If Arwen had been cut from the films

[vison]

Perfectly said, Sassafras.

[Athrabeth]

my objection is this: As a quintessential elf, Arwen, having been schooled by Elrond and Galadriel, the two greatest Elves remaining in Middle Earth, has the accumulated wisdom of 2,000 years and the knowledge of her forebears .....

Tolkien wrote:

And for all her wisdom and lineage, she could not forebear to plead with him to stay yet for a while. She was not yet weary of her days, and thus she tasted the bitterness of the mortality that she had taken upon her.

A progression which, I might add, finally leaves us with the conundrum of ALINTTTFOTR!!

ALINTTTFOTR is another detour altogether as far as I'm concerned. Arwen could well have been portrayed as coming back to Rivendell, asking for Narsil to be reforged, and waiting for the ultimate resolution with renewed trust and hope, without the screenwriters going down that particularly bumpy backroad.

The fact that a vision of Eldarion is necessary for her to change her mind and accept her doom is what rankles with me. I do not believe that Arwen would ever abandon Aragorn (even if she suspected, or knew, she might prove barren) As I said before, IMO that particular story arc is thoroughly un-Tolkien ..... it is the antithesis of his morality where an oath is an absolute. It is without compromise and is utterly binding.

You know, I think that's what I find the most unsettling in those last passages of the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen. I've never felt comfortable with the idea that it's an oath that compels Arwen to remain behind and die rather than love and faith. And quite honestly, Aragorn's words about "this doom we accepted" kind of tick me off.

Oaths in Tolkien's world are often nasty, unforgiving things, aren't they? Especially when they bind a heart that has changed, or yearns for peace. It's just rather sad to me that Arwen, in many ways, is caught in the same kind net that snares the likes of Maedhros and Maglor. I know this may get your blood boiling (or at least simmering a little ) but I actually prefer Arwen getting the chance to willingly reaffirm her choice of mortality.

but instead of celebrating the steadfastness of the Eldar, as is done in Fellowship where Arwen is portrayed as strong, supportive and full of hope, as the films progress she is increasingly shown as weak by succumbing to the persuasion of foresight (as you put it) by agreeing to leave Middle Earth and Aragorn behind in order to escape certain death ..... and in effect reneging upon the solemn promise given at Cerin Amroth.

I think Tolkien essentially portrays Arwen as weak at the end, losing her resolve to willingly accept death and being subject to Aragorn's rather reproachful words.

It is a lovely, poignant, and visually stunning piece of cinema but ..... it is just another example of the scriptwriters overwrought (and overused) lamentable penchant for reversal........ much like Pippin tricking Treebeard in rousing the Ents to war on Isengard (which I can tolerate) or Frodo sending Sam away ( which I cannot).

Sass, there is no way I could even begin to compare Arwen's reaffirming choice and renewal of hope to Frodo sending Sam away. The former is at least compatible (as far as I'm concerned) with themes found in Tolkien's works, the latter is at the most, just silly.

[axordil]

Oaths in Tolkien's world are often nasty, unforgiving things, aren't they? Especially when they bind a heart that has changed, or yearns for peace. It's just rather sad to me that Arwen, in many ways, is caught in the same kind net that snares the likes of Maedhros and Maglor.

I have found myself thinking that as I read this thread. Oaths are at best two-edged swords in Tolkien, as they are in Germanic legend and epic. Thus the exchange between Elrond and Gimli as the Fellowship leaves Rivendell...oaths taken rashly in particular, and when one does not know what lies ahead, even in one's heart, what oath is not rash?

[Primula Baggins]

And yet they are important, and most of us make them at one point or another. And keep them with varying levels of success. But for many people marriage vows, and other oaths such as for military service, are part of the fundamental framework of life. Not knowing how easy or hard it will be to fulfill the vow is simply part of the deal. That could be considered rash or even romantic, but to me a vow like that, taken after thought and consideration, can make the difference between achieving what one hopes for and falling short. It can sustain people at times when there's nothing else left.

[axordil]

It can sustain people at times when there's nothing else left.

You're with Gimli, then. But "after thought" and "rash" are mutually exclusive, are they not? The Oath of Fëanor, the archetype of Bad Oaths, was taken in a moment of rage by someone who did rage well. The Oaths of Fealty and Homage taken by Merry and Pippin, though, while also on the spur of the moment, were not nearly so problematic--although I note that Denethor conveniently released Pippin before Pippin would have been quite stuck by it.

