Lord of Gravity

[alatar]

The idea for this thread all started with a flippant comment regarding which of the Valar was the Lord of Gravity, some wind-downed trees and recent reading of Greek mythology.

Assuming that our world is Arda in an Age later than documented by Tolkien. This world was created by Eru, marred by Melkor and patched by the Valar. We witness daily round this world 'natural' disasters - hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, blizzards, tornadoes and other calamities, on both the small and large scales.

How and why do these things occur?

Are all of the 'bad' events, such as a tornado that wipes out a village, the mixing of power of one Valar (Manwë) with the legacy of Melkor? Or is it just the work of Manwë, and we just don't understand the purpose of the event?

While driving home the other day after a particularly powerful storm, I couldn't help but think that Yavanna could not be very happy with the hundreds of uprooted trees lying about - trees uprooted by the winds purportedly under the control of Manwë. Maybe this was 'part of the plan' where the Lord of Air's help was enlisted to knock down a few aging trees, and well, sorry if one fell on your house or across your path.

At least with Ossë, we have documentation that this maia is not always 'friendly,' and so many of the sea-related natural calamities could pour from his hands. Earthquakes and mine cave-ins could be laid at the feet of the Nameless Things, which may be burrowing around under the firmament, pushing up mountains and opening up chasms, and Aulë too busy pretending to be Iarwain Ben-adar (not) to be any help. Volcanoes explode due to the fluttering of a trapped Balrog's wings perhaps? Blight and subsequent famine, at a stretch, could be some plan of Yavanna, as maybe the soil/land may need to be rebooted now and again by a swarm of locusts.

I guess the question is not how and why does evil exist, as I think that Tolkien answers that in Arda, but how and why do natural disasters occur? Science tells us that, well, things happen, and will continue to happen as the world is continually in flux (the mountains/hills where I currently live were at one time under swampy water during the Carboniferous period, so things do change). Are the 'gods' angry with us, have a plan that we don't understand, or is the marring of Melkor still in play, and the Valar can not or will not hold back its dominion?

[littlemanpoet]

The marring of Melkor is still in play. imho

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I think if you ask for the answers of Arda, then it's clear from the Ainulindalë to me, as Elempi said: all the bad things come from Morgoth's marring, for example he was the one who created the unbearable cold and also the... (*interesting, now I had some sort of problem with memory, and could not think of what is the English word for the opposite of cold... but the word that immediately came to my mind, was the Elven word úre. So yup, that's it Interesting, by the way - the Prof would surely be happy if he heard about this, because he'd explain it so that's because I find the word úre suitable for naming that thing *) I imagine it the way that he could misuse any power of Valar, because originally

Originally Posted by Ainulindalë

he had a share in all the gifts of his brethren.

Which is the main point. Or more elaborated

Originally Posted by Valaquenta

Great might was given to him by Ilъvatar, and he was coeval with Manwë. In the powers and knowledge of all the other Valar he had part, but he turned them to evil purposes, and squandered his strength in violence and tyranny.

And we also know Morgoth was expert in twisting things as he wanted, and in making the "illusions" or "tricks", to make something appear differently, to make something look as if it came from Valar but it came from him, for example what I call the "Hunter-trick" to make the Elves be afraid of Oromë and thus disable the possibility of joining him:

Originally Posted by Silmarillion, Chapter 3

And indeed the most ancient songs of the Elves, of which echoes are remembered still in the West, tell of the shadow-shapes that walked in the hills above Cuiviénen, or would pass suddenly over the stars; and of the dark Rider upon his wild horse that pursued those that wandered to take them and devour them. Now Melkor greatly hated and feared the riding of Oromë, and either he sent indeed his dark servants as riders, or he set lying whispers abroad, for the purpose that the Quendi should shun Oromë, if ever they should meet.

So in conclusion, either the catastrophes come from Morgoth himself (when he's present) or are the continuing work of his marring (already "written" in the song).

[Mithalwen]

Osse and Uinen have reached that dangerous stage in their relationship... "The Seven Age itch"

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Only alatar would actually start a thread called "Lord of Gravity" WITHOUT tongue in cheek...

[radagastly]

If a tree fals in the forest, and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?

These natural disasters are only disasters because people are around to witness (and suffer from) them.

From the Silmarillion:

And Iluvatar spoke to Ulmo, and said, "Seest thou not how here in this little realm in the Deeps of Time Melkor hath made war upon thy province? He hath thought him of bitter cold immoderate, and yet hath not destroyed the beauty of thy fountains, nor of thy clear pools. Behold the snow, and the cunning work of frost! Melkor hath devised heats and fire without restraint, and hath not dried up thy desire nor utterly quelled the music of the sea. Behold rather the height and glory of the clouds, and the everchanging mists; and listen to the fall of rain upon the Earth!

And they built lands, and Melkor destroyed them; valleys they delved, and Melkor raised them up; mountains they carved, and Melkor threw them down; seas they hollowed, and Melkor spilled them, and naught might have peace or lasting growth, for as surely as the Valar began a labor so would Melkor undo it or corrupt it.

A pretty violent, ongoing process, and yet:

For the Children of Iluvatar were conceived by him alone; and they came with the third theme, and were not in the theme which Iluvatar propounded at the beginning, and none of the Ainur had part in their making.

Natural disasters are only disasters from a human (or elvish) perspective. They have nothing to do with the (ongoing) shaping of Arda, marred or unmarred. We simply find them in our way!

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by radagastly

Natural disasters are only disasters from a human (or elvish) perspective. They have nothing to do with the (ongoing) shaping of Arda, marred or unmarred. We simply find them in our way!

Well, that's surely a good point. However, there is one thing - it's important to remember that Arda was supposed to be made for the Children to abide in it. I think part of the solution lays in what you hinted at earlier, that the Valar did not originally think of the Elves and Men coming in the world.

Originally Posted by Ainulindalë

And they saw with amazement the coming of the Children of Ilúvatar, and the habitation that was prepared for them; and they perceived that they themselves in the labour of their music had been busy with the preparation of this dwelling, and yet knew not that it had any purpose beyond its own beauty.

