 by -
CTS-1
(Wed Sep 24 12:39:36)
|
|
 UPDATED Wed Sep 24 19:02:40 |
Note: at the suggestion of someone who noted that this original thread got mired with a troll, I have reposted this.
Hello, Everyone:
In this thread, I invite discussion on the issue of the Valar’s comprehension of events. Now, certain perceptual blind spots of the Valar (notably Manwe’s blindness towards the intentions of Melkor after his imprisonment) have been discussed in the past. However, the question I would like to explore involves the perceptual blind spots of the Valar towards the Children of Iluvatar with the strangest and most difficult to comprehend gifts, humans.
It is without serious dispute that, of all the races of Middle-Earth, humans are the most alien to the Valar mind. Ents and Dwarfs are products of the minds of the Valar, so there is a minimum base familiarity with their natures. Of all the races, Elves probably resemble the Valar the most (although there are definitely gradations, from Vanyar to Avari). Moreover, the Valar have spent ages living with the Elves.
Over and above the amount of contact and surface similarities, the fates of the Valar and the Elves parallel each other. By descending into Arda, the Valar tied their fates to that of the Circles of the World; their power, although great, is also contained within those boundaries. Likewise, the fates of the Elves are bound within the Circles of the World; they are both immortal and constrained in the same way.
Which brings us to humans. While humans are destined to take over the world, I submit that the Valar’s understanding of humans is actually quite limited compared to other races. First, the Great Music was fate to much, but it did not cover the eventual fate of humans; they were made free to create their own destiny, for better or worse. Second, there was much less direct contact between humans and Valar relative to Elves. Most of the direct interactions between humans and Ainur came about during the Second Age, when the Ainur created Numenor as a reward for the survivors of the three houses of the Edain who were loyal to the forces of good. Later in the Second Age, emissaries of the Valar were sent to Numenor in a failed attempt to explain the Valar’s position on the banning of humans from the Undying Lands and the Valar perspective on human death and their own immortality.
After the drowning of Numenor, only a handful of Maiar, the Istari, could be said to have close and frequent interactions with humans (while one unique human played an important part in Melian’s experience in Middle-Earth, she lived amongst Elves otherwise). By the end of the Third Age, as part of the transition from the world of mythology to the world of men, the evil Maiar (Sauron, the Balrog, Saruman) are dispersed and powerless, and Gandalf returns to Valinor. One can also safely assume Radagast (the lone remaining Maiar after the sailing from the Grey Havens) also retires from the affairs of the world; he either returns to Valinor later, or by spending his time with the birds and beasts of Middle-Earth, becomes irrelevant to the affairs of the world of men. As an aside, Radagast’s contacts with humans were also limited, whether by his choice or by the nature of his mission).
In “Morgoth’s Ring,” a facet of Valar behavior is explicitly stated which is strongly hinted at in “The Silmarillion” proper. As part of the transition of the world, the Valar withdraw from attempts to manage the destinies of humans. Manwe, who knows the mind of Iluvatar the best, suspects humans may be a burden and troublesome in their actions, actions which Manwe compares to Melkor’s. However, it goes on to state that, whenever the Valar attempt to manage the actions of humans, it usually goes wrong; the obvious classic example of that would be the tragic history of Numenor.
Although, when one contemplates the history of Numenor, comparisons to the Genesis story of the Garden of Eden come to mind. In each case, humans were set up with an obvious temptation, whether it was the one tree that they could not eat from, or the fact that the immortal paradise was visible, but out of reach. Did the Valar not understand, at the time Numenor was created, that the human minds would eventually fixate on the vision of an earthly paradise, inhabited by the Angels and immortals, just out of reach?
Which brings me to the point of this thread:
1. Do the Valar actually comprehend the way humans think and experience existence? Or, when the Valar act in the affairs of humans, is the human experience beyond their perception?
2. If there is a gap in the Valar’s perception of the human experience, how does that affect their ability to influence events?
3. If there are gaps in the Valar’s knowledge, what aspects of the human experience are beyond their comprehension?
4. While we know that, in the Third Age, the Valar did not forsake Middle-Earth entirely (see “The Istari,” in Unfinished Tales), the whole Tolkien mythos, from the departure of the Valar after the destruction of the lamps, to the departure of Gandalf, is a story of the Valar relinquishing their role in the affairs of Middle-Earth. Is this necessarily the only course of action available to them?
5. In FOTR, Gandalf states to Elrond that he puts his faith in men. Are the other Ainur capable of doing this? Is it possible that Gandalf comprehends the human perspective on existence in a more meaningful way than the other Ainur? Would that put Gandalf in a better position to “meddle in the affairs of men?”
I have a couple of theories on this, but I would welcome the perspectives of others first. Kudos to anyone who managed to detect a couple of hacked-up echoes of Jung’s “Answer to Job” in the way I structured this thread.
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Wed Sep 24 12:40:52)
|
|
ok im going to have a go at explaing a bit of what i think (dont laugh)
I am strugerling through the Simalration again as the last attempt i had problems understanding the entire thing, but nonetheless i do have a couple of opinions.
To your 5th point I think that Gandalf does understand The race of men better than the other Ainur, I think he see's something in them, like a potential yet to be reached, I think it interests him to see if he can unleash that potential through them, (hence his friendship and strong bond with Aragorn). And because of this he does take much more interest in the affiars of men, he knows they are an important part of middle earth, who still have an significant role to play, so he does meddlle in there affairs, the Elves will ulitmatly leave, and another dominent race will be needed, for the others to, if you like 'look up to' I think Gandalf understands this and comprehends the need to place faith in the them and to take interest in the comings and goings and so on.
hope that made some sense
Utúlie'n aurë! Aiya Eldalië ar Atanatári, utúlie'n aurë
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Wed Sep 24 12:41:40)
|
|
Hi CTS; Great post.