[Primula Baggins]

Well, Ax, your question was, are all oaths not rash? And the answer I was trying for was, if not foreseeing the consequences makes an oath rash, then rashness is part of the essential nature of oaths.

And, yes, I'm with Gimli on that one, though I think it applies to oaths that are made with thought and intention and certainly without coercion. Being forced to promise not to run away isn't likely to keep you from doing it.

[Frelga]

The Oaths of Fealty and Homage taken by Merry and Pippin, though, while also on the spur of the moment, were not nearly so problematic--although I note that Denethor conveniently released Pippin before Pippin would have been quite stuck by it.

As Théoden released Merry. Yet neither hobbit thought himself released, stuck by their oath, and helped saved the day. But their oaths were given out of love. The Feanorian oath was given out of anger and revenge and all mean feelings, and the result of it was predictably nasty.

I think Tolkien essentially portrays Arwen as weak at the end, losing her resolve to willingly accept death and being subject to Aragorn's rather reproachful words.

Reproachful? This bit?

The uttermost choice is before you: to repent and go to the Havens and bear away into the West the memory of our days together that shall there be evergreen but never more than memory; or else to abide the Doom of Men.

And this?

In sorrow we must go, but not in despair. Behold, we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell.

As I see it, the point of Arwen's choice is not to give Aragorn his trophy wife or to restore the bloodline - she didn't have to renounce her immortality to do that (see Elf blood in Dol Amroth). The point was for her to spend an eternity beyond the circles of the world with Aragorn rather than with her parents.

But the Doom of Men is hidden, and at the end, Arwen is faced with the certainty of loss without being assured that the reunion is to be happy, or even possible. Just like the rest of us, really.

[axordil]

The point was for her to spend an eternity beyond the circles of the world with Aragorn rather than with her parents.

Or her people, so far as we know. The long-range eschatology of the Eldar is hazy, deliberately so.

It is revealing how many times that motif appears in JRRT's work. Virtually every major protagonist in his mythos either is forced from his or her own family and people or chooses to leave them, often in order to protect them. The ones that settle comfortably are as a rule supporting characters, some problematic in the support they provide.

[WampusCat]

But the Doom of Men is hidden, and at the end, Arwen is faced with the certainty of loss without being assured that the reunion is to be happy, or even possible. Just like the rest of us, really.

That is how I read it. And I can attest that no matter how certain of that reunion you are in theory, doubt is inescapable when the reality of death, the pain of leave-taking, approaches.

[Athrabeth]

As I see it, the point of Arwen's choice is not to give Aragorn his trophy wife or to restore the bloodline - she didn't have to renounce her immortality to do that (see Elf blood in Dol Amroth). The point was for her to spend an eternity beyond the circles of the world with Aragorn rather than with her parents.

That's pretty much how I've always viewed Arwen's choice as well, Frelga.

But the Doom of Men is hidden, and at the end, Arwen is faced with the certainty of loss without being assured that the reunion is to be happy, or even possible. Just like the rest of us, really

That is how I read it. And I can attest that no matter how certain of that reunion you are in theory, doubt is inescapable when the reality of death, the pain of leave-taking, approaches.

Yes. I think Arwen's "human-ness" at the end is what makes her tale so compelling. She becomes "us", doesn't she? And getting back to the original question , if Arwen had been cut from the films, or had been relegated to remaining a perfect beacon of hope waiting in Rivendell, this essential quality (and purpose) of her character within the greater tale would have been lost. Her vision (pre-experience?) of Aragorn's death would have still been a hauntingly beautiful scene, but without Arwen facing the same kind darkness and doubt that shakes her "book character" to the very core, it's meaning IMO, would have been diminished.

It is revealing how many times that motif appears in JRRT's work. Virtually every major protagonist in his mythos either is forced from his or her own family and people or chooses to leave them, often in order to protect them.

What a great observation, Ax. It also reminds me of what you said about the "double-edged sword" quality of oaths. In Tolkien's world, one normally doesn't gain something great without losing something dear, or at the very least, risking that loss.

The uttermost choice is before you: to repent and go to the Havens and bear away into the West the memory of our days together that shall there be evergreen but never more than memory; or else to abide the Doom of Men.