(emphasise mine)
In other words, for example Aulë could have thought that an erupting volcano could be a nice thing to behold, but did not think of the possibility that it may harm anyone. However...

...however, I am sure that's not satisfactory explanation. First, even my example above is probably a little bit "out", since we know that Melkor created the "unbearable heat" and so on, so generally, I daresay that probably even then Valar did not originally create anything "harmful" by itself, that it all came through Melkor. Then, many beautiful things (like the snow etc) came out of originally evil intention; but not vice versa.

And concerning my volcano example, it was just an example - probably a bad one, by the way, because

Originally Posted by Ainulindalë

Melkor too was there from the first, and he meddled in all that was done, turning it if he might to his own desires and purposes; and he kindled great fires

So who knows if it's even a good example

Also, when Valar came down to Arda, they had still much, much work to do (and from that time comes what you, radagastly, mention in the second quote in your post above). The important thing is that they already knew that there were some Children coming - they knew it from the Vision, and they were technically making the whole World anew, just "by the lines" of the Music. Let's see:

Originally Posted by Ainulindalë

But when the Valar entered into Eä they were at first astounded and at a loss, for it was as if naught was yet made which they had seen in vision, and all was but on point to begin and yet unshaped, and it was dark. For the Great Music had been but the growth and flowering of thought in the Tuneless Halls, and the Vision only a foreshowing; but now they had entered in at the beginning of Time, and the Valar perceived that the World had been but foreshadowed and foresung, and they must achieve it. So began their great labours in wastes unmeasured and unexplored, and in ages uncounted and forgotten, until in the Deeps of Time and in the midst of the vast halls of Eä there came to be that hour and that place where was made the habitation of the Children of Ilúvatar.

So, at that time they already knew that there will be some Children, and they surely tried to minimalise the danger for them. We are told that even in connection to Melkor:

Originally Posted by Ainulindalë

And [Melkor] feigned, even to himself at first, that he desired to go thither and order all things for the good of the Children of Ilúvatar, controlling the turmoils of the heat and the cold that had come to pass through him.

There are two things I would conclude from this part:

1. Even Melkor wanted to (or pretended to want to) control the bad things he created. So it's I think safe to assume that the more the other Valar would want to calm down any harmful things they made, now that they knew that the World was made for the Children to live in, and not just for itself. (If ever the other Valar made such things, as I hinted at earlier, and also see below).
2. "That came to pass through him" - this sentence can mean two things. Either, Melkor wanted to control just the heat&cold HE created and if any other Vala made anything harmful, he did not care but wanted to undo just what he did. This would mean not just hot&cold, because I am sure Melkor made more "harmful" things than just the heat and cold and that the heat and cold are here named just as examples representing all Melkor's dischord. So, it would mean "Melkor wanted to undo what he did, but if any other Vala did anything bad as well, he left it to him". After all, why not. However, there is second explanation possible. If we put the main point in the words "that came through him", we could understand the sentence as "He wanted to undo all the evil things, that all came from him." I hope it's understandable - I mean that it could mean that all the evil came from Melkor and from no one else. This idea is supported by the fact that in the Music, everything went fine, and apart from Melkor, there was no dischord, even when the third theme (the one CONTAINING the idea of Children) came.

Then there is one last thing, which supports the idea that the natural disasters are "evil" in nature. As I said just now, there was no dischord between the Valar, apart from the one Melkor created. Even in the beginning. And here is my point. Yavanna, as we know, created kelvar and olvar (animals and plants), and as alatar already said in his first post, Yavanna would surely not be happy with the uprooted trees after a wind storm. But there was nothing like Yavanna's sadness at first in the song, so we can conclude that Manwë did not create any sort fo wind that would tear trees from their places. And the most important, and with that I am going to finish, is the animals. You said, radagastly, "If a tree fals in the forest, and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?" It's appropriate to say that if there were no Children, the natural disasters won't need to be classificated as "bad" because they won't harm anyone. But let's not forget that even before the Children, there were the living plants and also animals who can be afraid of things, and you'd hear them screaming if suddenly a volcano erupted near them. In this point of view, the original, unmarred Arda without Melkor would have been unharmful to its denizens, be they the Children or just plants and animals.

[alatar]

Thanks for posting, everyone.

Originally Posted by radagastly

Natural disasters are only disasters from a human (or elvish) perspective.

A man and his son sit on their porch one stormy night, taking advantage of the breeze. It's dark, as it's night, but also because a storm is coming. The air is thick, the clouds heavy, dark and brooding. The breeze slows, stops, then picks up and becomes a wind. Rain like a sheet drops from the sky and suddenly the porch is walled in water. Booming can be heard in the distance; the sky lightens here and there. As the storm gets closer, the booming gets louder and the lightning more apparent. The rain slows somewhat but the storm worsens. The son looks up at his dad, frightened by the intensity of the crashing, cracking and booming, but his father gives him a knowing nod, assuring him that it's okay, though the dad himself isn't too sure. The father looks up at his neighbors' house, sitting lonely on top of the hill across the valley...

Crack! BOOM!

The house up on top of the hill is no more. The fire now there is hard to see as the afterimage of the lightning bolt hitting the hilltop is still etched on both father's and son's eyes. When they recover from the shock, the son looks up at his dad, the question his face apparent.

***

How does dad reply? Would it be dependent on what is assumed to be the cause of the lightning? And so:

• Greek citizen, 435 BCE. "Son, those people must have angered Mighty Zeus, who smote them with his thunderbolt. Think that I heard them the other day saying something negative about Zeus' hair."
• Roman citizen, 26 BCE. "Son, those people must have angered Juppiter Optimus Maximus Soter, who smote them with his thunderbolt. Think that I heard them the other day saying something like 'Jupiter looked a lot like Zeus.'"
• Rohirrim peasant, Third Age, Peter Jackson's world. "Son, those people must have angered Saruman, who smote them with his thunderbolt, which is a newly acquired ability that he uses very infrequently like his purported fireball spell. Think that I heard them the other day saying something like 'Curse you Saruman! May you fall upon a spikey wheel of your own making!'"
• Some (not all) religious person, present day. ""Son, those people must have angered God, who removed his mantle of protection from them. Think that they didn't believe in the God that we know."
• Some (not all) religious person, present day. ""Son, our God works in mysterious ways and we are to learn from this."
• Some religious or not person, present day. "Son, though I'm not sure exactly why lightning struck that house, but maybe it's because the house was higher up on the hill and lightning tends to favor such elevated things. Such things are infrequent, but can happen.
• Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda. "Son, _______."