1. Do the Valar actually comprehend the way humans think and experience existence? Or, when the Valar act in the affairs of humans, is the human experience beyond their perception?
My take on this is not that the Valar cannot understand humans, it is that the Valar have not had the opportunity. This is first due to Iluvatar keeping the nature of human immortality in the afterlife a mystery to the Valar and second, that humans are from the first moment of their emergence in Middle-earth soon under the domination of Melkor. So, the Valar are cut off from understanding the human experience and their way of thinking.
2. If there is a gap in the Valar’s perception of the human experience, how does that affect their ability to influence events?
Does the problem of understanding humans by the Valar affect how they influence events on Middle-earth? Certainly the Valar have this problem but it IMHO is not due to a problem in understanding humans at least up to Age 4. The Valar are constrained in dealing with Melkor. Why is pretty complex and I am still working on figuring out the reasons myself. But this severely limits their roles as teachers to humans. But there are other factors. The Valar are unable to punish humans. This I found out from a letter by Tolkien. That is the reason they have to call on Iluvatar to deal with the rebellion of Numenor.
3. If there are gaps in the Valar’s knowledge, what aspects of the human experience are beyond their comprehension?
We know they do not understand where humans go after death.
4. While we know that, in the Third Age, the Valar did not forsake Middle-Earth entirely (see "The Istari," in Unfinished Tales), the whole Tolkien mythos, from the departure of the Valar after the destruction of the lamps, to the departure of Gandalf, is a story of the Valar relinquishing their role in the affairs of Middle-Earth. Is this necessarily the only course of action available to them?
I am torn here between the logic of the story and looking at Tolkien the myth maker. In the myth Tolkien is making room for the transition from prehistory to history. So, the mythical figures are going to fade or die out. That includes the Valar IMHO.
5. In FOTR, Gandalf states to Elrond that he puts his faith in men. Are the other Ainur capable of doing this? Is it possible that Gandalf comprehends the human perspective on existence in a more meaningful way than the other Ainur? Would that put Gandalf in a better position to "meddle in the affairs of men?"
Why Gandalf has faith in human kind and the other Wizards do not is a mystery to me. It was the job of the Wizards (as ordered by the Valar) to help the free peoples against Sauron but only he completes his task. Why? I can't think of anything beyond his free will and his nature as a Maiar.
It's late so I have to go. Enjoyed the quiz. Take care, BB ;-)
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Wed Sep 24 19:56:15)
|
|
Nicely put. One question: do you think that human death necessarily changes the human epistemological framework to the point where it becomes incomprehensible to the Valar?
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Wed Sep 24 22:50:20)
|
|
Hi CTS;
" do you think that human death necessarily changes the human epistemological framework to the point where it becomes incomprehensible to the Valar?"
This is similar IMHO to your post about time in Valinor. Is time the same when you are immortal?
In the same vein, if you never die, can you understand death? I mean truly to grasp its existential significance. IMHO death gives impetuous to two basic choices; either temporarily to ignore death and pretend it doesn't exist or to live each moment as if it were a last act giving meaning to each decision. Of course life is usually a combination of these two options. But these are the dominant choices.
But the Valar? They will never die. They will not fade like the Elves. The Valar just are. Yet, they are not the all knowing Iluvatar. The Valar are created beings of power with still limited knowledge. They are like us but more powerful but most importantly immortal. To me, every choice of a Valar is a different kind of choice to someone who faces death. I could never understand how that would feel, to be immortal. I think Tolkien did a great job of putting himself in the Valar's shoes. Yet, I can't imagine it. And by the same token I do not think the Valar could grasp in its fullness our situation.
Have you ever seen Zardoz? This is a film on a similar topic that you might find at some huge video store (or online) and which might interest you. This is by the same director that did Excalibur, John Borman. It is a strange film but it deals in detail about this issue of the experience of immortality and mortality. You might enjoy it.
Have a good one, BB ;-)
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Thu Sep 25 05:30:42)
|
|
I always analogized Zardoz to an extreme version of what might happen to the Elves in the end, or to humans if they did get immortality in contrast to Iluvatar's plan. For such a maligned movie (Sean Connery in a red diaaper), it does have a few interesting points on the necessity of human death. The final scenes where the immortals are partying- very counterintuitive, but somehow one can see the point.
"Total acquittal."
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Thu Sep 25 21:21:50)
|
|
Hi CTS;
"For such a maligned movie"
I wonder about this. Part of the problem for an audience was the Felliniesque middle section with the mirrors of the mind of Zardoz. But maybe another is that this topic of immortality is just as uncomfortable.
I am trying to recall other tales of life everlasting, Dorian Grey, an old Twilight Zone episode, Dracula and other vampires, and various other movie monsters that cannot die. The popular psyche has associated this undying with fears and horrors it seems. Is it fear of the unknown? I wonder.
Tolkien by contrast seems to have been one of the rare authors to have created parallel mortal and immortal cultures and generally shown the situation in some balance with immortals as both good and bad guys. Yet, the Nazgul are the nightmare of the undying. Are we afraid of immortality?
Have a good one, BB ;-)
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Fri Sep 26 21:22:14)
|
|
We are of two minds, I think. On one level, we want to be Elves- always healthy, strong, and free. Tolkien hit one point dead on- a vision of that kind of immortality over the horizon would be more insidious and corrosive that the tree in the Garden of Eden. After all, we do fear death. Corrollary to that, we fear misery, weakness, and eternal pain even more than non-existence. That is the potential down-side, as evidenced by the Nazgul. Much of the fiction of one immortal amongst mortals deals with the inability to cope with the changing of age all around us- like a certain old Twilight Zone Episode.
Hence why Zardoz is so interesting. There, all the controls were taken out. The humans essentially got the chance to live an "Elvish" life in their spheres- freed of death and separation from their friends. The result? Not eternal happiness or even contentment, but apathy, withdrawl and the craving of death. Basically, Zardoz stated (unlike most fiction on the subject) that, even in a perfect environment, we are not built for immortality.