Frelga, yes, I find those particular words of Aragorn's reproachful, although I'm pretty sure that Tolkien didn't mean for them to be so (using them more as a device to bring Arwen's past choice back to a sharper focus for the reader).

In sorrow we must go, but not in despair. Behold, we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell

For me, these lines have an entirely different feel to them, and I'm quite glad that Aragorn's final words are so loving and hopeful.

Wampus.........

[Primula Baggins]

Wampus,

The uttermost choice is before you: to repent and go to the Havens and bear away into the West the memory of our days together that shall there be evergreen but never more than memory; or else to abide the Doom of Men.

Frelga, yes, I find those particular words of Aragorn's reproachful, although I'm pretty sure that Tolkien didn't mean for them to be so (using them more as a device to bring Arwen's past choice back to a sharper focus for the reader).

You know, these particular words have always bothered me. They seem to me to negate Arwen's sacrifice. So, at the end, after choosing Aragorn and living a long, full life with him, she still had the option of changing her mind and returning to her immortal life as an Elf? To me that undercuts everything that came before: if this is how it was, then she did not in fact have to choose between a life with Aragorn and eternity with her people; she could have had both.

[Frelga]

To me that undercuts everything that came before: if this is how it was, then she did not in fact have to choose between a life with Aragorn and eternity with her people; she could have had both.

Indeed she could have had both, I think. As I have said upthread, what she had to choose was an eternity with her people OR eternity with her husband and children. The first was a certainty, the second was a risk she took for the sake of their love.

Frelga, yes, I find those particular words of Aragorn's reproachful, although I'm pretty sure that Tolkien didn't mean for them to be so (using them more as a device to bring Arwen's past choice back to a sharper focus for the reader)

Well then, it's clearly ATD* .
IMO, like Denethor and Théoden, Aragorn releases the person who loves him from the oath she undertook for his sake, believing apparently that she still has the choice. She thinks she doesn't, but we know the ships are still sailing, so what gives?

Yes, she is a bit bitter about it, but that's being mortal for you. Hardly any of us are perfect.

Wampus, This'll probably come out wrong, but I do think of you every time I think of Arwen's choice.

* ATD = agree to disagree

[WampusCat]

Wampus, This'll probably come out wrong, but I do think of you every time I think of Arwen's choice.

Yes, just call me WampusCat Tinúviel. Or maybe not.

It is odd, though, that the more of life I experience, the more Tolkien's universe makes sense.

[Athrabeth]

IMO, like Denethor and Théoden, Aragorn releases the person who loves him from the oath she undertook for his sake, believing apparently that she still has the choice. She thinks she doesn't, but we know the ships are still sailing, so what gives?

Ah, I see! Yes, I can appreciate how Aragorn's words can be construed that way. I guess you're cutting him quite a bit more slack than I do, reading it as him releasing Arwen from her vow. For me however, he'd actually have to say, "I release you from your vow" . Strangely enough, this is pretty much what Aragorn does in TTT after considering the magnitude of her choice. Go figure.

It is odd, though, that the more of life I experience, the more Tolkien's universe makes sense.

I think that's why it endures so strongly for so many of us, Wampus. Unlike many books I read in my youth that once seemed so profoundly deep and now seem rather obvious and shallow, LOTR "grew up" (and now "grows old") with me, and I can see truths (personal truths) that only the continuing experience of living and loving and losing can reveal.

[Sassafras]

It's taken me a few days and there's lots of good posts in between but I did want to reply because, as usual, Ath's words got me thinking once again.

Ath wrote:

Tolkien wrote:

And for all her wisdom and lineage, she could not forebear to plead with him to stay yet for a while. She was not yet weary of her days, and thus she tasted the bitterness of the mortality that she had taken upon her.

I wonder, did Arwen understand that by giving up her Elven heritage for the transience of mortal life she became a living symbol for the fading of the Elves? For the transition from the Third to the Fourth Age.
I do not mean to imply that only from a sense of duty to the vow was reason she wed Aragorn and therefore agreed to be bound to Middle-Earth. No indeed. Although on further reflection I do consider that her doom was entwined with his, and it is quite conceivable that the first suggestions were sung in the music of the Ainur.....

<Yes, I know. The fate of the Elves again!>

It's not my intention to suggest that the promise she made was all that bound her to Aragorn ….... Their doom was intermingled, (as were others) and although it well may be that doom was first laid down in the choirs of the Valar, its foundation always was true love.