What does the person living in today's Arda say to his son? Was it Melkor, Melkor's legacy, part of Eru's plan, Manwe, etc?

And note that I don't mean to disparage anyone's beliefs.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by radagastly

If a tree fals in the forest, and there's nobody around to hear it, does it make a sound?

These natural disasters are only disasters because people are around to witness (and suffer from) them.

Natural disasters are only disasters from a human (or elvish) perspective. They have nothing to do with the (ongoing) shaping of Arda, marred or unmarred. We simply find them in our way!

But the Valar (excepting Morgoth) worked in concert with the theme of Eru. One only ever reads of them building and making that which is good.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

• Greek citizen, 435 BCE. "Son, those people must have angered Mighty Zeus, who smote them with his thunderbolt. Think that I heard them the other day saying something negative about Zeus' hair."
• Roman citizen, 26 BCE. "Son, those people must have angered Juppiter Optimus Maximus Soter, who smote them with his thunderbolt. Think that I heard them the other day saying something like 'Jupiter looked a lot like Zeus.'"
• Rohirrim peasant, Third Age, Peter Jackson's world. "Son, those people must have angered Saruman, who smote them with his thunderbolt, which is a newly acquired ability that he uses very infrequently like his purported fireball spell. Think that I heard them the other day saying something like 'Curse you Saruman! May you fall upon a spikey wheel of your own making!'"
• Some (not all) religious person, present day. ""Son, those people must have angered God, who removed his mantle of protection from them. Think that they didn't believe in the God that we know."
• Some (not all) religious person, present day. ""Son, our God works in mysterious ways and we are to learn from this."
• Some religious or not person, present day. "Son, though I'm not sure exactly why lightning struck that house, but maybe it's because the house was higher up on the hill and lightning tends to favor such elevated things. Such things are infrequent, but can happen.
• Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda. "Son, _______."

What does the person living in today's Arda say to his son? Was it Melkor, Melkor's legacy, part of Eru's plan, Manwe, etc?

And note that I don't mean to disparage anyone's beliefs.

Originally Posted by a child (ahem) of the 7th Age

Would you stop calling me son, Dad? I'm your daughter, in case you hadn't noticed.

[Formendacil]

Perhaps this may be a tad too serious an answer for such a question, but I think we've seen the start of the correct answer in saying "it is Melkor's evil at work in the world".

To expand on that, if one reads the essays in HoME X Morgoth's Ring, I believe it is in the fourth section (the one that deals specifically with various Melkor Morgoth related topics), one will find the writings that gave the book its name.

Unfortunately, I don't have my copy at home with me, but it's back up at college, but I can recap:

Basically, in the same way that Sauron disseminated his power into the Ring, and used it to control things (specifically, the other Rings), Morgoth disseminated his power on a much broader scale: throughout all the physical matter of Arda. Tolkien adds that nothing (possibly excepting Aman) is free of the "taint" of Morgoth. Some parts of matter are more tainted than others; gold, for example, is a very strongly tainted element, hence why Sauron used it to make the Ring, as opposed to silver, but all matter has some Morgoth-element in it.

In the same way that the Sauron-element in the Ring gave it a "consciousness", so to speak, which we see manifested in the way it seeks to return to him, and betray its wearer, it is logical to assume that the Melkor-element in Arda is similarly still working towards his goal. And that goal, ultimately, we are also told in the same section of HoME X, is "the destruction and annihilation of Arda". Morgoth is unable to ever create or control all things, for he is not Eru, and as he becomes more evil, he becomes more blindly destructive.

In this light, I think it is very easy to see hurricanes, earthquakes, or the like as the manifestations of the Melkor-element in Arda blindly raging in destruction.

Sorry about no direct quotes, but my set of the HoME is in Edmonton, and I'm three hours away on a three week holiday at home.

[alatar]

Seemingly the consensus is that it's Melkor's legacy that causes the natural disasters. Though he was cast into the Void, his malevolence lingers to plague the residents, flora, fauna and works within Arda. All well and good. It's not what we would have wanted, but at least we know who's behind the disasters and so just have to tough it out as best we can.

Or is there something we can do?

Assume an earthquake swallows up an entire village as father and son watch from a safe vantage point. It's not their village, so they aren't as upset as if it were their home. Still, as they walk home, the father has to answer more questions from his inquisitive son.

• "Dad, why is it that whenever we're together we witness some calamity?"
  
• "Dad, I know that although the Dark Lord was defeated long ago, we still have to live with his residual evil, but why can't something be done by the Valar?"

Dad ponders this. Are Manwë, Aulë and their ilk busy dancing around in Aman and so weren't available to help the village, did they fear to intervene as the Valar are still smarting over their failure that was the elven intervention, or did the Valar intervene and though the village was swallowed whole by the ground, at least the man and his son got to walk away as that's about as much the gods could do, as there seems to be a limit to their ability to stave off disasters such as this? Dad, in this thoughts, summarizes then speaks to his son, "Son, either the Valar won't help, can't help or did help as much as they could. I don't know the answer; there's a whole in the ground where that village used to be, regardless."

Maybe that's why no one prays in Middle Earth.