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Fri Sep 26 23:00:09)
|
|
Loved this post CTS; Maybe because I agree with the whole thing! LOL ;-D
"The humans essentially got the chance to live an "Elvish" life in their spheres- freed of death and separation from their friends. The result? Not eternal happiness or even contentment, but apathy, withdrawal and the craving of death. Basically, Zardoz stated (unlike most fiction on the subject) that, even in a perfect environment, we are not built for immortality."
There is some undercurrent of this idea in Morgoth's Ring IMHO. While in LOTR Tolkien focuses on the Elf success stories like Elrond and Galadriel, as you know in the published Silmarillion it is more of a mixed bag with the Feanor sons and other troubled Elves like Eol turning out pretty badly.
In Morgoth's Ring (pp. 223-224) I recall that Tolkien talked about the ending of the Elves; that either the Elves went to Valinor or eventually became spirits in Middle-earth haunting the woods, some becoming influenced by evil. Frankly this is a somewhat troubling end to the Elf myth. Partly because they do not last that long in Middle-earth/Earth as physical beings. From the emergence of the Elves in the days of the trees through the Fourth Age when the Elves fade into spirits is only about 25,062 years. (15,000 years, age of Trees; First Age, 600 years; Second, 3441 years; Third, 3021 years; Fourth, ~ 3,000 years) While a long time in our terms this is no where near the span of the Cro-Magnon (100,000 to 200,000 years) and is less time than the lives of the Valar before the Elves arrived in Middle-earth. (30,000 years)
So, it seems as with the "immortal" humans in Zardoz, the Elves are not meant to live as physical beings that long on earth. They literally "burn out".
Have a good one, BB ;-)
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Wed Sep 24 12:42:33)
|
|
1. Do the Valar actually comprehend the way humans think and experience existence? Or, when the Valar act in the affairs of humans, is the human experience beyond their perception?
The Valar are not entirely different than humans, so there must be things they understand. However, there's a difference in perception and ability that makes Valar who they are, thus necessarily distancing them from men.
2. If there is a gap in the Valar’s perception of the human experience, how does that affect their ability to influence events?
Well, Illuvatar seems to have set it up so that the Valar couldn't directly influence human events, regardless of the gap in perception. In fact, it would seem as though direct involvement by the Valar in human affairs would be going against Illuvatar's plan.
3. If there are gaps in the Valar’s knowledge, what aspects of the human experience are beyond their comprehension?
Oh, this one is beyond me
4. While we know that, in the Third Age, the Valar did not forsake Middle-Earth entirely (see “The Istari,” in Unfinished Tales), the whole Tolkien mythos, from the departure of the Valar after the destruction of the lamps, to the departure of Gandalf, is a story of the Valar relinquishing their role in the affairs of Middle-Earth. Is this necessarily the only course of action available to them?
I haven't read enough to be able to answer this, sorry
5. In FOTR, Gandalf states to Elrond that he puts his faith in men. Are the other Ainur capable of doing this? Is it possible that Gandalf comprehends the human perspective on existence in a more meaningful way than the other Ainur? Would that put Gandalf in a better position to “meddle in the affairs of men?”
Oh, Gandalf definitely comprehends the most of any Ainu what men are about, except for Illuvatar (I'm not sure if he is an Ainu :) But then Gandalf has lived freely among men whereas the others have not. I realize Gandalf is not Jesus per se, but he is a very Christ-like figure.
As a personification of the divine, he provides some key insight into the relationship between men and the greater powers. One of these insights I feel, is that there's an effect to letting a being as wise and as powerful as Gandalf have a conspicuous role in the affairs of mortal. Imagine what the LOTR story would be like if Gandalf had no restriction on the use of his attributes.
As it stands, he takes an auxillary role, and really only comes into play as an 'Ainu,' in contrast to just an 'old man', in cases such as the Balrog where "this foe is beyond any of you."
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Thu Sep 25 14:56:45)
|
|
"As a personification of the divine, he provides some key insight into the relationship between men and the greater powers. One of these insights I feel, is that there's an effect to letting a being as wise and as powerful as Gandalf have a conspicuous role in the affairs of mortal. Imagine what the LOTR story would be like if Gandalf had no restriction on the use of his attributes. "
I think that allowing Gandalf to "run the show" so to speak would run counter to the Valar's belief that when they try too hard to guide the course of human affairs, things go wrong. Perhaps the Istari's limitations are grounded in this principle. What do you think?
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Fri Sep 26 17:57:10)
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Sep 26 18:01:08 |
What I was getting at is that men were meant to be left alone :)
Else, they've be just like elves.
And you're right, if the valar try too hard to control men, they will mess up.
But I think Gandalf simply doesn't interfere because he knows he has to let men do things on their own terms.
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless 
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Sun Sep 28 21:02:44)
|
|
I suppose what I am driving at is: is the human experience so unique that any immortal being would have perceptual blind spots which would negatively affect their ability to predict outcomes of their influence?
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Sun Sep 28 23:03:39)
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Nov 7 01:40:38 |
Part of that gift of mortality, is that the others are necessarily distanced.
I mean, once elves reach valinor, they are in essence valar themselves. Sure it might take awhile, but living and being eternally around valar will make the elves very much like them ... if not in actual ability, at least in thought.
Compound with the fact that since elves are immortal, and since they expect to go to valinor, they are in essence groomed to be ones with the valar. The destiny of elves lies unquestionably with the Valar.
Men on the otherhand, are not only mortal, they are forbidden from going to live with everyone else in valinor. The one time men and elves got along, it was with men who were under the Valar's influence and were less than mortal ;)
To answer your question, yes, with the possible exception of illuvatar :)
And the point I'd like to add, is that it seems Illuvatar specifically made men that way... to be seperate from the others.. which in turn would explain why the valar's attempts to interfere with men naturally go astray. As I said, part of that gift of mortality is a distance, a freedom, which the others don't have.
