding argumentation (which you are to be commended upon, by the way, kind sir) Eternal and indestructible need not mean frozen, just not subject to time and enthropy. So, as you yourself in one of your previous were defending the point that change is possible even without, or outside time, I believe it can be assumed here too?

Well, it may be that the individual's perception of eternal things may be 'eternally new', but the things themselves, being eternal, cannot be in themselves eternally new - except in Eckhart's sense of being eternally created, rather than being created & constantly 'held in existence' - which strikes me is the difference between what Eru does (constantly creating all things) & what the Elves do by means of the Rings (creating an object once & then preserving or embalming it). From this I would draw the conclusion that the Elves' understanding of Eru's creativity is, while a genuine attempt at emulation (as all true sub creativity is), & is mistaken. They simply do not attempt to sub create eternal living things - which is what Eru does - they merely attempt to stop change. Change is certainly possible - if we accept the sequencial events, the process, clearly stated in Ainulindale - but do the Elves have a clear understanding of that? Galadriel tells Celebrimbor that she wishes to rule a land where Flowers & trees do not die; all Elvish sub creativity is an attempt to go back to an earlier, more perfect state. Change from that state is seen as 'wrong', so we cannot assume that in their conception of 'eternity' change plays any part. 'Frozen' may indeed be implied by Finrod - even if he wouldn't use that word.

Flieger quotes from an unpublished note of Tolkien's on Elvish Time:

'In Elvish sentiment the future was not one of hope or desire, but a decay & retrogression from former bliss & power. Though it inevitably lay ahead , as of one on a journey. 'looking forward' did not imply anticipation of delight. 'I look forward to seeing you again' did not mean or imply 'I wish to see you again, & since that is arranged/ & or very likely, I am pleased'. It meant simply 'I expect to see you again with the certainty of foresight (in some circumstances) or regard that as very probable - it might be with fear or dislike, 'foreboding '' Their position, as of later day sentiment, was one of exiles being driven forward (against their will) who were in mind or actual posture ever looking backward.
But in actual language time & place had distinct expressions.'

If Elves are bound (psychologically at least) by the Music, then they would only be able to concieve 'perfection' as being the 'perfect' manifestation of the Music in space/time/matter. They would not consider a change in the Music to constitute 'perfection'. So to this extent, while, if they were exposed to the new form of the Music manifest in Arda re-made, they might find it more beautiful, while in Arda Marred, knowing & able to relate only to the original Music, their concept of what constituted Arda re made would be based on their understanding of what the original Music would have brought into being. A new Music, changed in any way from the original, would not appeal. They could not concieve it, they would only know it would be 'different'. Of course, as Finrod says, they hold to estel & believe that Eru will cause Arda re made to be the ultimate state of perfection, but they cannot concieve it. Hence, their attempts at giving it some imaginative 'form' are limited, & are merely subtle variations on what they can concieve. An Arda re made which differed radically from the Arda they feel should have been produced from the original Music would seem to them strange & alien.

For Elves, the ideal of Arda re made would seem to be -everything remaining the same, but their perception of it being constantly renewed. For Men I don't think that would suffice. They would require genuinely new things to be possible, genuiine change & the possibility of new sub creation. So Elves would seek newness of perception, Men newness of that percieved.

Quote: 'only Valar and Maiar are actually bound by what was sung, and at that they actualise exactly what each of them was singing at the time.'

Not necesserally; they were capable of hearing some of the Music as a whole, & they sang in unison, so some at least had a sense of the wholeness of the Music.

Quote: 'Least of all I would accept "men can bring good out of evil", for men doing evil are evil (i.e. means are not justified by the end for the doer, or, Hitler's murderer may have averted much sorrow, but that would not have made him holy, he would still have been murderer). It is Eru who brings good out of evil, and in unexpected way, usually. But the 'tool' i.e evil-doer whos deeds resulted in new good, is not considered responsible for the good, he is still to be condemned on behalf of his evil deed.'

This is my fault for not being clear. What I meant was, there are things within Melkor's theme, which he inroduced for his own purposes - domination & destruction, of which we could include the potential for the production of jet engines , explosives, chemicals, etc. If Elves or Maiar were to choose to manifest Melkor's theme, go over to his side, they would not only be choosing to actualise his 'prototypes', build the things he has 'drawn up the blueprints for', they would also be choosing to suppport his desires & bring about his goals - because they cannot think beyond the themes, & have to choose one or the other. Men can take something which Melkor intended for domination & destruction - say a jet engine, & choose whether they will build a warplane or a cargo plane, or a rescue aircraft. Melkor's intent in producing the 'design' would have been to build the warplane, if Elves or Maiar had chosen to build a plane it would inevitably have been a warplane, because they can only choose to manifest his theme or not. But Men can take the idea of the plane & choose to turn it to either good or evil.

Quote: Why, do you reckon, they were not told about the thing which is the main motive of their existence (apart from explicit Christian idea to be free beings other than God to be loved by Him), but for the Fall?

Here we are speculating on the mind & motives of Illuvatar - which is perfectly valid if we view Illuvatar as a character Tolkien has invented - we may question, criticise, do a character analysis (or assasination ) if we choose. But if we see Illuvatar as in any way synonymous (even if only in Tolkien's mind) with God, then we simply can't enter into such speculation, simply because the Mind of God is too great ( as the writer of The Cloud of Unknowing has stated, God cannot be understood by the human intellect, only loved & worshipped). If one is Christian, one will accept the 'fall' (whether literally or metaphorically). If not, but is still a believer in God, then the reasons for Man's not knowing his role in the universe, & having to fumble to find it, could be manifold. In other words, Fall is not the only possible reason for not knowing why we're here - though one would have to assume that it is the one Tolkien himself favoured

Quote: PS. Since we are neck deep in philosophy by now, should we ask moderator to split our discussion (for we two are only participants for a while now) from the main thread starting at post where it began or a bit earlier, say, and make of it separete 'philosophy' thread? For title "Evil Things" is quite misleading. Your opinion?

Well, I know that Estelyn has been trying for a long time to get a serious thread on philosophy going, so I wouldn't have a problem - as long as you don't expect too much! I'm not a philosophy student, merely someone who has read a few books

[HerenIstarion]

Here we are speculating on the mind & motives of Illuvatar - which is perfectly valid if we view Illuvatar as a character Tolkien has invented - we may question, criticise, do a character analysis (or assasination ) if we choose. But if we see Illuvatar as in any way synonymous (even if only in Tolkien's mind) with God, then we simply can't enter into such speculation, simply because the Mind of God is too great

touché

On the other hand,

Well, it may be that the individual's perception of eternal things may be 'eternally new', but the things themselves, being eternal, cannot be in themselves eternally new - except in Eckhart's sense of being eternally created, rather than being created & constantly 'held in existence' - which strikes me is the difference between what Eru does (constantly creating all things) & what the Elves do by means of the Rings (creating an object once & then preserving or embalming it). From this I would draw the conclusion that the Elves' understanding of Eru's creativity is, while a genuine attempt at emulation (as all true sub creativity is), & is mistaken

On grounds given above (inability to understand Eru's mind), the conclusions you come to may be equally untrue as mine are, than. Though I agree that mine "aha" was a crooked argument, of course. Yet you, me, Eckhart and any other creature is equally unable to enter God's mind, therefore all of our reasoning may hit wild.