[Lalwendë]

Real World - things just happen. We are just vulnerable apes in clothes no matter how we try and impose our intellect on things. We can prevent or predict some disasters but not others, nature is Bigger Than Us. It serves to put us in our place. Some answer it with religion, others with science, either way it's intellectualising and nature often shows us up for being too clever

Tolkien's World - here things are more simple in a way. Eru creates Morgoth, who goes out and marrs the creation of the world, but hey, in doing so, he also creates the chance for great works of beauty - both inadvertent creations of his evil such as beautiful ice floes and mighty thunderstorms, and creations made in response to his evil such as Gondolin, mighty swords and human qualities of bravery and honour. All of which ironically serve only to fly in the face of Morgoth and make Eru look that bit more cool and awesome.

The Book of Job shows us a similar God, one who causes smiting and destruction, and when Job questions him, he finds out it's Because He Can, Don't Question My Authority. I reckon if Alatar of the Barrow Downs asked the same question of Eru - why do you allow this? - he might get much the same answer, but with the footnote and pat on the head: "but don't worry, because whatever nasty stuff Morgoth has put into Arda, ultimately only serves to glorify me a bit more".

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Real World - things just happen. We are just vulnerable apes in clothes no matter how we try and impose our intellect on things. We can prevent or predict some disasters but not others, nature is Bigger Than Us. It serves to put us in our place. Some answer it with religion, others with science, either way it's intellectualising and nature often shows us up for being too clever

I wouldn't say that "things just happen," even though I say that a lot. There is a cause; sometimes we don't know what that is, but it's not like, out of the blue sky an elven princess appears with a sword to your throat (that's caused by Peter Jackson). It's always something, but I know what you mean. There's no malevolent will behind a lightning strike; maybe standing atop the highest hill in the area during a lightning storm parading around with a tall iron pole had something to do with your being fried.

Tolkien's World - here things are more simple in a way. Eru creates Morgoth, who goes out and marrs the creation of the world, but hey, in doing so, he also creates the chance for great works of beauty - both inadvertent creations of his evil such as beautiful ice floes and mighty thunderstorms, and creations made in response to his evil such as Gondolin, mighty swords and human qualities of bravery and honour. All of which ironically serve only to fly in the face of Morgoth and make Eru look that bit more cool and awesome.

Great. We get to do our best to duck and dodge the remnants of Melkor just so Eru can appear cooler. Is he some geek teenager in some school? "Dudes, check this out! In my little terrarium here I got this cool white stuff falling from the clouds. My experiments call it 'snow.'" "Dude, what's with all of the bodies lying on the ground over there?" "Think that we call that 'overhead.'"

The Book of Job shows us a similar God, one who causes smiting and destruction, and when Job questions him, he finds out it's Because He Can, Don't Question My Authority. I reckon if Alatar of the Barrow Downs asked the same question of Eru - why do you allow this? - he might get much the same answer, but with the footnote and pat on the head: "but don't worry, because whatever nasty stuff Morgoth has put into Arda, ultimately only serves to glorify me a bit more".

Guess that puts Eru in the 'almost perfect' set, as perfect, seemingly, could not receive additional glory.

[Formendacil]

Why don't the Valar do anything? Are Manwë and Varda powerless?

I think the answer is, for the most part: yes.

Think about it; we are told that the Valar did not make war on Morgoth after his escape from Valinor (I believe this may also be from Morgoth's Ring), quite largely because to do so would rend the earth in much the same fashion as the tumults of the world when they imprisoned him the first time, and they feared for the survival of Men, who are not as hardy as the Elves.

Additionally, though, if we continue to compare the Earth to the Ring, then remember how Sauron's connection to the Ring was finally broken: by destruction--utter destruction in Mt. Doom.

If the Valar destroy "Morgoth's Ring", we are left with... nothing. Arda will be no more--or no more inhabitable by Men, anyway (and probably not by anything else, either).

Of course, the day will come when the Valar must take the battle to Morgoth. Tolkien's writings are lightly scattered with references to "Dagor Dagorath", the battle at the end of times, when Melkor will at last be slain, but also when the Earth shall end. Shall "Morgoth's Ring" be destroyed--the final end of Arda Marred?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Shall "Morgoth's Ring" be destroyed--the final end of Arda Marred?

There are two versions that I know of: healing - or recreation of Arda:

Originally Posted by Note iii to Of the severance, Later Quenta Silmarillion, HoME X

Since the Elves (and Men) were made for Arda, the satisfaction of their nature will require Arda (without the malice of the Marrer): therefore before the Ending the Marring will be wholly undone or healed (or absorbed into good, beauty, and joy).
...
But others use another analogy, saying that there will indeed be a New Arda, rebuilt from the beginning without Malice, and that the Elves will take part in this from the beginning.

Originally Posted by Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth, HoME X

- [Those of the Old Hope] say, answered Andreth: they say that the One will himself enter into Arda, and heal Men and all the Marring from the beginning to the end.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

"but don't worry, because whatever nasty stuff Morgoth has put into Arda, ultimately only serves to glorify me a bit more".

The more consistent answer is, rather, that all evil works for good, something you touched upon in your post. Tolkien had this idea about his created world

Originally Posted by Notes on motives in the Silmarillion, Myths Transformed HoME X

Manwe 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.

or real life:

Originally Posted by Letter #64

All we do know, and that to a large extent by direct experience, is that evil labours with vast power and perpetual success – in vain: preparing always only the soil for unexpected good to sprout in. So it is in general, and so it is in our own lives. ....

[Bêthberry]

Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda: "Well, daughter, why do you think Eru allows natural disasters to happen?"

Daughter of the 7th Age: "Well, dad, that's a problem only if you think the world should be in statis and perfection an unchanging state. Yet if you recognise that the world and life are in a constant state of flux and that the true nature of life is change, then you won't be so hung up on thinking that natural disasters represent an evil change. Chaos is part of life, just as birth and death are. We can supply our own ethics of how we think human beings ought to respond, but to think that good is a state of unchanging perfection, well, that's just more patriarchal, masculinist claptrap, Dad. Vanity, thy name is man. Think Ecclesiastes."

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda: "Well, daughter, why do you think Eru allows natural disasters to happen?"

"Offspring of indeterminate gender..."