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| by -
Anarya
(Wed Sep 24 14:30:46)
|
|
Hmm... I just replied to the other one and now I found this. I'll re-bump this post then, since, as I said, I have not enough wisdom to respond. Good post CTS!
The problem with the future is that it keeps turning into the present...
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Tue Sep 30 05:09:21)
|
|
Thank you for your great post!
Just thinking aloud here, or rambling aloud really, and seeing what comes out of it.
1. I think the Valar do not understand humans. They are of a different nature, and I don't think they're even MEANT to do so (ie. Eru did not intend for them to understand humans). Someone already wrote about "the theme for humans" in the Music of the Ainur, so I'm not going to repeat that. But still: the theme was the work of Eru, and the Ainur at first didn't understand it at all. So that (I think) would point in the direction that the Valar are somewhat at a loss when it comes to humans.
I think the final question is this: How is the Valar mind-set different from the human (or the elven for that matter) mind-set? (This could very well branch into asking whether or not it's ever possible to actually understand another person, and that's a far too big a question for me. But anyway... I think the Valar are far too different beings from humans to ever really understand them.)
Sorry if I'm confusing things, I haven't read the Ainulindalë in a while, and am Sil-less at the moment.
How does the thinking of humans and elves actually differ from one another? Has Tolkien written anything about that?
2. It seems to me that the Valar pretty much leave humans to deal with their own business as much as they possibly can - they get involved with humans only when they absolutely have no other choice (eg. Manwë only listened to Eärendil after he had managed to sail to Valinor itself). Maybe this could have a connection with the understanding thing - (partly) because they don't understand humans (or don't know their ultimate fate) it's better for them not to get too involved with them. (I have absolutely no evidence to back this up, so if this sounds absolutely hare-brained I'm perfectly willing to admit my error, or hare-brainedness.)
Again, I think Eru meant for the Valar to keep their noses out of what the humans were doing. But all this is still not answering your actual question... of course, if you don't understand someone it's going to affect your decisions about that person. And certainly not for the better... so I think I was saying that the Valar have made the decision (or perhaps Eru has made it for them?) not to meddle with humans as much as possible, precisely because they are aware that their understanding of humans is very limited. Does that make any kind of sense?
3. Someone already wrote about death in answer to this question, and I can't add anything to that... I thought that post was just brilliant.
4. No, I don't think relinquishing is their only course of action. But as for any other possible courses, I'm not sure I can imagine what they could have been. Thinking back to the music of the Ainur again, it actually seems rather weird to me that the Valar's influence in the affairs of Middle-earth is lessening all the time.
I seem to be coming back to this again and again: the only possible explanation to me is that they were meant to give up their power over the events in ME. "Bilbo was meant to find the ring" and all that.
5. Well, certainly not all of the Ainur understand humans as well as Gandalf does. Saruman and Radagast come to mind... still, both of them were chosen to come to ME by the Valar same as Gandalf... which would indicate that they were thought to be capable of "functioning" well there? I mean that S&R were thought to be well fitted to their tasks in ME.
So I guess that Gandalf understands humans better than most Maiar, at least. But here's another question: why did not one of the Valar come to ME at the beginning of the Third Age, but delegated the task to several Maiar, with mixed results? Are they too powerful beings for that? I guess Sauron would have known about their presence?
Oh dear. I wrote all that? I feel 
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Tue Sep 30 09:17:01)
|
|
And thank you for the nicely thought out reply.
On the big picture, I agree with you on most points. You also touch on an issue which has been addressed tangentially in a half dozen times, but never squarely addressed in a thread: the "Gandalf v. Radagast" issue. More to the point: just how badly did Radagast fail in his mission by choosing the path that he did? I think you bring up an interesting facet of this issue by pointing out the possibility of Radagast's relative lack of comprehension of the Children of Iluvatar and his higher comfort with birds and animals (as an aside I agree, and wouls further state: "he is a Maia of Yavanna- what did you expect?)
As far as the Valar themselves, i think there are two issues there. The first was the above-mentioned difficulties when they tried to intervene directly in human affairs; things often went very wrong. Second, when the Valar match force with force, destructive things happen. As in the entirety of Belariand gets sunk beneath the ocean destructive.
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Tue Sep 30 09:48:08)
|
|
Firstly, thank you again! 
Did Radagast fail? I've always assumed that his mission was somehow different from Gandalf and Saruman's... I thought this mainly because there were the two other wizards, those who went into the east that nothing is known of, and their task must have been somehow different from the others'. So it ought to be possible for Radagast as well...
I just remembered - isn't Saruman described in the Sil as being the closest to humans of the Istari? (The same passage says, I think, that Gandalf spent most of his time with the elves...)
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Tue Sep 30 09:58:21)
|
|
I am a member of the school of thought which believes that Radagast did not fail because his mission was attuned differently, also. But, of course, the source material can be read different ways and there are different interpretations.
Don't recall the Saruman passage offhand. Would have to check (and, I am using a non-revised edition Sil; it might be different.)
Look- he's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Tue Sep 30 10:36:20)
|
|
I totally agree with you about Radagast! 
Will have to think about this, I'll get back to this later!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Thu Oct 30 01:28:56)
|
|
This is from Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien (really hard to guess what I'm reading at the moment...), Letter 156, To Robert Murray, S.J. (draft):
...in this 'mythology' all the 'angelic' powers concerned with this world were capable of many degrees of error and failing... The 'wizards' were not exempt, indeed being incarnate were more likely to stray, or err. Gandalf alone fully passes the tests, on a moral plane anyway (he makes mistakes of judgement). For in his condition it was for him a sacrifice to perish on the Bridge in defence of his companions... He was handing over to the Authority that ordained the Rules, and giving up personal hope of success.