Yet, unless we are forced to abstain from any discussion whatsoever on that ground, and thus bringing us in discordance with God's will, somehow, for A) Having in mind the statement of being created in His likeness B) Having in mind that one of the mind's (pun warning - H-I always puns badly) main faculties is such of reasoning C) Abstaining from its employment is drawback on said likeness,

I draw a conclusion that we have to go on discussing such issues too

Well, I was not aware of the note you provide about elvish perception of Time. Thanks for the revelation, but I may argue that perception of time is not equal to perception of the Music, if we talk about ability to actualize given theme only in elven case. Therefore

A new Music, changed in any way from the original, would not appeal.

is speculation. It may be applicable to Valar and Maiar, or may be not, but with elves and men both being new theme in the Music, it strikes as discrepancy. Why should elves be so oppressed and depraved of ability to receive Eru's gifts? For anything coming from Eru is stated textually to be believed by Elves to be for the good of his Children (Estel), and elves are His Children. In case change comes from Eru, it is for their good and should not be rejected. And the answer is backed up textually too – because of Morgoth – who, tainting matter of Arda, made constant union of elven fëar and hroar even inside temporal boundaries of Arda Marred inharmonious and even impossible. And since the power goes both ways, and as fëa has its influence on hroa, so the latter does influence the former, the effect is such a dread of the future (and in case of Men Morgoth causes dread of death). It may be even speculated that Elves dread the future because their bodies fade (what with parting of fea and hroa regarded unnatural and undesirable). Barring of which process is the reason for such a preservation and freezing of time as done in places of elven rings (T.A), and Valinor in later times. (cf 'we must leave ME for Valinor or else we fade'). But there is no evidence that once harm done by Morgoth is healed (Arda Remade), elves must nevertheless dread the change.

Indeed, the change is not their main function (such being the remembrance), but dread they exhibit is not to be there in Arda Remade. Therefore, the change in the Music if produced by Eru should appeal.

Of course, as Finrod says, they hold to estel & believe that Eru will cause Arda re made to be the ultimate state of perfection, but they cannot concieve it

Than nobody can, for the same reason of Eru's minds inscrutability. Even Men, who, as I have a feeling we are agreed upon, act unconsciously. Besides, Estel consists not in the belief of perfection of final product of Eru's, but in the belief of His love for his Children and any deed of His being for their ultimate good.

For Elves, the ideal of Arda re made would seem to be -everything remaining the same, but their perception of it being constantly renewed. For Men I don't think that would suffice. They would require genuinely new things to be possible, genuiine change & the possibility of new sub creation. So Elves would seek newness of perception, Men newness of that percieved.

In case of the perception, how would one tell whether the thing perceived is the old thing perceived as new but nevertheless unchanged, or thing indeed changed and new and therefore so perceived?

If Elves or Maiar were to choose to manifest Melkor's theme, go over to his side, they would not only be choosing to actualise his 'prototypes', build the things he has 'drawn up the blueprints for', they would also be choosing to suppport his desires & bring about his goals - because they cannot think beyond the themes, & have to choose one or the other. Men can take something which Melkor intended for domination & destruction - say a jet engine, & choose whether they will build a warplane or a cargo plane, or a rescue aircraft. Melkor's intent in producing the 'design' would have been to build the warplane, if Elves or Maiar had chosen to build a plane it would inevitably have been a warplane, because they can only choose to manifest his theme or not. But Men can take the idea of the plane & choose to turn it to either good or evil.

Well then, if I understood correctly, you state that:

A) Valar and Elves know some themes to be good and some to be bad. Their freedom is expressed in choosing bad or good theme, and than act upon it. Whatever they do once they choose the theme, is defined to be good or bad according to the theme chosen.
B) Men may choose any theme of the Music (good or bad uniformly) and than act upon them in a good or bad way. So their freedom is of the other kind whatsoever.

Now my argument is that: Should groups and categories be introduced, it is incorrect to place Valar and Elves in one group and Men in another. It would be rather more logical to make groups as follows – group 1 Valar and group 2 Elves and Men, on the ground of difference of status. What is the case for Valar in choosing the themes may be speculated upon (I hold it is the same way as with elves and men, keystone being possible repentance of Sauron), but possibilities there for elves and men are discussed in following entries:

A) Good and Evil are stated to be the same for everybody. If we come to define what Evil is, I presume we will agree that uttermost end of it is Pride – i.e. replacement of priorities – putting forward of created self to take place of its Creator. Cruelty, domination and destruction are consequences. Any material object used for evil ends is ultimately but still merely medium for pride. Medium of the thing can not be at the same time the thing contained, so warplane can not be pride [=evil] in itself. I.e. warplane or any material object probably could not have been sung of in the Music, and if it nevertheless was, the dominant in the theme of warplane (sword, torture chamber, bomb etc) should have been pride.

B) Good and Evil are stated to be the same for everybody, again. So, any elf or man becoming proud in an evil way, (there are good ways to be proud, but that's another issue) are 1. Choosing Morgoth's theme 2. Performing act of choice. But Man, can not choose to be proud (cruel, dominant, destructive) and yet make any good end of it. Eru bringing good out of evil does so in mixing up results of actions of those who chose to be evil, but evil doers in themselves were planning quite other results (c.f. Melkor vs Ulmo and Manwe and snow and rain – freeze and heat were not invented with producing of beauty of snow and fertility of rain in mind)


C) With the B clause in mind, the way of acting goodly/badly for elves and men is the same and expressed by choice.


Further support for clause A:

He chanted a song of wizardry,
Of piercing, opening, of treachery,
Revealing, uncovering, betraying.
Then sudden Felagund there swaying,
Sang in a song of staying,
Resisting, battling against power,
Of secrets kept, strength like a tower,
And trust unbroken, freedom, escape;
Of changing and shifting shape,
Of snares eluded, broken traps,
The prison opening, the chain that snaps

That is excerpt from Finrod's singing contest with Sauron. Even in lesser expression of thing [probably] similar to Great Music, the concepts are handled rather than material objects (though these figure too, but as mediums – broken trap=freedom etc)

Or, to be back on jet engines, jet engine per se is neither good nor bad. The knowledge on behalf of its handler (be it man or elf) that its usage is damaging, and decisions and actions hence with regards of such a knowledge, that is which makes jet engine probable medium for evil.


PS I have asked Estelyn to separate the discussion down from post #67. Let us await her decision

[davem]

Quote: Why should elves be so oppressed and depraved of ability to receive Eru's gifts? For anything coming from Eru is stated textually to be believed by Elves to be for the good of his Children (Estel), and elves are His Children.

What I meant was that from the perspective of Elves in Middle Earth, living out, or attempting to live out, the original Music, knowing (consciously or unconciously) only the original Music, a New Music would seem alien & unattractive, unless it was in vitually all ways a restatement of the original. Of course, once they actually hear the new Music, as it proceeds from Illuvatar, as Eruhini, they could not but be won over to it. If they can only choose to manifest one or other of the themes of the original Music, they could not relate to a totally new form of it, because they could not concieve of a totally different Music.,

Quote: Estel consists not in the belief of perfection of final product of Eru's, but in the belief of His love for his Children and any deed of His being for their ultimate good.

But surely, the result of any loving deed of Eru must be 'perfect'. Whatever the Elves hope for, or trust in, they would expect it to be perfect, even if they cannot concieve of the form that 'perfection would take.

Quote:In case of the perception, how would one tell whether the thing perceived is the old thing perceived as new but nevertheless unchanged, or thing indeed changed and new and therefore so perceived?

By difference in form of the thing percieved. My feeling is that the Elves would seek constantly renewed experience of what they already know, whereas men would seek experience of new things. This is how I understand the difference of human & Elvish psychology. Both races could tell whether they were simply looking at the same tree with 'renewed' vision, or looking with the 'same old' vision at a new tree.


Quote: Now my argument is that: Should groups and categories be introduced, it is incorrect to place Valar and Elves in one group and Men in another. It would be rather more logical to make groups as follows – group 1 Valar and group 2 Elves and Men, on the ground of difference of status.