Daughter of the 7th Age: "Well, dad, that's a problem only if you think the world should be in statis and perfection an unchanging state. Yet if you recognise that the world and life are in a constant state of flux and that the true nature of life is change, then you won't be so hung up on thinking that natural disasters represent an evil change. Chaos is part of life, just as birth and death are. We can supply our own ethics of how we think human beings ought to respond, but to think that good is a state of unchanging perfection, well, that's just more patriarchal, masculinist claptrap, Dad. Vanity, thy name is man. Think Ecclesiastes."

Vanity, thy name is Narcissus, speaking of my boy...

Your answer seems to be the 'serenity' prayer. My point, besides never accepting things as they are, is that in Arda the Valar either cannot, will not or do not intervene, or if they do we can not discern their handiwork from the background; therefore the Valar are irrelevant save the bedtime story with occasional moral lesson. Raise a cup to the Westering Sun, but keep your sword sharp, boots dry and water bottle full, as that's all you can depend on.

And regarding the Book of Ecclesiastes, even I'm more positive than that.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda: "Well, daughter, why do you think Eru allows natural disasters to happen?"

Daughter of the 7th Age: "Well, dad, that's a problem only if you think the world should be in statis and perfection an unchanging state. Yet if you recognise that the world and life are in a constant state of flux and that the true nature of life is change, then you won't be so hung up on thinking that natural disasters represent an evil change. Chaos is part of life, just as birth and death are. We can supply our own ethics of how we think human beings ought to respond, but to think that good is a state of unchanging perfection, well, that's just more patriarchal, masculinist claptrap, Dad. Vanity, thy name is man. Think Ecclesiastes."

I can only agree with that!

Why do we never read anything of what happens to the Vanyar in Valinor? If it was so beautiful and perfect why didn't Tolkien write about this? Because what was happening in Middle-earth was infinitely more interesting. It was in Middle-earth that we could see pity and glory and joy, and it was there that we could see Eru's intentions best of all. Valinor is boring. Had Tolkien just written about Valinor it would have been like the kind of tedious pap you can read in the platitude columns in Reader's Digest or the People's Friend. I don't want to read about some simpering Elf Princess and her beautiful hair and her embroidery, I want to read about Frodo and Gollum and Boromir and Saruman!

More below




























OK, it's Lalwendë's post actually...

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Judging by the Ainulindale, wherein virtually everything the Valar built was *almost* undone by Melkor, the Arda we wound up with is nothing like the original intent of Manwe & Co. Reminds me a bit of the part of Big Bang Theory in which the proportions of matter and antimatter were nearly equivalent, and annihilated each other, and the very tiny excess of matter is what was left.

Anyway, as to natural disasters- one of the late essays (can't be bothered to look for it) points out that Mordor was the way it was, and so named 'Black Land', before Sauron ever set up shop there- it was a leftover from Melkor's primal Marring. So if volcanoes stem from that source, there's no reason to exclude earthquakes, and weather patterns that produce storms.

[littlemanpoet]

It seems to me that the logical conclusion a 7th Age Tolkienist must reach, barring any "outside influences" from the 1st Century of our present era, is the Nordic world view with its code of honor and dark, cold, windblown skies, and Ragnarok over the horizon.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

It seems to me that the logical conclusion a 7th Age Tolkienist must reach, barring any "outside influences" from the 1st Century of our present era, is the Nordic world view with its code of honor and dark, cold, windblown skies, and Ragnarok over the horizon.

Why is this pesimism the logical conclusion? And would it take precedence over the required estel on behalf of Men? The Athrabeth puts great emphasis on the role of good Men in fulfilling Eru's design, so I would say the contrary would be true.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Why is this pesimism the logical conclusion? And would it take precedence over the required estel on behalf of Men? The Athrabeth puts great emphasis on the role of good Men in fulfilling Eru's design, so I would say the contrary would be true.

You will recall from The Silmarillion that "good men" were a rarity even in the First Age. Only three Houses of Men could stake claim to the epithet. The Akallebêth shows that the greatest of the Good Men were prone to great evil.

Those Men who had never mixed with the Eldar were surely less likely to become "good men" than those who had. Throughout the history of Middle Earth, "good men" are the exception rather than the rule. They are always Northern, which is an interesting aspect of Tolkien's set-up that deserves discussion in its own right.

Anyway, as Tolkien shows, Men tend to forget, unless constantly reminded, about such personages as Eru and the particularities of the Valar. Therefore, the best, that is the Northern line of men, loses the bedrock for its code of honor but keeps the code because it makes sense in terms of the hard life they live. Death comes quickly. Winter bites deeply. The laws of bloodshed and vengeance take primacy. Thus the pessimism of a brutal world.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

They are always Northern, which is an interesting aspect of Tolkien's set-up that deserves discussion in its own right.

I believe it is safe to assume that Rohan and Gondor have always been significant havens for such good Men.

Those Men who had never mixed with the Eldar were surely less likely to become "good men" than those who had.

I don't think that propensity towards evil is a must for all Men. Rather, I would expect that, in later ages, when there is no other highly corrupting mythological incarnation of evil, a larger portion of Men would develop desirable character traits.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

I believe it is safe to assume that Rohan and Gondor have always been significant havens for such good Men.

You will recall that after Gandalf fell into Khazaddûm with the Balrog, it was Aragorn of Gondor who said, "Then we shall have to do without hope." It is living without hope that is the earmark of the Nordic worldview, making of a dire life - and inevitable death - what one can.

I don't think that propensity towards evil is a must for all Men. Rather, I would expect that, in later ages, when there is no other highly corrupting mythological incarnation of evil, a larger portion of Men would develop desirable character traits.

When has there not been a highly corrupting mythological incarnation of evil, whether real or imagined, throughout the history of the Seven Ages?

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

When has there not been a highly corrupting mythological incarnation of evil, whether real or imagined, throughout the history of the Seven Ages?