That I should say is what the Authority wished, as a set-off to Saruman. The 'wizards', as such, had failed; or if you like: the crisis had become too grave and needed an enhancement of power. So Gandalf sacrificed himself, was accepted, and enhanced, and returned.
Radagast is, I think, a difficult case because he only comes in so briefly, seems to be in a hurry, but does not say why. He also seems (to me, at least) oddly unwilling to commit himself to the affairs of men, or hobbits - why is he sitting by a road in the wilderness, and not in the Shire itself, seeking more actively for Gandalf?
The Sil thing just made me wonder if it weren't possible that Radagast's mission had more to do with animals than human beings (or elves, dwarves or hobbits) - part of the Istari's mission was, after all, "to move Elves and Men and all living things of good will to valiant deeds" (my italics!). And a Maia of Yavanna, whatever his other failings  would, I think, be a natural choice for such a mission.
But the interesting wording, I think is "Gandalf alone fully passes the tests" (my italics, obviously, again). Maybe this is twisting it too far again, but it could be possible to read this to mean that Radagast was far from being a complete failure.
Finally, a small thing that has always bothered me: did Radagast and the two other wizards ever return to the West?
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Fri Oct 31 22:04:35)
|
|
The line about Radagast being a Maia of Yavanna actually is from the Unfinished Tales essay. Unfortunately, Radagast being a Maia of Yavanna raises more questions than it answers, most notably: was he fullfilling his mission, at least in part? And, did he have a unique subspecies of mission?
I have seen the "did Radagast return to the West" debate in many forms. I recall seeing one school of thought that stated that he would be allowed to. There is one pooem fragment is Unfinished Tales which indicates the answer is no. My personal spin, which is more educated guess than firmly held opinion, would be that Tolkien would have written him into the West had he tied up all the loose ends.
By way of contrast, it is generally assumed that the Blue Wizards failed. If they were corrupted, they never made it back. If, on the other hand, they were actually slain, the possibility arises that, while they failed in their mission, they were not corrupted in the process. If that was the case, they might have been accepted into Valinor as disembodied spirits, to be re-embodied there.
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Sat Nov 1 04:11:44)
|
|
Well, I think it's rather clear that the Istari had at least to some extent shared their duties - I mean that each of them was concentrating on something specific (as Gandalf had most to do with elves, and Saruman with humans (or so it says in the Silmarillion), and most notably, the blue wizards went East). It seems to me that it could be that each of the Maiar concerned had been "briefed" by the particular Vala he had been serving. This, I think, would be consistent with the nature of the Ainur in general, meaning that not one of them knew all of Ilúvatar's plan, but knowledge was distributed among them.
You want more proof? Fine. How about tequila?
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Sat Nov 1 13:45:55)
|
|
I agree with what you say- it makes a lot of intuitive sense. Each Maia would be briefed as to what its part of the picture was. The only contrary evidence comes from Unfinished Tales in that poem fragment which indicates that only one (Gandalf) returned. Of course, we might need to check and see if that is supposed to be an early or later fragment. Unfortunately, I think the evidence is both incomplete and contradictory on the issue of the Ithryn Luin and Radagast.
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Mon Nov 3 05:40:08)
|
|
There's still the question of what that "picture" actually was, and what Tolkien actually meant by that "all living things of good will" that the Istari were meant to contact. It would also be nice to know where Radagast was heading in such a rush.
Sorry if I seem to be sticking over minute details and repeating myself, but being called "moronic", "an idiot", "a maniac", and "a social outcast" tends to do that to me...
And there are no footprints
In the dust behind us
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Mon Nov 10 12:09:40)
|
|
"what Tolkien actually meant by that "all living things of good will" that the Istari were meant to contact. "
As you might recall, during the War of the Last Alliance, even the birds and beasts took sides and fought. So, there would be some precedent indicating that "birds and beasts" would be part of the picture of forces fighting evil. So, Radagast could be related to that issue.
Also, one has to wonder where the "kick tail and take names" beasts of Radagast's neighborhood, the Beornings, fit into this picture.
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Elehal
(Wed Nov 12 01:15:20)
|
|
I had indeed forgotten about the Last Alliance! I find I'm bit confused here... what about the passages in Morgoth's Ring in the "Myths Transformed" section? There is a paragraph entitled "Orcs" in which Tolkien among other things discusses the talking animals, and comes to the conclusion that the Eagles have no fëar. Still, the Eagles can clearly be categorised as "living things of good will"...
The Beornings are still humans, aren't they, despite their skin-changing?
And there are no footprints
In the dust behind us
|
|
|
A most remarkable thread! that I have been meaning to reply too! But a "bump" will have to do right now!
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Sat Oct 4 01:23:37)
|
|
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Sat Oct 25 22:42:44)
|
|
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
Nate-skate
(Mon Oct 27 06:13:30)
|
|
| UPDATED Mon Oct 27 06:32:33 |
Very thought provoking thread. I'm rather late, and I wonder how much is in the realm of knowing?
Some of the conversations already point out that Tolkien's theology is influenced by multiple sources. But if you look at each and every one of those sources, you begin to realize that there are two realms.
There is the realm of revelation: What we can comprehend from a human perspective.
Then there is the realm of mystery: What we can not comprehend from a human perspective.
I think Tolkien's mythology has a blend of these two realms. And so we have Tolkien Theology courses to help us try to comprehend the mysteries that we can never fully know. We can only know, "What Tolkien did say?" But it is more fun to speculate upon, "What did Tolkien imply?"
And I think Tolkien implies that we can't know everything there is to know about the Valar or their purposes. At some points we might be forced to correlate his mysteries with his sources of inspiration rather than his writings. And so, a knowledge of mythology and theology are somewhat helpful. You can draw a parralel between his mythological theological world and known theologies.
All of the questions really have to do with the interactive nature of Tolkien's universe.