You see, I would agree with you here, except it is clearly stated by Tolkien that mne are not bound by the Music, which is as fate to all things else. So, Elves Valar & Maiar are bound by the Music, & Men are not

Quote:.But Man, can not choose to be proud (cruel, dominant, destructive) and yet make any good end of it.

I would say that Turin does exactly that. He is driven by pride - probably more than any other character but Feanor. Both these characters' pride achieves good - the slaying of Glaurung & the creation of the Silmarils. Even the Noldor's rebellion & return to ME helps to hold Morgoth in check, In fact they probably did more in the fight against Morgoth than the Valar did, taking into account their strength.

Quote:Or, to be back on jet engines, jet engine per se is neither good nor bad. The knowledge on behalf of its handler (be it man or elf) that its usage is damaging, and decisions and actions hence with regards of such a knowledge, that is which makes jet engine probable medium for evil.

If we take the statement from Hobbit about Orcs being responsible for explosives & torture devices as being correct, then we can concieve of Morgoth's theme including the 'potential' for modern warfare, including jet fighters. So, Elves & valar could choose the jet fighter, or reject it, but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'. Men could, so they could build a jet aircraft which wasn't a fighter.

[HerenIstarion]

May I confess I'm immensely enjoying this little skirmish of sorts?

I would say that Turin does exactly that

Well, of all things else, I thought of Turin as argument in my favour. Indeed, what good did his pride brought him himself? He ended up murderer and suicide, committer of incest. Noldor likewise. There is no telling what may have happened if Noldor restrained from rush action. For one thing, there would have been no Kinslaying. What good is following their bad action, is result of Eru's 'bringing good out of evil' principle, but for the doers there is woe and misery. Turin dies, and Noldor are relieved only after total humiliation, when they are almost swept off ME shores into the sea

By difference in form of the thing percieved. My feeling is that the Elves would seek constantly renewed experience of what they already know, whereas men would seek experience of new things. This is how I understand the difference of human & Elvish psychology. Both races could tell whether they were simply looking at the same tree with 'renewed' vision, or looking with the 'same old' vision at a new tree.

No telling before we get there, but it seems to me that it is the same thing, whether one looks at old thing with new eyes or new thing with old eyes. Can not be told apart, somehow + and - signs are exclusive.

But surely, the result of any loving deed of Eru must be 'perfect'

Truly so. But the priority is Love and Good of the Children, the perfection is merely consequence of [the logical conclusion that] the deed proceeding from the perfect being can not be imperfect, or else the being doing the deed is not perfect in the first place.

but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'.

Now that's mere speculation. The mere ability of separating Great Ring from their own Elven Rings proves the opposite. The concept is brought in by Sauron. It may be argued that it is actualization if not Morgoth's, than of his greatest minion's themes. Once it is known that Annatar is indeed Sauron, in case the concept you propose be true, than there would have been for elves two ways only - to go on using the rings and be evil, or reject and destroy them on the spot. Ture, Sauron haven't seen or touched Elven Rings, but the idea of applying power just so proceeds from him.

What really happens, is that Elves show quite a good ability of distinction you reserve for Men only, shift the gears a bit and use their rings with a proviso (unless the Ring is found)

[davem]

Quote"Well, of all things else, I thought of Turin as argument in my favour. Indeed, what good did his pride brought him himself? He ended up murderer and suicide, committer of incest. Noldor likewise. There is no telling what may have happened if Noldor restrained from rush action. For one thing, there would have been no Kinslaying. What good is following their bad action, is result of Eru's 'bringing good out of evil' principle, but for the doers there is woe and misery. Turin dies, and Noldor are relieved only after total humiliation, when they are almost swept off ME shores into the sea"

Ah, but here we come to the 'Frodo Question' In worldly terms Frodo doesn't gain very much - he ends up feeling a 'broken failure', sad, miserable & unhappy. But he has saved others.

Turin's pride leads him to do terrible things, of course, but his pride leads him to almost fight Morgoth's foes to a standstill, & leads him to kill Glaurung - & these things are done because of his pride, not in spite of it - it isn't a case of Eru turning a disaster brought about by Turins pride to bring about good, Turin's proud acts produce the good results.

In the case of the Noldor its the same - imagine if they hadn't rebelled & returned to ME - Morgoth would have totally enslaved &/or slaughtered Men, Dwarves & the Sindar, he would have increased his forces, & possibly have built up an army strong enough to assail Valinor. The pride, selfishness & desire for revenge of the Noldor is what holds Morgoth in check till the Valar can get their act together & deal with him. ME would have been lost to Morgoth if it had not been for the 'sinfulness' of the Noldor - again, not a case of Eru bringing good out of the faults of the Noldor - their 'faults' are what bring about those results.

If Turin & the Noldor had done what they 'should' have done, behaved 'well' it would have brought about disaster. In a sense, it was necessary for them to 'offend' if Morgoth was to be dealt with. The Valar were 'good', behaved as they 'should' & would have enabled Morgoth to win hands down - what's the message there?

Quote:but it seems to me that it is the same thing, whether one looks at old thing with new eyes or new thing with old eyes. Can not be told apart, somehow:

But there is a difference between one tree & another. And there is a difference between seeing the same tree from a different angle or in a new way, & looking at a completely different tree. Eckhart states somewhere that if we could see a flower, as it has its being in God, it would be a greater thing than the whole world. But one flower is not the same as another.

Quote:But the priority is Love and Good of the Children, the perfection is merely consequence of [the logical conclusion that] the deed proceeding from the perfect being can not be imperfect, or else the being doing the deed is not perfect in the first place.

But does Eru, from his eternal perspective, make that distinction? Would not the 'Love & Good of the Children' be the same as the manifestation of the 'perfect' eternal state? One could not be without the other. Maybe Eru's prime desire is to bring about 'perfection' & the love & good of the Children is a part of that. Would Eru see them as separate things?

Quote:The mere ability of separating Great Ring from their own Elven Rings proves the opposite. The concept is brought in by Sauron. It may be argued that it is actualization if not Morgoth's, than of his greatest minion's themes. Once it is known that Annatar is indeed Sauron, in case the concept you propose be true, than there would have been for elves two ways only - to go on using the rings and be evil, or reject and destroy them on the spot. Ture, Sauron haven't seen or touched Elven Rings, but the idea of applying power just so proceeds from him.

I'm not sure he does introduce the concept of the Rings - he introduces the particular form. He doesn't introduce the desire to control & preserve. In a sense the One Ring merely does what the Elven Rings do, only 'more so'. It is a more effective version - it too is designed to 'control & coerce' Sauron wants to dominate & control the world, the Elves also want to do that - their motivations & the end results may differ, but there is little difference in the desire. This is why, I feel, that Tolkien describes them as having 'flirted with Sauron' - meaning not so much that they went along with him in making the Rings, but that they 'flirted' with what he symbolised. But their goals & his are not all that different - for all Galadriel's dismissal of 'the deciets of the Enemy'. Their Rings can bring them what they desire - why would they destroy them? This is their temptation, this is how Sauron ensnares them - not by introducing some totally new idea & conning them into going for it, but by offering them what they really desired all along - as he did with the Numenoreans.

Quote:
(but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'. )
Now that's mere speculation.

Not if 'Jet-fighter' is Morgoths introduction, & exists as a single concept in the Music - If I'm right that would put the Elves in a 'take it or leave it' position as regards flying machines - of course, Morgoth probably introduced a concept more like a flying Dragon - so to rephrase the point - the Elves couldn't have soncieved of breeding a 'good Dragon' they would either have to breed an evil destructive dragon, or not breed one at all. I suggest Men could concieve of a 'good dragon' because they would be free to seperate the concept :'Good' from the thing :'Dragon'

(It is fun, all this, I must admit - though I'm daily expecting a PM from the mods saying 'You two are confusing (& boring!) everybody else to death - go away & do that stuff on your own time! )

[HerenIstarion]

Frodo question re:

But he has saved others

And both Noldor and Turin brought woe upon others besides themselves.
Besides, only when Noldor reach the state of humiliation and self-denial Frodo was evincing, they are granted 'salvation' – i.e. passage to the West. And Frodo is too granted the healing there – a reward not often distributed among mortals. Would it so happen that Noldor (in the person of Earendil) haven't prayed for mercy, of what avail would have been all their valour and bravery?