Well, the Third Age seems to be the last one that had any:

Originally Posted by Notes on motives in the Silmarillion, iii, Myths Transformed, HoME X

Sauron, however, was a problem that Men had to deal with finally: the first of the many concentrations of Evil into definite power-points that they would have to combat, as it was also the last of those in 'mythological' personalized (but non-human) form.

You will recall that after Gandalf fell into Khazaddûm with the Balrog, it was Aragorn of Gondor who said, "Then we shall have to do without hope."

I believe that the reason for this is the awareness of dealing with far superior foes, another Nordic motive. However, after the Third Age, it is pretty much a level playing field between good and evil, so no such despair would be called for.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Well, the Third Age seems to be the last one that had any...... I believe that the reason for this is the awareness of dealing with far superior foes, another Nordic motive. However, after the Third Age, it is pretty much a level playing field between good and evil, so no such despair would be called for.

The incipient challenge of this thread's discussion, as established in the first post, is that we are to presume that the stories of Middle Earth as presented by Tolkien, are point of fact. Thus anything from known history that contradicts the assertions laid out by Tolkien, are not allowable. Therefore, Sauron must be accepted as the last great corrupting mythological figure. Morgoth is banished; all that is left is the taint of Morgoth on all that has been created.

It must be acknowledged that, for the purposes of this discussion, Maiar still are extant and may and will do as is in them to do.

There have been mythologies in which both good and evil Maiar have ensconced themselves throughout the Seven Ages. We may not, for the purposes of this discussion, dismiss them out of hand just because Tolkien is not the recorder of their histories. So we have the Mayan, Roman, Greek, Egyptian, Babylonian, Hittite, Hindu, Chinese, Hebrew, Celtic, and last but not least, Nordic myths, and no doubt many others which I have not named.

We may conclude that these myths were engendered and inhabited by Maiar still at loose in Arda; and since they are by and large at odds with those histories recorded by Tolkien, we may conclude that they are filled with lies. Since they are filled with lies, we can deduce that they are in fact inhabited almost exclusively by evil Maiar. Though of less stature than Sauron and Morgoth, these evil Maiar may be concluded to have been Pluto, Set, Murdok, Kumarbis, Lucifer, Surt, and so forth.

Have humans indeed comported themselves well throughout history, whether in servitude to these myths' Maiar or after they have been thrown out in favor of a limited set of myths that are these days called 'world religions'?

Has slavery ever not been part of human history through these last three of the Seven Ages? Has genocide? Conquest? Petty theft? Murder? Sacrificing one's own offspring to the gods - er - excuse me, Maiar? I'm very sorry, but throughout the history of the Seven Ages, there is little evidence to suggest that humans by and large have comported themselves very well at all.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

The incipient challenge of this thread's discussion, as established in the first post, is that we are to presume that the stories of Middle Earth as presented by Tolkien, are point of fact. Thus anything from known history that contradicts the assertions laid out by Tolkien, are not allowable.

Although I very much enjoy a debate, it should be noted that this was far from what Tolkien intended with this "imaginative invention", that is, to present some of his apprehension of th world. He didn't put very much effort into synchronizing primary and secondary reality and he didn't expect much of it.

Therefore, Sauron must be accepted as the last great corrupting mythological figure. Morgoth is banished; all that is left is the taint of Morgoth on all that has been created.

It must be acknowledged that, for the purposes of this discussion, Maiar still are extant and may and will do as is in them to do.

I believe you are contradicting yourself, since surely any surviving evil Maia, still interacting with Arda, would definitely qualify as a mythological incarnation of evil - an instance which cannot be accepted based on Tolkien's quote.

We may conclude that these myths were engendered and inhabited by Maiar still at loose in Arda; and since they are by and large at odds with those histories recorded by Tolkien, we may conclude that they are filled with lies.

Some may even accept that all these stories are true, but have not manifested themselves on the material level, but on more subtle ones.

I'm very sorry, but throughout the history of the Seven Ages, there is little evidence to suggest that humans by and large have comported themselves very well at all.

I would say that we evolved even morally. Many things that would have been accepted as normal decades or centuries ago are not so anymore (at least for the average person, disregarding what some politicians do or pass as laws). Human rights have taken great leaps forward, and even if there is much to fear today, there is also much reason for hope. I, for one, am not pessimist, but I hold to the idea that, "if we are indeed the Eruhin, the Children of the One, then He will not suffer Himself to be deprived of His own, not by any Enemy, not even by ourselves".

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Although I very much enjoy a debate, it should be noted that this was far from what Tolkien intended with this "imaginative invention", that is, to present some of his apprehension of the world. He didn't put very much effort into synchronizing primary and secondary reality and he didn't expect much of it.

By saying this you seem to be implying that there is no need to resolve contradictions. If so, there is no debate, period. Any assertion may be made, and no one can contradict it on any evidence whatsoever.

I believe you are contradicting yourself, since surely any surviving evil Maia, still interacting with Arda, would definitely qualify as a mythological incarnation of evil - an instance which cannot be accepted based on Tolkien's quote.

If you imply above that which I have inferred, my so-called contradiction doesn't matter. If not, then you are hoist with your own pitard, for I was arguing from your assertion that there have been no mythological incarnations of evil since Sauron; if we accept the evidence of the worldwide mythologies, there indeed were.

Some may even accept that all these stories are true, but have not manifested themselves on the material level, but on more subtle ones.

What precisely are those accepting who hold to this view?

Okay, the above was in part facetious. What follows is serious.

I would say that we evolved even morally. Many things that would have been accepted as normal decades or centuries ago are not so anymore (at least for the average person, disregarding what some politicians do or pass as laws). Human rights have taken great leaps forward, and even if there is much to fear today, there is also much reason for hope. I, for one, am not pessimist, but I hold to the idea that, "if we are indeed the Eruhin, the Children of the One, then He will not suffer Himself to be deprived of His own, not by any Enemy, not even by ourselves".