What is the purpose of the Valar? What responsibility do they have towards mankind? What are their specific abilities and limitations? What are their rules of engagement? It seems that from other conversations that the Valar are similar to small "g" gods, or angels in power. And if you look at angels (theology) or small "g" gods (Mythology and some polytheistic religions), then you realize that they have limitations in power and knowledge.
1) Do Valar comprehend humans? The question assumes that we have the same humanoid minds, simply because we both have intelligence. But the question may be more like, "Do horses know what cows think?" Because if we are different species rather than cousins, then they can't fully understand us and we can't fully understand them. A horse walks with four legs and eats grass, but it does not have the same temperment/intelligence.
I think that Valar/humans share some types of comprehension. But due to their natures I think they can't know some things. They cannot comprehend fear as we do. They cannot comprehend the pressures of anything that is time based, "I have to hurry up and make a choice". They cannot understand "all of them" the concept of being fallen and being redeamed and starting over. To a great extent, they can't comprehend that idea of temptation in the exact same way, because their temptations are not "weakness" based. For instance, you can make up your mind not to focus upon a tempation, and your body can fight against your mind. We wrestle with our own bodies, not just principles.
2)How does the inability to comprehend himans impact Valar's ability to influence our affairs?
The question has two sides. Are the Valar more limited by inability to comprehend, or are they more limited by Iluvatar's laws rather than they are limited by to comprehend men. If they are so powerful, then they should be capable of bypassing man's frailties and doing everything themselves.
And this brings up the second issue, what are the Valar's assignments regarding men? Are all of them assigned to be some type of Guardian to the human race? What are their other areas of administration? And what are the specific boundaries set by Iluvatar?
We assume that because the Valar have free will that there are no specified guidlines which rule them. They are obviously free to disobey Iluvatar, but it's like children. Even though the Valar are individuals with free wills, this does not mean that they are without guidlines of expected behavior.
I'm deviating from the numbered questions, because I'm answering what I think the questions imply. If the Valar are all free agents trying to figure out everything based upon their ability to comprehend us, then it is conceivable that they can accidently work against each other with a bunch of different plans.
Now, I think Tolkien allows for this, because Gandalf/Saruman are capable of failure. How much more do Valar know than Maiar?
I guess that the Valar have varying personalities and abilities, but I see them as being a part of the same grand Orchestra, and Iluvatar is the orchestra leader. They all have to work together, and he ultimately dictates the song.
I see the Valar as not being all knowing. I see them as having asigned duties, but they also have freedom to work within the realm of those assigned duties.
And ultimately, the Valar are never "against" men. They never take away freedom of men to choose. Rather, they are always fighting for men. (A counter to Morgoth) And they are more of a counterbalance. They are not fighting man's wars for man. They are leveling the playing field against evil.
If you look at this whole thing as a game, the Valar are not playing the game. The game is humankind inhabitants of middle earth vs the fallen super beings and their hoards. The Maiar are more like coaches, they can influence the players. Valar are like Ref's rather than players. They have power to set limits. Only the fallen (Morgoth/Sauron/Saruman) are players with an agenda. In effect, these three fell away because they usurped authority, and stepped beyond their limits.
Here's a question. IF Morgath never fell, would the Valar be involved in Middle Earth at all? Maybe not.
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Mon Oct 27 07:16:53)
|
|
I started this thread working from the premise that human mortality is, by its nature, something unique and beyond the Valar's comprehension. As such, there are aspects of the human experience which are perceptual blind spots to the Valar.
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
I agree with that.
Here's my only deviation from that. I think we try to look at Valar as thinking like Immortal humans would think. And therefore we try to think of how we humans would think if we were in their shoes?
This is an opinion, because I'm not sure I can say what kind of "Mind" a Valar has. What are it's instincts/values/perceptions?
Are their passions like our passions? Do they look at their own passions through an immortal mindset, or do they have different passions altogether?
I'm trying to think of a comparrison?
How about a young child mindset vs an adult mindset? Even though we share the same nature, there is such a thing as a childish mindview vs adult mindview.
A child can't comprehend an adult mindset. "Why do you want to go to the library and read? Let's go out and play ball!"
A four year old can't comprehend the love of a man and a woman. He sees the world from the perspective of a child and you can't change that.
With the Valar, I see the issue as not simply being an issue of shared experiences, but also one of two different mindsets. I could be wrong about that.
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Mon Oct 27 13:56:39)
|
|
| UPDATED Mon Oct 27 14:03:14 |
I think you have a good point on this. Whether the Valar and Humans start off with identical thinking processes, the immortal/ indestructible/ bound within the Circles of the World mindset of a Valar would deviate, as a result of experiences, from the mortal/ fragile/ bound to leave the world humans.
This is actually the point where I thought Jung's Answer to Job had an interesting point. Despite being the creator, the Old Testament Yahweh who kicked tail and caused plagues really had a very limited comprehension of what it was like to experience existence as a human. If the Valar have the same problem, compounded by the fact that their powers and perceptions are more limited, they might reach the conclusion that their attempts to shape human affairs are often ill-founded because of this lack of comprehension.
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| UPDATED Mon Oct 27 11:49:54 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| UPDATED Fri Oct 31 22:26:22 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by the poster
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Fri Oct 31 23:50:39)
|
|
Hi Sinsans; What is boring to you may not be boring to someone else. There are many paths in life. Some people live simple lives and there is nothing wrong with that. Others study literature, film or become writers and film makers and there is nothing wrong with that either.
It is a big world and there are many ways to live in it. What may be exciting to you would be boring to me. You see, I cannot be you and I don't expect you to be me.
Have a good one, BB ;-)
it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO - 
|
|
|
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Sun Nov 2 01:08:24)
|
|
Hi again Sinsans;
"According to your theory , critics and judges do not exist"
Oh, there is such a thing as judgement, value systems and criticism. You have the right to your opinions and I have the right to mine. But your comments are very vague. For what people are doing here is studying a very complex series of books by Tolkien. You can believe that study is boring, but it is only your personal opinion.