We have abovementioned 'Hitler's slayer's' situation here. Yes, much against Morgoth have been done, but it does not realese the doer from the charges they are accused of unless they repent = i.e. pride is replaced with self-denial

Perception re: All things are possible, and either of us may be right, but I will rather hold on to textual evidence as voiced by Finrod (up: Forever beautiful and new). It somehow, even contains both views. (though I personally would have acquired a headache if every day new kind of tree was found in my backyard , with new colour of walls and fridge in different place all the time. But that's kidding, there is no need of answering this in your next)

But does Eru, from his eternal perspective, make that distinction? Would not the 'Love & Good of the Children' be the same as the manifestation of the 'perfect' eternal state? One could not be without the other. Maybe Eru's prime desire is to bring about 'perfection' & the love & good of the Children is a part of that. Would Eru see them as separate things?

Maybe. We do not know (inscrutability principle). But if we hold on to tradition, than Love and Good of the Children is prime issue, perfection as a mere result of perfection of Eru Himself, who, being perfect, by definition acts perfectly. (was it tautology, by the way? four 'perfect'-s in one sentence…)

Good dragon/rings of power/flirt with Sauron re:

Is is not self contradictory: they can not distinguish good/bad jet planes, but are very well with good/bad rings? Ring's concept is similar to that of jet-fighter – both are meant for the domination of the world in respective way. And in case of rings elves are quite good at distinction – they bring the concept of domination (coming from pride, i.e. evil in the end) to the comparatively good usage, i.e. doing exactly what is attributed to men only in your concept. To parallel it with jet-figthers: jet=ring=device designed to focus power, plane type=power application form. So, the extracted concept of power focusing device (jet engine=ring) is created in both cases, power application form is different (fighter=ring of power=total domination of all, cargo plane=elven rings=preservation).

Now the jet in itself is not bad or good for the handler untill the handler defines, learns what is in his hands (my exapmle above about jet engine per se). I probably failed to communicate that, but I had a vision of a jet engine as something placed somewhere with no previous connection to its future handler and than found by someone, for whom, the finder, the thing is not good nor bad until studied.
But for the designer, the concept already in his head defines the goodness/badness of the object produced. So, device to focus power for domination is thus defined as bad.

Flirt with Sauron (good point, btw) you mentioned comes in. It does imply that Elven Rings were bad thing to be done from the very beginning. [edit for the sake of better understanding - that is indeed] Not the right thing to do. Yet Elves have been achieving things that are defined as good with their Rings (i.e. beauty of Lorien, etc). So, where is the alleged impotency of elves to pick up the bad theme and act good upon it?

Nevertheless, in case of the rings, giving them up by the end of Third Age is good action – they have to humiliate themselves, deny the last remnants of their pride which led them in the beginning, be relieved and thus be themselves more so. That much good is lost along the way, is grieving, but that is the way with good based on evil – for they were doing exactly what, as you state, man can do only – building their good upon bad foundation. (with Galadriel's "I will diminish, remain Galadriel and go to the West" applying not to the Great Ring only but to her own ring too) It parallels with Noldor seeking pardon in the person of Earendil, with Frodo's "I have to go without, for all else should preserve it" etc

Probably, one day mankind would be forced to reject jet-engines likewise – for the sake of constantly polluted environment, or whatever. For bringing good results out of bad things is Eru's faculty - all else must submit, remake, go back and start over.

[davem]

Quote:And both Noldor and Turin brought woe upon others besides themselves.
Besides, only when Noldor reach the state of humiliation and self-denial Frodo was evincing, they are granted 'salvation' – i.e. passage to the West. And Frodo is too granted the healing there – a reward not often distributed among mortals. Would it so happen that Noldor (in the person of Earendil) haven't prayed for mercy, of what avail would have been all their valour and bravery?

Yes, they brought woe on themselves & others - but that does not deny the good they did - as a direct result of their 'sins', not as a result of Eru changing or manipulating the result. We can't assume that they wouldn't have felt that it wasn't all a failure to be repented of. In this instance one could say the Valar, by their inaction, are just as much at fault, & share some of the responsibility for the sufferings of the inhabitants of ME - though they are not held accountable - don't we have examples here of sins of comission (the Noldor) & sins of Omission (the Valar). Dealing with Morgoth is the Valar's responsibility, not the Noldor's. And what of Manwe's (foolish? idiotic?) decision to release Melkor from Mandos? Who starts this tragedy? But Manwe is not held accountable in any way.

Of what avail would have been their bravery? Well, Morgoth was held in check for a good part of the first Age - at the very least he wasn't allowed to have things all his own way, & become a threat to the whole of ME, including Valinor - which the Valar's inaction would have risked happening. Its entirely possible that the Valar's survival (at least as rulers of ME) is in large part entirely down to the Noldor in ME.

Quote:Perception re: All things are possible, and either of us may be right, but I will rather hold on to textual evidence as voiced by Finrod (up: Forever beautiful and new).

Finrod is expressing the Elvish perspective, not the human. He thinks like an elf. But constantly new things would not have to replace each other with such speed as you suggest. My feeling is that the Elves want to be surrounded constantly with the 'known', but in such a way that that 'known' is percieved with a feeling of 'newness'. Men on the other hand would seek the wholly new - things they had never experienced before. This is simply a manifestation of the Elves backward looking stance - seeking to get back to the known, while Men are forward looking, ever seeking the unknown. The Elves do not seem atracted to new possibilities - which are percieved as changes to what they already know, what has already been, & hence a movement away from Ainlindale.


Quote:Is is not self contradictory: they can not distinguish good/bad jet planes, but are very well with good/bad rings? Ring's concept is similar to that of jet-fighter – both are meant for the domination of the world in respective way. And in case of rings elves are quite good at distinction –

Well, do the Elves consider the One Ring in its essential nature as 'evil' or is it merely teh use it is put to by Sauron that they object to: The One is designed to control & preserve - to control & coerce, as are the Elven Rings. What they realise by the End is that Their Rings & the One are 'wrong', because the desire behind them is wrong. There is every reason to believe that the Elves would have come up with their own equivalent of the One Ring, if they'd had the time & freedom to do it. This is the 'flirting with Sauron' - not the means (magic rings) but the mentality. The Elven Rings & the One are different only in power & in the intention behind their use - The Elven Rings are not 'morally good' & the One 'morally evil' - they are objects which are used by individuals, & it is the individual's intent which should be judged. In a way the Elven Rings are just as potentially corrupting as the One, because they offer the same temptation to power & control, domination & coercion of lesser wills. It could be argued that Galadriel is so acutley conscious of the danger of the One because she has lived so long with the temptation of Nenya..

Quote:It does imply that Elven Rings were bad thing to be done from the very beginning. Not the right thing to do. Yet Elves have been achieving things that are defined as good with their Rings (i.e. beauty of Lorien, etc). So, where is the alleged impotency of elves to pick up the bad theme and act good upon it?

This statement could be applied to the 'pride' of the Noldor - was that 'bad' from the very beginning? Didn't the 'sinful' Noldor achieve great beauty, wisdom & long stretches of peace & happiness in the FA? So, was their 'pride' ever 'good' as you say the Elven Rings were originally? The Elven Rings were another manifestation of the Noldorin desire for power & control - always 'bad' yes, but bringing about great good in various times & places.