An assertion that humans have evolved morally is, sad to say, "gobtwiddle". The 20th century was a span of one hundred years in which the largest number of humans died unjustly at the hands of others, through war and genocide: World War One. World War Two. The Korean War. The Vietnam War. The India/Pakistan wars. Stalin's murder of tens of millions of Ukrainians. Hitler's murder of six million Jews. The Killing Fields of Campuchia. Mao Tse Tung's genocide of tens of millions of Chinese. Drug Cartels. Enslavement of young women internationally. Child pornography. International businesses that have grown so large that they can ignore the laws of the nations where they were started, engendering many of the injustices that are holding the nations of Africa in hock so that they cannot break out of abject poverty. Cynical powermongering warlords in Afghanistan, Sudan, Uganda, and so forth.

And politicians can only do what the citizens blithely allow them to do, if we actually have democratic governments anymore. If our governments are no longer democratic such that we can control the politicians, that speaks no better for your claim of moral evolution.

As for He who holds Justice as His own sole possession, no entity can deprive Him of anything at all, for He holds it all anyway. It is His to reward or punish, and the "deprivation" of any one soul in no way makes Him a loser.

I hold to hope as do you. But the questions being posed here, absent any sureties that we may hold as His followers, can only be answered with despair. It is only logical. Thus, the Nordic noble hero with no hope is the most logical ideal when argued to the question's conclusions.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

By saying this you seem to be implying that there is no need to resolve contradictions.

Pretty much, yes. The main purpose of his effort at synchronizing seems to be directed at easing the acceptance of his work by the modern readers.

If so, there is no debate, period. Any assertion may be made, and no one can contradict it on any evidence whatsoever.

I don't see how accepting Tolkien's writings as ultimate evidence concerning his imagined world implies that any assertion is valid.

If you imply above that which I have inferred, my so-called contradiction doesn't matter. If not, then you are hoist with your own pitard, for I was arguing from your assertion that there have been no mythological incarnations of evil since Sauron; if we accept the evidence of the worldwide mythologies, there indeed were.

I can understand half of that at most. Anyway, it was not my asertion that there weren't any more mythological incarnations of evil, it was a quote from Tolkien's writings. I am not sure where you are heading, it seemed to me that we accept comparisons between primary and secondary reality only as long as there is no contradiction to Tolkien's works.

What precisely are those accepting who hold to this view?

That all those stories manifest themselves on the realm of ideas & symbols, or on a myriad subtle, parallel planes of creation. Nevermind, I am allowed a wild speculation once in a while; you can safely ignore this line of my argument.

An assertion that humans have evolved morally is, sad to say, "gobtwiddle".

Thanks. Another English world unknown to the dictionaries I have access to .

The 20th century was a span of one hundred years in which the largest number of humans died unjustly at the hands of others, through war and genocide:

I believe I have made it clear in my argument that I am not referring to those who are in power. Aule said that the greatest are the most potent also for evil; unfortunately, for us it translates into power corrupts, etc. I was primarily referring to citizens from at least the "civilized" countries, where discrimination is at least frowned upon, death sentence is outlawed, torture is not seen as an everyday tool in gathering information, so on and so forth (I know, there is a notable exception). When dealing with the human powers-that-be, they still hold a virtual monopoly on violence. But even in such conditions, we do see organizing and action against injustices at home and abroad, and I certainly doubt that despair is at the foundation of these actions; quite the contrary, it is hope in victory that motivates.

But the questions being posed here, absent any sureties that we may hold as His followers, can only be answered with despair. It is only logical.

Ultimately, yes: absent faith, despair is surely the outcome, at least in Ea

Originally Posted by On the severance of marriage, Later Quenta Silmarillion, HoME X

...trust in Eru the Lord everlasting, that he is good, and that his works shall all end in good. This the Marrer hath denied, and in this denial is the root of evil, and its end is in despair.

Originally Posted by Author's note #7, Athrabeth

By the holiness of good men - their direct attachment to Eru, before and above all Eru's works - the Elves may be delivered from the last of their griefs: sadness; the sadness that must come even from the unselfish love of anything less than Eru.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

Thanks. Another English world unknown to the dictionaries I have access to .

Fear not. I coined it. It means, loosely, "nonsense"; specifically, it is the act of batting one's lips up and down with the forefinger.

I believe I have made it clear in my argument that I am not referring to those who are in power.

Yes, you did, but I don't accept the distinction. In free republics and democracies, or at least so-called ones, the people are responsible for the government that rules them.

I was primarily referring to citizens from at least the "civilized" countries, where discrimination is at least frowned upon, death sentence is outlawed, torture is not seen as an everyday tool in gathering information, so on and so forth (I know, there is a notable exception).

Even this distinction overlooks the reality that the governments of "civilized" countries are supposed to be the most powerful in the world right now, and turn a blind eye to the injustices of Darfur, Rwanda, Sierre Leone, Nigeria, and others, all of which could be stopped if the so-called "civilized" and supposedly enlightened developed nations had the moral will to do so. However, that moral will is not there; the "civilized" citizens who elect their leaders care more about our local football teams and retirement funds and entitlements.

But even in such conditions, we do see organizing and action against injustices at home and abroad, and I certainly doubt that despair is at the foundation of these actions; quite the contrary, it is hope in victory that motivates.

Yes, except that these "We are the world" types of endeavors are really only band-aids placed upon symptoms. What Africa and other developing nations need is international justice; even a Marshall Plan or better for our time; but I don't see that kind of thing happening.

Ultimately, yes: absent faith, despair is surely the outcome, at least in Ea.

Yes.

However, this has strayed a good deal from the main point. The point I have been making is that humans have not evolved morally.

My earlier point, that despair is the only logical conclusion to the Tolkienian system, was facetious in part, based on my reading of history such that humans have a knack for forgetting about Eru, and thus tend to lose, over the course of perhaps three or more generations, the basis they once had for their hope.

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

In free republics and democracies, or at least so-called ones, the people are responsible for the government that rules them.
...
the "civilized" citizens who elect their leaders care more about our local football teams and retirement funds and entitlements.

