The Silmarillion Discussion at The Hall of Fire

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This thread is for continuation of the discussion that was first begun in the m00bies forum at TORC:

m00bies read the Silmarillion

and then picked up again from the beginning at board77:

Sil Discussion at board77

I propose that since the main recent participants of the discussion are already here, that we continue the discussion here from where we left off. I wrote, on Nov. 12, at b77:

Which would mean, of course, that the dispersal of Melkor's power into the very fabric of Arda was Eru's plan all along.

I still disagree with this. I think the dispersal of Melkor's power into the very fabric of Arda was potentially Eru's plan all along.........as every other infinite possibility had the potential to become manifest at the very moment Ilúvatar kindled "the offspring of his thought" with the Imperishable Flame.

Whilst I do not dispute that every infinite possibility had the potential to become manifest, Iluvator knows before it occurrs which possibility will in fact become manifest. How do I know this? Because what is Mandos but the mouthpiece of Eru? Surely anything that Mandos knows is known by Iluvator as well. I think that Mandos' main role in the story is to inform us of the inevitability of at least certain aspects of the tale.

That free will (in the Silmarillion, at least) is illusory. Oh, there are undoubtedly acts of individual volition ... but not where it concerns the nature of Melkor or the Doom of the Elves. Melkor was meant to fall, to imbue Arda with his essence (Arda Marred) and the Elves were meant to travel the long defeat.

To my mind, that would negate the necessity of the hand of Eru entering into the story on occasion (from the Sil through to LOTR) to "put things right", as it were. If everything is set according to some great predetermined master plan, then why should its maker mess with the design at all? On the other hand, if things can indeed go awry with the great predetermined master plan, doesn't that that imply that its maker is capable of error? Neither seem quite right to me, somehow.

While I agre with you that free will is not illusory, could not Iluvator's own interventions be part of the great predetermined master plan? After all, if I were devising some great predetermined master plan, I would certainly want to reserve some actoins for myself, rather then just being a boring onlooker all the time.

:Wooper:

To me, this is the beauty of Tolkien's construct: that "God" creates sub-creators capable of free will and the inherent ability to make their choices "be", and regardless of what outcomes these choices will generate, they become part of "the plan". I still maintain that if Ilúvatar is somehow "infinitely every-thing", then that must mean that absolutely every possible outcome springs from him at the instant his thought takes form, from the creation of the Ainur to the propounding of the Third Theme of Music, in which his "Children" have their beginning. It is through the gift and the burden of free will that infinite paths become narrowed and set, but even so, they still meet and entwine and branch out to form destinies and destinations unlooked for, some painfully tragic and others magnificently triumphant.

To me, the beauty of Tolkien's construct is that free will exists despite the fact of Eru's being infinitely everything. After all, what does time mean to Eru? I would say that Eru exists outside of both time and space, and therefore He necessarily knows everything of what will be, because to Him what will be is no different then what is, or what was. We see glimpses of that all-seeing vision through Mandos' eyes. The painfully tragic and magnificently triumphant destinies and destinations are unlooked for indeed, by all of Eru's creations, from the greatest of the Valar to the smallest of the lower life forms (are you reading this, Cerin?), but not to Eru Herself. And yet each of those creations must exercise its own free will in order to achieve Eru's vision.

In one of his letters, Tolkien says something to the effect that in gifting the Ainur with both free will and the powers of subcreation, Ilúvatar must accept all the potential outcomes born from these forces as part of the great unfolding tale that he began. The only assurance he gives, unchanging and absolute, is that no "subdesign" conceived by any one of them can ultimately usurp the greater themes of his thought, and though individuals may fall and be corrupted, though death and pain and despair may long hold sway, no evil can overcome the blessedness of his Children, for whom Arda was created.

I'll address this paragraph later.

I still intend to address that paragraph.

[Sassafras]

Edit: copy/paste from b77 Sil thread 13th November.


<I'm not at all sure that this re-creation is either sharper or more focused.
The gist is similar but I've lost some insight>

Be that as it may:

“Sense is what you make of it”

I borrowed your title V. because it makes so much sense

It seems to me that we are, all three of us (since no one else has chosen to join in the discussion. Too boring or?) are agreed on the central premise which is “All things on heaven and earth are sprung from Ilúvatar” but that we are choosing (by dint of our own particular philosophies) to interpret that premise differently.

Voronwë said:

I don't think he had any choice in the matter. Which would mean, of course, that the dispersal of Melkor power into the very fabric of Arda was Eru's plan all along. How's that for a sobering thought?

And then I said:

Hey, I've been arguing this since we first began reading the Silmarillion on TORC.

That free will (in the Silmarillion, at least) is illusory. Oh, there are undoubtedly acts of individual volition ... but not where it concerns the nature of Melkor or the Doom of the Elves. Melkor was meant to fall, to imbue Arda with his essence (Arda Marred) and the Elves were meant to travel the long defeat.

All for the sake of the plan: the Final Music.

The final sentence was overlooked although it is the conclusion of my argument.


Athrabeth said: (in direct answer to V’s comment on Morgoth’s Ring.)