[HerenIstarion]

Yes, they brought woe on themselves & others - but that does not deny the good they did - as a direct result of their 'sins'

Than you once again contradict your own maxim of elven inability to play bad theme in good direction. For Noldor are elves, are not they? But, and but, and but again only Eru can bring good out of evil, for:

The woe they brought about is direct consequence of their pride. So, evil results in evil

The good they brought about is direct consequence of their virtues - valour, courage etc. i.e. good results in good

So men are excluded too, boom ta ra ram, for the principle works for them in the same way. Turin's pride ended him suicide, but his courage killed Glaurung. And there is no paradox here, for all I can think. Quite the contrary – the paradox of evil coming out of good and vice versa is thus easily solved. Noldor were not, after all, completely evil, but the dominant, the driving power of their deeds was pride, so overall, on the general plane they could not have succeded unless repenting, but in minor results, which proceeded from their retained virtues, no restrictions were set. And that's why all the good they contrived was vain – being grounded on their evil, it was of no avail

This is simply a manifestation of the Elves backward looking stance - seeking to get back to the known, while Men are forward looking, ever seeking the unknown.

I've already agreed that this may be the case. On the other hand, I have (I believe, successfully ) postulated that once the marring is healed, there will be no problem for elves of change-accepting kind.

So, was their 'pride' ever 'good' as you say the Elven Rings were originally

You missed my point ('thanks' to wording, I reckon – 'Not the right thing to do' is to be applied to forging of the Elven rings, not to what you've said about it. To the contrary, I was saying that elven rings were bad thing to do from the beginning. So, it seems, we are saying same thing here.

The Elven Rings are not 'morally good' & the One 'morally evil' - they are objects which are used by individuals, & it is the individual's intent which should be judged.

So this maxim is also accepted by me. (But then, were did the good jet and bad fighter as part of the music got to, I wonder? and which only men can split as different concepts?) Side note only – The Great Ring is stated to hold part of Sauron's original will, and has an ability to bend handler's will to evil, so it ceases to be mere object (as described up above, found by handler with no previous bias) but is a bit more. But this side note is not revelant. It may be said that Great Ring is merely object. Still more, individual has to have patterns of mind similar to that of Sauron's, and similar intentions already there to be affected (hence no effect of the Ring on Tom, and great dread on Gandalf's part even to touch it) – or, your statement of motives under creation of rings also found acceptable

The noldorin pride might have been good up to some point, but a little bit before making of the silmarils it was already going bad.

Definition of 'good' pride I have none but to rephrase C.S. Lewis' paragon (I don't remember the book where it is to be found, so have to give my own wording, but I do remember the essence – 'to be the best architect in the world, apply skill and build the best building there ever was, and be glad about it, but no more than you might have been if someone else have had erected said building'. Or better still, to, 'see that some thing is good and be content' (no matter who did it)

What Valar did/did not re

Here I spy with my little eye something beginning with s, or here comes another shifting of gear for our discussion:

idiotic Manwe re:

Myths Transformed

Of Manwe it was said, when Melkor was allowed to go freely about Valinor, that he believed that his evil was cured: for he himself was free from the evil and could not comprehend it

[davem]

Quote:'Than you once again contradict your own maxim of elven inability to play bad theme in good direction. For Noldor are elves, are not they? But, and but, and but again only Eru can bring good out of evil, for:

The woe they brought about is direct consequence of their pride. So, evil results in evil

The good they brought about is direct consequence of their virtues - valour, courage etc. i.e. good results in good'

I don't think I said the Elves couldn't make mistakes, or bring about evil in their attempt to follow Eru's theme - they can - but the point is they would be attempting to actualise Eru's theme. Sauron or Melkor could make a similar mistake in attempting to actualise the 'evil' theme & good could result. We are talking about intention, not results - intentions may be pure but results include many factors, known & unknown, & are impossible to predict.

Quote:'Noldor were not, after all, completely evil, but the dominant, the driving power of their deeds was pride, so overall, on the general plane they could not have succeded unless repenting, but in minor results, which proceeded from their retained virtues, no restrictions were set. And that's why all the good they contrived was vain – being grounded on their evil, it was of no avail'

I wouldn't agree they were 'evil' at all. Pride is a sin, but that does not mean every proud person is evil. In fact, I'd say that they overall they brought about more of good than evil, & their pride was a direct cause of that . I don't see that it was some frail spark of 'good' which they retained which brought about that good. I'd also say that without their 'sins' driving them on they wouldn't have achieved anything at all, Morgoth would have dominated ME, & there would have been Dragons perching on Taniquetil before the Valar had got around to doing anything practical to deal with him.

Quote:'On the other hand, I have (I believe, successfully ) postulated that once the marring is healed, there will be no problem for elves of change-accepting kind.'

Well, this is not provable one way or the other - it would, of course, mean a complete change in the Elves psychological make up - they would, mentally at least, be different beings, percieving the world in a completely different way - this would mean that the Elves of ME could not in any way concieve of their 'changed' nature in Arda Re-made - so it would be impossible for them to feel any desire for that state.

Quote:'Of Manwe it was said, when Melkor was allowed to go freely about Valinor, that he believed that his evil was cured: for he himself was free from the evil and could not comprehend it'

This is no excuse - there were others - Tulkas, Orome, Ulmo, Mandos - who could have told Manwe what Melkor was like, but Manwe didn't listen - Pride perhaps?

Quote:' The Great Ring is stated to hold part of Sauron's original will, and has an ability to bend handler's will to evil, so it ceases to be mere object (as described up above, found by handler with no previous bias) but is a bit more. But this side note is not revelant. It may be said that Great Ring is merely object. Still more, individual has to have patterns of mind similar to that of Sauron's, and similar intentions already there to be affected (hence no effect of the Ring on Tom, and great dread on Gandalf's part even to touch it) – or, your statement of motives under creation of rings also found acceptable'

I agree. But we would have to say the same about the Elven Rings, because it seems to me that they all work in the same way, & to that extent are all the same. All of them would overwhelm the mind & will of the individual using them.

Clearly Sauron puts forth some of his own power into the One, which doesn't seem to be the case with the owners of the Elven Rings - yet we do see their power fades when their Rings fail - even Galadriel speaks of 'diminishing'. Perhaps all the Rings work by teh wielder putting forth some of their power into them. Possibly the Elven Rings could have been as powerful as the One if their owners had put forth more of their power into them - but they would not want to risk it.

[HerenIstarion]

Perception - let it go, than

Evil, horrible, awful Noldor re:

Pride is a sin, but that does not mean every proud person is evil

Give it time enough and it will bring you there. Main case - dear old soppy Melkor/Morgoth. Minor case - a lot of kinslaying going about even after Alqualonde. Another minor case - Denethor II, Steward of Gondor. Their name is legion.

Morgoth would have dominated ME

Here, as in physics, speculation goes both ways. If not the Pride of the Noldor, Manwe in person may have headed the renewed pursuit and kicked some arse, which pursuit may have been reversed just 'thanks' to the rebellion of Feanor and his kin. No knowing.

I don't see that it was some frail spark of 'good' which they retained which brought about that good

Not necessarily frail, at that, but it is quite simple . If they have been proud, and proud only, without anything else, whatever driving force it may have been, they would end up nowhere:

Without wits, they would not have been able to judge what was to be done. Without courage, how to cross so great a sea or even how to find food to sustain them once ashore. Without sub creative talents they would not have been able to make swords and build fortresses to hold Morgoth in check, and so forth. So, all good fruit they bore is there as the consequence of them having virtues of reason, courage etc. Rip that off, and with pride as a leftover you get kinslaying and madness only.