What was begun in the First Age is completed in the Third for there are three examples of apparent pre-ordained plighted troth between ladies of high nobility with men of lesser status. The motif begins with the semi-divine Melian laying enchantment upon Thingol in the woods of Nan Elmoth …..

“She spoke no word; but being filled with love Elwë came to her and took her hand and straightway a spell was laid on him, so that they stood thus while long years were measured by the wheeling stars above them.”

<:love:>

The second playing of the motif is Lúthien and Beren who meet in the woods under similar circumstances ….

“and he fell into an enchantment; for Lúthien was the most beautiful of all the Children of Ilúvatar.”

And in with some variation, the third repeat ...... In the woods of Rivendell, Aragorn.....

singing a part of the Lay of Lúthien, which tells of the meeting of Lúthien and Beren in the forest of Neldoreth. And behold! there Lúthien walked before his eyes in Rivendell . .
clad in a mantle of silver and blue, fair as the twilight in Elven-home; her dark hair strayed in a sudden wind, and her brows were bound with gems like stars.
<snip>

And at their first eventful meeting Arwen says in response to his calling her Tinúviel.......

“So many have said,” she answered gravely. “Yet her name is not mine.. Though maybe my doom will not be unlike hers.”

In all three of these unions the lovers appear to have little or no volition in the matter although it's true the intensity does seems to lessen a little with each subsequent pairing. Melian and Elwë are spellbound from the very first, Lúthien and Beren meet several times and finally Arwen and Aragorn must wait years before their vow is fulfilled.

You know, I think that's what I find the most unsettling in those last passages of the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen. I've never felt comfortable with the idea that it's an oath that compels Arwen to remain behind and die rather than love and faith.

Oh, I don’t believe so! Rather I think it is the entwining of a destiny enhanced with true romantic love which both honour with a steadfastness that is not in any way that dreadful mind-numbing sense of obligated duty which chafes the spirit and dulls the soul. On the contrary, they are in each other's thoughts constantly. We are told, remember, that Arwen, with her sight, watches over Aragorn.

<it is precisely because I hold that view that the film version of waffling Arwen is so upsetting to me>

I think Tolkien essentially portrays Arwen as weak at the end, losing her resolve to willingly accept death and being subject to Aragorn's rather reproachful words.

Say not so much weak, say grieved instead, and forlorn. She has known and rejoiced in the full flower of love but the condition of death came with that joy and finally she is left alone and bereft. She has sacrificed immortality for love of Aragorn and to ensure the continued mingling of the blood lines ;and also , in a very direct and beautiful way, her loss becomes salvation for Frodo when she exchanges her place on the ship for his.

But Queen Arwen said, “ A gift I will give you. For I am the daughter of Elrond. I shall not go with him now when he departs to the Havens; for mine is the choice of Lúthien, as she so have I chosen, both the sweet and the bitter. But in my stead you shall go, Ring-bearer, when the time comes, and if you desire it. If your hurts grieve you still and the memory of your burden is heavy, then you may pass into the West, until all your wounds and weariness are healed.”

Arwen’s renunciation of Elvish life and her poignant mortal death tells us that with great change there comes great pain. It is my belief that Arwen represents the changing age:The dominion of Men ....... and so she is the physical embodiment of the fading of the Three and, sadly, poignantly, her sacrifice represents the final passing of the Elves into the Uttermost West.



Thus the world becomes a lesser place.

[vison]

It is no easier for us mortals to realize that though we love, we will also always experience loss. Arwen's choice was to open herself to loss - and it is always a choice.

I never thought her sorrow and pain meant that she "regretted" her choice. Even when she said, "There is now no ship that would bear me hence". She knew what she was doing when she did it, but it hurt more than she could possibly have understood when she fell in love with Aragorn and vowed to share his fate.

It is true for all of us.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

There is too much here for me to properly respond to, but I just want to say that it does my heart good to come back and see a discussion like this here.

[axordil]

and so she is the physical embodiment of the fading of the Three

That's perilously close to ALITTTFOTR, you know.

[Primula Baggins]

Not that close. The Three, not the One; and she is an Elf, so naturally her existence in Middle-earth is tied to the fate of the Three. It fits, where ALINTTTFOTR does not.

[Sassafras]

You've got it, Prim. Thanks

Whereas you, Ax, do not.