In my opinion, you are raising too high the standard for what you consider moral advancement in this area, while disregarding it in others. Progresses, or at least fights, are made in that direction, but it ought to be taken into account that the current system immensely benefits a certain few, and these oligarchs (public or private) are willing to use their vast resources to preserve the status quo. Frankly, if we truly had the rule of the people, it would pretty much be already Arda Unmarred, since, according to some studies, it would take only the agricultural production of two advanced countries to ensure food for all humanity, a fraction of what is spent on military would ensure worldwide education and cover other basic needs, and the means to advanced technologically can be acquired without hurting the environment. We are not already there, but the necessary cognitive liberation is taking place even in this aspect.

humans have a knack for forgetting about Eru, and thus tend to lose, over the course of perhaps three or more generations, the basis they once had for their hope.

Well, we might have that inclination; happily (and we should say happily, no matter how bitter the situation), though "being set amid the turmoils of the powers of the world, [we] would stray often, and would not use [our] gifts in harmony", events occur in our lives that open our eyes and our heart.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

In my opinion, you are raising too high the standard for what you consider moral advancement in this area, while disregarding it in others.

It's not my standard, it's the moral standard. Right action is right action, or else it is wrong.

We are not already there, but the necessary cognitive liberation is taking place even in this aspect.

Cognitive liberation simply isn't enough. Saruman knew what he had become which is demonstrated in his recognition of its opposite in Frodo. But he refused because he wanted to hate and ruin others' lives rather than humble himself and receive mercy, let alone pay for his crimes. He's an illustration of the need for a "cardiac" liberation.

Well, we might have that inclination; happily (and we should say happily, no matter how bitter the situation), though "being set amid the turmoils of the powers of the world, [we] would stray often, and would not use [our] gifts in harmony", events occur in our lives that open our eyes and our heart.

Yes, if we choose to accept it.

Tolkienist, 7th Age, living in Arda. "Son, we live in Arda marred. The taint of Morgoth is upon all things. We will mourn the loss of our friends on the heights, and we shall put their deeds to song."

[Raynor]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

It's not my standard, it's the moral standard. Right action is right action, or else it is wrong.

It is commendable that you hold yourself to such high standards; however, concerning judging others, I agree with Tolkien:

Originally Posted by Letter #246

To others, in any case of which we know enough to make a judgement, we must apply a scale tempered by 'mercy': that is, since we can with good will do this without the bias inevitable in judgements of ourselves, we must estimate the limits of another's strength and weigh this against the force of particular circumstances.

Cognitive liberation simply isn't enough. Saruman knew what he had become which is demonstrated in his recognition of its opposite in Frodo.

True, but again, we are not talking about the same subjects, since it is our average "hobbit" (Man) that I have in mind. In the end, maybe a lot of us would be highly tempted to perpetuate the status quo, if it would bring great benefits, albeit at great costs to others; I am not casting any stone. "We are finite creatures with absolute limitations upon the powers of our soul-body structure in either action or endurance". My point is that cognitive liberation may be enough to move people to action; as far as I know, most of our liberties and rights have occurred due to upward public pressure, and not otherwise; in several writings I read on the subject of social movements, cognitive liberation is a highly significant step towards social change.

Yes, if we choose to accept it.

From my knowledge and experience, it is not a once in a lifetime opportunity .

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Raynor

It is commendable that you hold yourself to such high standards; however, concerning judging others...

If only I actually did. That I know what is right does not mean that I do it.

True, but again, we are not talking about the same subjects, since it is our average "hobbit" (Man) that I have in mind.

Saruman was the best example of my point. In that example I would venture to say that he acted as like an average "hobbit" (human) as an Istar conceivably could.

My point is that cognitive liberation may be enough to move people to action...

Hobbits are a good example that people don't really want to know the truth; it might force them to change.

From my knowledge and experience, it is not a once in a lifetime opportunity .

True, but there may come a last chance. As with Saruman. He didn't realize it would be his chance when it came, but then, suddenly, it was too late.

[alatar]

Until lmp's and Raynor's discussion, I thought that I had all of the answers that I needed:

• Unless you're someone really really special, prayer - petitioning the Valar - is useless. Divine help is not coming. Have an escape plan ready, and store extra food, water and candles.
• Use the last Age's manure to grow your garden. Manure is just a part of the way things work, and you might as well hold your nose and make the best of it.
• Be a good steward. Remove the rocks that you find so that your descendants will have better soil.

As to the discussion, though I found it interesting, not exactly sure what it all means. Pessimist/skeptic/cynic that I am, I don't think that the world is getting worse, morally. Same percentages; larger number of participants. Back during the Kin-strife, we had good and bad people slain for no good reason, though the numbers were limited. Today, we can play the same old game but increase the damage - human and otherwise - exponentially. Also, sans a palantir one didn't hear news unless one actively sought out a loquacious Dwarf or made the journey to the borders or even Bree (from a Shire folk's point of view). Today all of us have second generation palantirs in our homes, and so can know news in real time from anywhere on this globe. So anyway, we may be not better or worse than when we started, and so that makes me feel that the 'despair' noted above is unwarranted.

Today's heroes don't get immortalized in songs like they once did, and maybe their deeds aren't as valiant. Hurin may not be found again - our species doesn't have a Durin - but even today there are some little and big stands taken against the darkness, and that too gives me hope.

There's also a little corner in me - probably due to the kids - that thinks that as a species we might make it. Doesn't the foretelling say that we humans, carrying the blood of the three races, will always spring back up? And in the end we leave. Isn't that the true gift that Eru gave us? The chance to leave this all behind - all of it, maybe even Him, as if this is the best he can do, giving us Arda Marred... - and go elsewhere? Maybe one day we will live elsewhere, and leave Melkor's taint here.

Thanks for posting.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by alatar

Maybe one day we will live elsewhere, and leave Melkor's taint here.

Yes. Somewhere ... Else. By way of Niggle's Parish, I'm thinking.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Yes. Somewhere ... Else. By way of Niggle's Parish, I'm thinking.

Somehow, even to me, Niggle's Parish (thanks for the reference!) sounds a whole lot better than that angry orange planet, Mars.