On Valar, later

[davem]

My own feeling as regards the whole behaviour of the Noldor is that they are trying to 'actualise the Music' which includes getting to ME as fast as possible, to confront & destroy Morgoth - of course they ride roughshod over many good things, do terrible things, but they are being driven by an unconscious desire to make the world as they feel it should be. Probably this makes them do things they should not even consider, but they are being 'driven', & if driven by the Music, then driven ultimately by Eru, who composed it. They are driven by hate, anger, pride, desire to put right a wrong. Their ultimate motivation is to put the world right, make it as it should have been - as far as they are capable of understanding it.

Quote:'If not the Pride of the Noldor, Manwe in person may have headed the renewed pursuit and kicked some arse, which pursuit may have been reversed just 'thanks' to the rebellion of Feanor and his kin. No knowing. '

But the point is, Manwe doesn't have that luxury, to put on one side his, & the Valar's responsibility to deal with Morgoth, till the Noldor had been humbled, because in doing that he's leaving Men, Sindar & Dwarves to suffer at Morgoth's hands. My own feeling is that the Valar were in shock at the mess they'd made by intervening & bringing the Elves to Valinor, & so went to the other extreme, & decided to opt out of ME altogether - or as far as they could. They didn't know what to do for the best, but their choice was a bad one, & if not for the Noldor in ME we can't say whether Morgoth would have achieved final victory - with a possible force of Dragons, Balrogs, enslaved men, dwarves & Sindarin Elves at his command. What the Valar should have done is put the issue of the Noldor on one side, dealt with Morgoth, & then found a way to deal with the Noldor.

For all their 'sin' the Noldor are the perfect 'shock troops' to hit Morgoth with - & the reason they are so 'perfect' in that role is not because of their remaining virtues, but because of their 'vices' - anger, pride, & desire for revenge. Nothing short of a direct attack by the Valar (which wasn't going to happen straight away) would have been more effective against Morgoth. Because of the Noldor the Valar had time to find the right way to deal with Morgoth in the end. The Noldor hold the line till the Valar are ready - which may imply that the Valar make use of them in that role - for all their condemnation of them.

[HerenIstarion]

For all their 'sin' the Noldor are the perfect 'shock troops' to hit Morgoth with - & the reason they are so 'perfect' in that role is not because of their remaining virtues, but because of their 'vices'

Working backwards from that statement:

pride and anger = good tool to fight Morgoth

since pride and anger ≠ humility and calmness
and
good tool ≠ bad tool

so humility and calmness = bad tool to fight Morgoth

Yet Morgoth is finally overthrown by the Host of the West, which mainly consists of humble and calm Vanyar. Proud and andry Noldor are crushed. But:

Valar re (The delay I needed to find appropriate piece of textual evidence :

you seem at the same time correct and erring in your judgement. Let him answer who told us the story:

Myths Transformed, HoME X

This appearance of selfish fainéance in the Valar in the mythology as told is (though I have not explained it or commented on it) I think only an 'appearance', and one which we are apt to accept as the truth, since we are all in some degree affected by the shadow and lies of their Enemy, the Calumniator. It has to be remembered that the 'mythology' is repre¬sented as being two stages removed from a true record: it is based first upon Elvish records and lore about the Valar and their own dealings with them; and these have reached us (fragmentarily) only through relics of Númenórean (human) traditions, derived from the Eldar, in the earlier parts, though for later times supplemented by anthropocentric histories and tales. These, it is true, came down through the 'Faithful' and their descendants in Middle-earth, but could not altogether escape the darkening of the picture due to the hostility of the rebellious Númenóreans to the Valar.
Even so, and on the grounds of the stories as received, it is possible to view the matter otherwise. The closing of Valinor against the rebel Noldor (who left it voluntarily and after warning) was in itself just. But, if we dare to attempt to enter the mind of the Elder King, assigning motives and finding faults, there are things to remember before we deliver a judgement. Manwë was the spirit of greatest wisdom and prudence in Arda. He is represented as having had the greatest knowledge of the Music, as a whole, possessed by any one finite mind; and he alone of all persons or minds in that time is represented as having the power of direct recourse to and communication with Eru. He must have grasped with great clarity what even we may perceive dimly: that it was the essential mode of the process of 'history' in Arda that evil should constantly arise, and that out of it new good should constantly come. One especial aspect of this is the strange way in which the evils of the Marrer, or his inheritors, are turned into weapons against evil. If we consider the situation after the escape of Morgoth and the reestablishment of his abode in Middle-earth, we shall see that the heroic Noldor were the best possible weapon with which to keep Morgoth at bay, virtually besieged, and at any rate fully occupied, on the northern fringe of Middle-earth, without provoking him to a frenzy of nihilistic destruction. And in the meanwhile, Men, or the best elements in Mankind, shaking off his shadow, came into contact with a people who had actually seen and experienced the Blessed Realm

In their association with the warring Eldar Men were raised to their fullest achievable stature, and by the two marriages the transference to them, or infusion into Mankind, of the noblest Elf-strain was accomplished, in readiness for the still distant, but inevitably approaching, days when the Elves would 'fade'.
The last intervention with physical force by the Valar, ending in the breaking of Thangorodrim, may then be viewed as not in fact reluctant or even unduly delayed, but timed with precision. The intervention came before the annihilation of the Eldar and the Edain. Morgoth though locally triumphant had neglected most of Middle-earth during the war; and by it he had in fact been weakened: in power and prestige (he had lost and failed to recover one of the Silmarils), and above all in mind. He had become absorbed in 'kingship', and though a tyrant of ogre-size and monstrous power, this was a vast fall even from his former wickedness of hate, and his terrible nihilism. He had fallen to like being a tyrant-king with conquered slaves, and vast obedient armies.

The war was successful, and ruin was limited to the small (if beautiful) region of Beleriand. Morgoth was thus actually made captive in physical form, and in that form taken as a mere criminal to Aman and delivered to Námo Mandos

emphases mine

[davem]

Well, if we accept that this interpretation is correct - & here we have Tolkien the Mythographer analysing the Legendarium as though it is genuine myth - then we have to say I am, as you say, both correct & incorrect.

Yet it is presented in the form of an 'interpretation' of the events by a 'detatched' expert, it is not presented as an explanation by the author of the stories - in other words, I read this as Tolkien playing the role of an interpreter of an ancient mythology, a scholar offering an personal analysis of events.


Quote:It has to be remembered that the 'mythology' is repre¬sented as being two stages removed from a true record: it is based first upon Elvish records and lore about the Valar and their own dealings with them; and these have reached us (fragmentarily) only through relics of Númenórean (human) traditions, derived from the Eldar, in the earlier parts, though for later times supplemented by anthropocentric histories and tales.

Well, this was Tolkien's (not entirely successful) attempt to explain the inconsistencies within the Legendarium, & the lack of consistency between the Legendarium & modern scientific accounts of the history of the world. I've said before that I find (sadly) a great deal of Tolkien's attempts in this late period to 'clarify' the legendarium has the opposite effect.

My own feeling is that the explanation is problematical, as it has the Valar standing back & allowing a lot of innocent people to suffer in order that they can become 'better' people through suffering - bit like the parent about to beat his child senseless saying 'this is for your own good!' I think that Tolkien is trying to construct an account of the Valar's behaviour which would be consistent with the later form of the Mythology - the selfish, confused, proud Valar worked fine in the context of the Lost Tales, even of the '30's Quenta Silmarillion, but by the later period, where they have moved from the equivalent of the Pagan gods to incarnate Angels their behaviour has to be accounted for in a different way. The account Tolkien gives in the quote is one possible explanation for the Valar's behaviour, but I'm not sure it works completely - like so much in the later writings.

Quote: Yet Morgoth is finally overthrown by the Host of the West, which mainly consists of humble and calm Vanyar. Proud and andry Noldor are crushed.