You think that you are revealing "that there is a big world outside of their window." As if none of us have traveled, had relationships, have jobs or have not done the things you have done. You are wrong.
I would guess we have done by and large all the things you have. But we choose to do more. We like to read books including the Tolkien books. We like to study ideas in those books about myth, philosophy and religious ideas. And that study also can show us things about the "big world outside".
Have a good one, BB ;-)
it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO -
|
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 01:38:11 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
hey sinsans...
i have to defend the imdb here somewhat...i don't find it mediocre at all. if anything, i find it pretty useful for cast lists, more so with the older films, silent and otherwise. right now i'm reading a book 'speaking of silents', interviews with actresses such as eleanor boardman and lois wilson. in reading the book, i use the imdb as a companion of sorts, to look up films, figuring out which ones i've seen and not seen. then i might go from imdb to the turner classic movies site to search and see when a particular film might be airing.
i really don't find that your regs, in general, are spending 12 odd hours at a time posting here. i think you could look at anybody's profile and see where and when they are posting. i find it to be that regs may be signing on at a particular time, posting fast and furious, and then leave.
i admit today i'm bumming around online, mostly cause i fell roller skating yesterday, am sore beyond belief, and the idea of doing much manual labor other than using the brain cells isn't all that enticing. hell, i've done enough friggin laundry this week!
"haven't you ever found a man that could make you happy?" "sure! lots of times!"
|
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 15:24:13 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
try and contact the admins about not labeling 'a clockwork orange' under horror. give them a well constructed thought out explanation.
some of the more in depth postings here got me to read the lotr tolkien books. there's nothing wrong with that is there? i don't think my mind is necessarily corruptible, not by posting and the posters here anyway. if i didn't want to have read the books, i wouldn't have.
i do know what you mean by mental flashers, and have encountered them on many other boards. they try and dazzle others and force feed their views. i find that they aren't particularily well rounded types, and usually it's very easy to call their bluff. i enjoy silents and pre-codes, and other than maybe a hint or suggestions here and there, i don't ram the point home here, unless someone specifically engaged me in the topic. that's for other boards i frequent, not this one.
"haven't you ever found a man that could make you happy?" "sure! lots of times!"
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Sun Nov 2 18:18:37)
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 18:20:17 |
Hi again Sinsans; If you are really concerned about people spending too much spare time on their computers;
" I highly doubt anyone who spends 12-20 hours posting humorless nonesence on a MOVIE BOARD intended for teenagers is hardly living a 'full life'."
Then maybe this information might be useful. Studies show that some users of Massive Online Role Playing Games such as Ever Quest are spending more time in their virtual world than in their real world. May I suggest that if you are really concerned about informing people of excessive recreational computer use, that Ever Quest would be a good place to start.
Now as for "humorless nonsense on a MOVIE BOARD"; I don't see the major problem on the LOTR boards that you seem to think exists. Since I have a masters degree in psychology I think I am qualified to make that assessment.
There are a few trolls who spend hours just harassing people which I would describe as "humorless nonsense". These are basically immature people, the equivalent of online pranksters, and great effort has been made to teach these people social etiquette.
Otherwise the people here are;
* Moderate in their use (rarely over 4 hours per day).
* People are living regular lives with relationships, jobs, taking vacations, etc.
* They are informing themselves about the LOTR movies, the books and the ideas behind the books.
* Several participants have put their time to practical use;
1. For school papers
2. For those interested in studying film, literature & other topics which LOTR touches on.
I understand your concern; but there really isn't a problem here except for the trolls.
Have a good one, BB ;-)
it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO -
|
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 19:15:22 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Sun Nov 2 19:31:34)
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 19:32:30 |
First, I have a degree that no doubt trumps yours. And it is from a real university. I wonder what non-accredited place gave you a graduate degree.
So, let me get this straight. Your fascinating vision of the situation here is that we are somehow useless people. Yet, you waste an awful lot of time around here trying to prove your superiority. In an extremely smug and self-righteous manner, I might add.
So, my mere observations have led me to the conclusion that you are a genuinely bitter, angry freak who is desperate to drag anyone down to their antediluvean level. And the internet gives you that opportunity without getting the well-deserved thrashing you would get if you were this ill-mannered in person.
Or, to put it in simpler words you might be able to understand, if you genuinely thought yourself so superior, you would just not bother, concluding you had better things to do with your time. By spending so much time and effort in an attempt to drag this board down, you have placed yourself beneath the least of us. You have betrayed your hypocritical ways for all of us to see.
Aw, look- it's trying to act superior!
|
|
|
just wondering.
Truly a shooting star of a troll.
|
|
|
Sinaes and Sinsans are two different people. Sinaes is pleasant, Sinsans is not.
...picture this, a day in December...
|
|
|
I meant Sinsans, not Sinaes. Sorry the names are so similar It just slipped my mind.
Truly a shooting star of a troll.
|
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 21:03:58 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Sun Nov 2 20:00:40)
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 20:47:48 |
You feel a really obsessive-compulsive need to label others as "losers." Looks like I struck a nerve, child. You will get no respect from me, and that is what you really want, isn't it? You really are a sad, useless waste of a life.
And, as far as bringing anything down, you have failed. Have you not noticed that the "losers" all write better than you? You have merely betrayed yourself as a joyless loser (yes, your term. After all, it is your desire to escape that label that drives you to do this, right?) who cannot say anything of value to anyone, so you have to behave like a disruptive second grader with ADHD. Although I suspect Paxil, not Ritalin, is the right drug for your psychological difficulties.