I don't recall the Vanyar being described as 'calm'. I doubt they were all that calm when faced with dragons, Balrogs & orcs slaughtering their comrades during the battle. And as Tolkien says, only the Noldor could have done the job of holding Morgoth in check throughout the FA - the Noldor as they were, with both vices & virtues.

[HerenIstarion]

Vanyar re: I suppose they must have been calm since they were not proud. (anger as the direct consequence of pride)

Tolkien is trying to construct an account of the Valar's behaviour which would be consistent with the later form of the Mythology

Where is the bad thing in that?
Somewhere in preceeding posts you also mentioned that when authors were all elves it made it even more confusing as to why accounts differed to that extent. It is fine by me (as was quoted in someone's signature around here, "some people are wise, and some are otherwise") - some scribes knew better, some not. Most of what was written accounts the history of elves this side of the sea. Possibly, those allegedly calm Vanyar and other dwellers of beyond the sea were exactly the people to know better (all them kinds of things - that sun was round, that Manwe was wise and not confused - they were on the spot to judge it, whilst those on this side had their sight dimmed with distance and, yes, again, you guessed rightly, with their pride)

bit like the parent about to beat his child senseless saying 'this is for your own good!

Three cases (or possibly four, if we separate sindar as distinct group)

A) Men
Valar were not in a position to be viewed as parents to men - men were too great a thing for them to handle. Even if we hold on to my argument that difference of their freedom is only in their death. If we lean on your argument of men having different kind of freedom, than it is impossible ofr Valar to help out men whatsoever. Indeed, how can creature moving in one direction at atime only (i.e., actualizing this particular theme and not other, step out of its rails and change the course. So, dead lock:

1. If Valar are after actualization of the Music, they can not let such an actualization be and change their course. For the pause when they do nothing is already in there in the Music, and can not be altered whatever Manwe's personal position
2. If we hold on to what I think can be the case - i.e., all, including Valar and Men, have their freedom expressed as simple choice - "do-don't", whilst each action is measured in this respect against built-in standard of "good-evil", than judgement comes in and defines further action. What kind of judgement prevailed, see up there

I hold the second clause to be true. In this case, Valar and Men are coeval. But still Valar can not go and give them guidance and protection, for:

Men's fate after death is to go where elves knew not [but assumptions there are that to Eru directly]. Death came around as a result of the Fall (again too), when men ceased to listen to Eru's voice. So men were not to be tinkered with by Valaron two additional grounds :

1. Before the Fall, there was Eru to guide them. Were the Valar to walk in and take the Men away?
2. After the fall, two more points: 2.1 As shutting of Valinor against Noldor is just, so denial of help to those who rebelled not against mere Manwe, but Eru Himself is even more justified. 2.2 There is not time enough even if Valar choose to go for it - men die soon and go to Eru. If you take Men to Valinor, it can bring disastrous results (I'll try to provide you with quote later, for now, summary: fea will want to go, but hroa in the bliss of Valinor would have the powerto, ehich bind it. In case of stronger fea, it will break free by force. In case of stronger hroa, man will degenarate into kind of monster or zombie. And fea and hroa will hate each other). Valar can not themselves go to Beleriand to protect Men on the spot for the reasons given above.

That's why Earendil is essential - to repent on behalf of both races. And existence of a person to do so for both would not be possible without Valar letting things develop a bit. (not to mention whole line of kings of Numenor etc)


B) Noldor
Noldor chose to go away freely, though they were warned. But coming back to parent argument - is there a parent which would not want for their children to grow up, but to remain small for ever? Not to be able to do things for themselves, but look up to parents for ever? Here you seem to try to eat a cake and have it - let them be proud and independent, but when push comes to shove, why do not we get a help, it is unjust! But that is not a kind of argument I oppose you with, it's just an impression I've got, beggin your pardon, if you follow my meaning, kind sir , pray correct if I err.

C) Sindar
Sindar knew their peril when they decided to stay behind

D) Dwarves

Dwarves were more the concern of Aule, than of all Valar combined. Ask of him what he did not...

But it seems to me, above given exerpt explains it more or less adequately, without further need for me to find additional ones

Besides, I'm running out of steam, I suppose, for I have a feeling of forgetting to put something important in and can't tell what precisely. Maybe because of late hour it is, so, with the hope of morrow bringing better judgement, I stop here for now.

later

[davem]

Quote:Vanyar re: I suppose they must have been calm since they were not proud. (anger as the direct consequence of pride)

Quote:
Tolkien is trying to construct an account of the Valar's behaviour which would be consistent with the later form of the Mythology
Where is the bad thing in that?


The problem with Tolkien doing this, as I just mentioned in the Unnumbered Tears thred, is that he is not so much adding & developing the Legendarium as trying to 'explain' it - sometimes to explain certain events away. In the later writings he is writing theology, & what he writes has more to do with his feelings about events in this world, than events in ME. He attempts to explain the Valar's lack of action. He says this is necessary because 'some' have criticised their lack of action against Morgoth during the FA . But who are the critics? My own feeling is that after LotR, partly as a result of letters recieved questioning events in the book, often questioning its 'orthodoxy', he began to look at it in a more 'detatched' way, analysing events & characters. Its notable that during the writing of LotR & later he begins referring to the Devil by the name of Sauron, & uses the term 'The Authority' when he is referring both to God (in this world) & to Eru. The Legendarium begins to overlay the 'real' world in his imagination. The 'critics' I mentioned seem really to be one (by the time of the later writings the Inklings are no longer meeting) - Tolkien himself is the 'critic'. He has re read the Silmarillion, & it no longer works - or rather it is no longer what he wants or needs to write. The behaviour of the Valar, which in their original form of Pagan gods, was capricious, confused, selfish. Now, it can't be. So he either has to rewrite the whole thing (which he eventually attempts, unsuccessfully), or he has to construct complex theological explanations, which really explain very little. His problem is that the stories are fixed in his mind, integrated with each other - changes in one tale would necesitate changes in all the others. This is one reason he cannot finish the Silmarillion. The other is that, as an old man who had seen terrible things, & known incredible loss - parents, friends - he felt a need to write somthing else. Theology - specifically a theology of suffering. How can a good God allow pain, loss, death. So lots of things which earlier could be simply stated as background events - like the fall of Man - come centre stage, & are dealt with. But this is no longer about creating a mythology, it is about understanding God, himself & all the suffering in the world. The Legendarium provides the means for this exploration, but he's no longer writing the Silmarillion - that was effectively finished before LotR was begun, & simply needed 'tidying up' for publication. He wanted, needed to do something else. Its not so much that its a 'bad' thing. Its a 'different' thing. Unfortunately, pursued in the way it was, it risked unravelling the Legendarium. I think he simply wanted to write something else - perhaps follow Lewis as a Christian apologist, but couldn't leave the Legendarium, so he combined the two.

Quote:Somewhere in preceeding posts you also mentioned that when authors were all elves it made it even more confusing as to why accounts differed to that extent. It is fine by me (as was quoted in someone's signature around here, "some people are wise, and some are otherwise") - some scribes knew better, some not. Most of what was written accounts the history of elves this side of the sea. Possibly, those allegedly calm Vanyar and other dwellers of beyond the sea were exactly the people to know better (all them kinds of things - that sun was round, that Manwe was wise and not confused - they were on the spot to judge it, whilst those on this side had their sight dimmed with distance and, yes, again, you guessed rightly, with their pride)

Except we don't have any accounts from beyond the Sea - how could we - ok, possibly the Vanyar updated the people of ME - but my sense is that all these 'speculations' on the Valar's motives are not 'canonical' - what they are are Tolkien's own comments & interpretations -they are given in the form of a canonical work, certainly, but I think he had changed his 'role' by then - he was both recorder & interpreter of that world, & in some writings the roles blurred - often to his own confusion.

My own feeling is that originally the Valar intervened with the Elves, saw the whole thing turn out to be a mistake, & then didn''t know what the Music was telling them to do. They called the Elves to Valinor out of desire for them - a lesser 'sin' than Pride, perhaps, but not so much less. They learnt from that mistake, but were still unsure of what the right course of action was. The drive to actualise the Music is not wholly a conscious thing, even with the Valar themselves, because they don't know the whole of it - mostly only their own parts in it. So most of their attempts to actualise it would be 'best guesses'. After the death of the Trees & the Rebellion of the Noldor they were suddenly unsure of their skill at guessing. They wouldn't have had to bring Men to Valinor to protect them. Why not at least go to ME, explain the situation, offer to move them out of Beleriand, so they could deal with Morgoth. Why not at least try something. But here we are back with the situation of the Valar's behaviour being based on wholly different motives, not the High ideals of the later writings. We also come to the question of how much 'freedom' men & other races could be said to have in the extremely straightened circumstances they found themselves in. And finally, Morgoth is the Valar's responsibility, which they simply shirk for most of the FA. They leave the Chiildren at the mercy of a being who they cannot hope to defeat, in the midst of a war of attrition which they can only lose.

As to Earendel - if his repentence was the only thing the Valar were waiting for, why make it so hellishly difficult for him to get there & repent? I don't see either that the Sindar knew what they were letting themselves in for - they had no real knowledge of what Morgoth was going to do - & once he had been removed to Mandos, they certainly had no idea the Valar would release him. But then, either Manwe had to release him, because it was in the Music - which takes away any choice of the Valar, & they become 'puppets' without choice, or it wasn't 'specifically' set out in the Music, in which case it was a stupid thing to do - the Valar don't come off too well in either case.

My own feeling regarding the Music is that it sets out too possible 'futures' & Valar, Maiar & Elves are moved to try & bring about one or the other by choices they make - not that every single event is laid down by it & set in stone.

[HerenIstarion]

I find it easy to agree with you and accept your comments on Tolkien's doings in his later writings. Ok, he was doing the different thing. But I fail to see why such a change in motives and main factors underlying the legendarium is to be rejected and not to be welcomed as anything produced earlier?

What you have done in your previous, is the same what you 'accuse' Tolkien of - you have been interpreting actions of invented characters. In such a case, the author has the final word, rather than any other interpreter

Therefore, I would more willingly believe the creator of said characters who's actions you both (or we three, rather) try to interpret, even if the creator contradicts his earlier writings

Besides, I have already mentioned why inconsistencies do not confuse me, for I believe they can be explained away but assuming several authors for legendarium, each expressing his own point of view. So, for embittered Noldo it would have been only natural to accuse Valar of selfishness and reluctance to do anything about Morgoth.

As to Earendel - if his repentence was the only thing the Valar were waiting for, why make it so hellishly difficult for him to get there & repent?

Well, for one thing, sins have been great, so why should it be easy to get forgiven?

For another, the act is rather symbolic. Probably and possibly (speculation of yours truly, of course, but thing possible for all I can think of) Morgoth would have been kicked either way. But for all things else, Noldor and Men were nevertheless given the chance to repent.

My own feeling regarding the Music is that it sets out too possible 'futures' & Valar, Maiar & Elves are moved to try & bring about one or the other by choices they make - not that every single event is laid down by it & set in stone

My point exactly. With all mentioned 'pattern world is fitted into', and 'music does not eliminate freedom, it rather defines it' above. But you have come down to choice too seemingly, did you notice? For all this time I was trying to point out that the main expression of freedom for all (Valar, Elves and Men) as reserved despite the Music is the choice of 'do/don't' kind.

cheers

[davem]

Quote:'But I fail to see why such a change in motives and main factors underlying the legendarium is to be rejected and not to be welcomed as anything produced earlier?'

I do welcome the later writings - I think they are some of Tolkien's greatest works, & contain some of his most beautiful prose & profoundest thought. I just feel tht a lot of what is in there is so different from the original mythology that it is like putting new wine in old bottles - it starts to crack the whole thing, or like patching an old garment with new cloth. When Tolkien introduced works like Osanwe Kenta, The Athrabeth, Laws & Customs, etc, into the Legendarium as he found it when he turned back to it after completing LotR he was bound to cause himself problems. And this whole idea of the histories coming from different hands cannot accomodate two such completely different accounts of the origin of the sun, or a mad conception like the 'Dome of Varda' - which is simply an act of desperation on Tolkien's part, in his misguided attempt to make his mythology fit in with modern cosmology.

The point is, all these later conceptions -- ie Morgoth sending forth his power into Arda, which is incredibly clever - are later inventions, & played no part in the original stories. The effects of the War of Wrath on the world were not inspired by this conception of Morgoth's attempt to corrupt the Hroa of incarnate beings by corrupting the matter of Arda. They were a 'mythologisation' of the hellish destruction left by the mechanised warfare of WW1. The Valar did not intervene originally because they were haughty & proud & were simply leaving the Noldor to stew in their own juices. Hence, they have to be begged. Earendel has to come crawling before they will condescend to help. When Tolkien goes back to the Legendarium, he realises this behaviour will no longer work for the 'new' Valar he is concieving, so he begins to construct some very complex 'explanations', which don't convince at all.

(Sorry, More later)

[davem]

(Cont)

My own feelings regarading the Music is that in his original theme Eru basically put forward the vision of a supremely beautiful world. Melkor then introduces 'negative' forces to control, dominate & destroy. 'Specific' events are quite rare.

When it comes to 'actualising' the Music in Arda Valar & Elves are attempting to bring about the primal vision, but including later changes. It is a working toward that vision. Certain events - not all - will 'have' to happen, but most will be the result of choices made in order to bring the vision into being.

But they can only choose which of these two visions to actualise, & their 'freedom' consists in choosing which of the two alternative themes to work to bring about, but they have a great deal of choice in how they do it. Men are not bound to choose either theme, & may offer to Eru new possibilities which he may accept or reject.

[HerenIstarion]

Dear davem

I certainly ran out of steam. It seems to me we are bound to repeat arguments already pointed out from now on (for we have turned back to actualization of the Music again). Well, I stay with my own - for I do not agree with number of your statements, least of all with the mode of the choice. Neither legendarium-changing process makes so much of confusion (find out what next man thinks God is and what thermodynamics are, and compare it with what educated theologian and educated physicist respectively may tell you - you'll get as much difference as with Tolkien's earlier and later accounts, probably more)

But, before I've started another prolonged essay, I better state that some fresh wine will do good to the bottle in the case of given thread and stop at that. Nevertheless, thank you ever so much for this invigorating piece of debate - I haven't got such a training for my wits for ages. It helped me to better shape some pieces I was dimly aware of for myself. There were points on which we agreed, too, and that is a good thing as well

Besides, since I won't be able to go online for a while hence, I thought it improper to leave you thus unanswered

With which I withdraw myself (not that I do not reserve the right to return and renew the hostilities once I feel inclined to, tricky me )

But for now, until better times

[davem]

Well, I suppose all good things must come to an end - but I think you're right. We've taken this as far as we can. I'm glad we've ended it on amicable terms, even if without agreement

I suppose we (or at least I) have started to circle back around old ideas - possibly my fault - I tend to just post what comes to me as I write, without reviewing earlier things I've said - on the principal so wisely expressed by Proverbs 26:11

I think there may be an interesting debate to be had about the value of Tolkien's later writings, & their place in the Legendarium.

Like Gandalf & Bombadil, we have had our long talk - I won't suggest which of us is which ! But unlike them, I hope it won't be our last on this side of the Sea.

[HerenIstarion]

Thank you a lot indeed, davem

[Nirvana II]

ok..im lost...explain this in crude layman's terms please!!!!!