Oh, and by the way, bleating about your academic credentials:
" I also have a degree, that beats your degree by a long shot. "
Then turning around and whining when someone points out that theirs are undoubtedly better:
"'[Quoting from my comment:] First, I have a degree that no doubt trumps yours. And it is from a real university. I wonder what non-accredited place gave you a graduate degree.'
_______________
[Dimsin's response:] An example of an insecure loser. What did I tell you."
Makes you either a complete hypocrite or, by your own definition, an insecure loser. Pick one.
I have wasted enough time on your drivel. Meet the ignore button.
Look- it's trying to act out in a pathetic cry for attention!
|
|
|
| UPDATED Sun Nov 2 21:38:54 |
This message has been deleted by an administrator
|
|
|
alrighty!
oh sinsans, i guess i gotta tell you right up front - i don't have a degree. never went to college. so, that's out of the way up front.
this really is not a board for children. i'm under the impression that since i have a smaller type child, i can judge that with no problems. if you go back thru the various threads here, many of these conversation are not posted on the level of an eight year old. however, there are some that are lighter in nature, as when i got excited that the chicago cubs won (okay, i am so not gonna get into that again). are there threads where topics get childish, or the posters themselves get childish? sure there are.
there are posters here, too numerous to mention, that are true tolkien-ites, they've read the books numerous times, they love the films, and they post here. for the most part, they share their information freely. they engage in conversations that frankly, i can't wrap my brain around. i can tell i need to read the books again. i guess i don't see what's wrong with that, being a tolkien pro...most of us do have one or two areas of expertise.
i've got to ask you honestly now, if you don't care for the imdb and you don't care for the movies or books that much (it doesn't seem like it anyway), why are you posting here? you know, i can understand you getting your rocks off by being arguementative. but it seems that you yourself don't like to be called a 'loser' or what have you, but yet you prod and prod and prod. what can one possibly expect, if i went to the matrix boards and accused people of no life, and no brains, what do you think i'd get?
oh well...
"as long as there are sidewalks you'll always have a job!"
|
|
|
Another thing that struck me: since when does having a college degree equal being intellectually superior? I know plenty of college graduates who are no Einsteins, not by a very long shot. Getting a degree these days doesn't mean the same as it did a generation ago. Anyone can do it.
Begone foul dwimmerlaik, lord of carrion!
|
|
|
| by -
CTS-1
(Mon Nov 3 05:12:49)
|
|
| UPDATED Mon Nov 3 05:17:26 |
Agreed. But, as you no doubt noticed as well, our friend Dimsin wants it both ways. Somehow, its yet to be disclosed degree is very special, while the fact that several of us have advanced graduate degrees should mean nothing. Dimsin is really tipping its hand there- and the cards all scream "inferiority complex."
Look- it's trying to think!
|
|
|
| by -
BB-15
(Mon Nov 3 03:27:43)
|
|
Sinsans;
* BB please dont lay your psychological crap on me, I also have a degree, that beats your degree by a long shot.
Frankly, you missed the point of my post. You have made several assertions that the participation on imdb is somehow interfering with "living a full life". The study of patterns of behavior and leading productive lives is an area of study in psychology. I happen to be an expert in that area. I am not bragging, it just is the truth. Your irrational, insulting response and getting in some juvenile comparison of one degree being better is not productive to this discussion.
You are asserting that spending time on these LOTR Boards is somehow harmful to people's development. I am saying there is no evidence for this and I have some qualifications to come to such a conclusion. That is just the reality of the situation. I am sorry you do not like it.
* "'my studies' and mere observations show that people who come and spend many hours on internet do tend to be social outcasts"
I do not deny that there is some internet activity that interferes with social development. I gave you an example of Massive Online Role playing games in which this seems to be the case. However, in my observations of the people participating on the LOTR Boards, the regular participants are not "social outcasts". Many people here are married, are in relationships and have lots of friends. The Board format when it works as intended encourages dialogue and encourages the development of social skills. I have seen several trolls drop their hostility and become meaningful participants and in turn learn some manners in the process.
* "Some here, take the hollier than thou attitude to a new rediculous level, and when you really think about it, these people arent playing games, yet they arent inventing a cure for cancer nor pondering the waste management problem, they have immersed themselves into a fantasy world of pure absurdity and expect others to take them seriously. "
This objection maybe gets to the heart of the matter. It does not have to do with imdb at all. It is the question, does literature matter in our lives? Or should we just be immersed in political activism, scientific research, or trying to save the world. I think what is missed in your opinion is the value of entertainment and art. I have worked as a social worker and counselor for over 25 years. I have done my part with union organizing, helped lead a movement to improve waste management in my county. But you know life isn't all about the job, dealing with people's problems and trying to save the world. There is more to life than that.
I am also a husband and a father. I am also a musician. I appreciate art, literature and good films. There is a place for that in ones life. And LOTR is a brilliant work of art and the Jackson films are excellent. I do not "expect others to take" this study seriously if we are comparing it to cancer research. But I do expect a recognition that there is value in learning about the beauty of this world and LOTR contains some of that beauty.
* They, in 'all seriousness' consider themselves elite scholars of this BS.
In a university I took classes in literature, opera, film, jazz, art history, map making, and in each subject there were elite scholars. People do study Shakespeare, Rembrandt, Mozart, and now they study Tolkien. Your objection IMHO is with the entire field of the study of art. And frankly this is not the forum for your objections.
Since you have a degree, go to your university administration and demand that only hard science to taught there. Write letters to the newspapers and demand that all the theaters be closed. After all most plays and movies are "a fantasy world of pure absurdity… (and) arent inventing a cure for cancer".
To badger the people on this Board is futile. We like the books and we like the movie. I am sorry you disagree but there is nothing you can do about the desire to create and discuss art which has been going on for thousands of years.
BB
it's just in my humble opinion - IMHO -
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Fri Nov 7 01:42:44)
|
|
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
| |
| | |
company.
Advertise on IMDb.
License our content.
bravenet.com