I still disagree with this. I think the dispersal of Melkor's power into the very fabric of Arda was potentially Eru's plan all along.........as every other infinite possibility had the potential to become manifest at the very moment Ilúvatar kindled "the offspring of his thought" with the Imperishable Flame.

And,

To my mind, that would negate the necessity of the hand of Eru entering into the story on occasion (from the Sil through to LOTR) to "put things right", as it were. If everything is set according to some great predetermined master plan, then why should its maker mess with the design at all? On the other hand, if things can indeed go awry with the great predetermined master plan, doesn't that that imply that its maker is capable of error? Neither seem quite right to me, somehow

Let me see if I’ve got this right: You think the events which play out in the Sil and LOTR are all a result of happy chance? All coincidental?
If, as you suggest, there are an infinite number of possibilities because all possibilities are within the realm of Ilúvatar‘s thought… WHAT determines a chain of events? Mere haphazard circumstance? What gives shape to the pattern? For patterns there most certainly are.

I can only speak, and not concisely enough, to my own opinion: Which is that I use the concept of pre-ordination to suggest a determinism which is NOT, repeat NOT, fatalistic. Fatalism would imply that every single thought, every single act is set in stone from the beginning. As I see it, within the laws of Tolkien’s universe, the fall of Melkor and the setting of the Elves on the path of the long retreat, the long defeat is
so that the world of Men may have dominion. And that has been decided by the very fabric of the music from it’s first inception. HOW those two major events are played out is left up to the participants.
To use an anology…. The frame dictates the final shape of the house but the decoration is left in the hands and minds of the inhabitants.

The maker “messes with the design” because from time to time the participant need a gentle nudge in one direction or the other. I’ll repeat myself again …. There is a rather large difference between Fatalism and Determinism. A Fatalistic view allows only for a future where events have already been determined. The other, to paraphrase Hume, says that while thoughts, beliefs, actions have antecedent causes the only meaningful interpretation of freedom relates to the ability to translate those desires and beliefs into voluntary action.

<Frodo was meant to have the Ring. His very nature gives him a natural ability to withstand it’s seduction far longer than many others. But going still further back in ME history … Gollum, not Déagol, was also meant to have the Ring and meant to lose it to Bilbo. The chain of events is set in motion>

The deck was stacked in favour of the Ring’s ultimate destruction.

I believe, Ath, you think I hold a thoroughly fatalistic view of the Sil and LOTR. I’ve tried to explain ( badly no doubt) that while I do think much is pre-determined, pre-ordained, pre-destined there remains room for individual volition within the rules.
Take Fëanor for example and the making of the Silmarils.
All the conditions are pre-set. The Two Trees made by Yavanna. The decimation and consumption of the light by Melkor with Ungoliant’s help which will now make inevitable the request to Fëanor to hand over the jewels to the Valar. His arrogant nature, his covetedness which will not allow him to part with them sets the entire downfall of the Quendi into motion. Although I would postulate that the path they must travel is a forgone conclusion. It must be so.

Finally there is this quote.from the Ainulindalë:

Never since have the Ainur made any music like to this music, though it has been said that a greater still shall be made before Ilúvatar by the choirs of the Ainur and the children of Ilúvatar after the end of days.Then the themes of Ilúvatar shall be played aright, and take Being in the moment of their utterance, for all shall then understand fully his intent in their part, and each shall know know the comprehension of each, and Ilúvatar shall give to their thoughts the secret fire, being well pleased.

This prophecy, for prophecy it is, strongly suggests to me that Tolkien is obliquely talking about the final Redemption of Man (and Elf) as does Ath’s final comment,
Quote:
no evil can overcome the blessedness of his Children, for whom Arda was created

The only thing missing is the Messiah.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


This requires a seperate post.... and a whole lot more thought.

Voronwë wrote:

To me, the beauty of Tolkien's construct is that free will exists despite the fact of Eru's being infinitely everything. After all, what does time mean to Eru? I would say that Eru exists outside of both time and space, and therefore He necessarily knows everything of what will be, because to Him what will be is no different then what is, or what was. We see glimpses of that all-seeing vision through Mandos' eyes. The painfully tragic and magnificently triumphant destinies and destinations are unlooked for indeed, by all of Eru's creations, from the greatest of the Valar to the smallest of the lower life forms (are you reading this, Cerin?), but not to Eru Herself. And yet each of those creations must exercise its own free will in order to achieve Eru's vision.

[Athrabeth]

Well, this post is still not entirely complete (what else is new?), but I thought I’d submit it now so that the probing questions and articulate rebuttals that will inevitably follow can hopefully help me form some more solid thoughts on the matter. Thinking about how to express my own shadowy musings on this topic can make my brain hurt, I’m afraid.

Sass and Voronwë, I actually think that we are more in agreement than not about certain “dooms” being set within the tale: I just think we have differing opinions about where and how those dooms begin to take form.

Let me see if I’ve got this right: You think the events which play out in the Sil and LOTR are all a result of happy chance? All coincidental?

Absolutely not, Sass. I think that most, if not all, are intricately connected.

If, as you suggest, there are an infinite number of possibilities because all possibilities are within the realm of Ilúvatar‘s thought… WHAT determines a chain of events? Mere haphazard circumstance? What gives shape to the pattern? For patterns there most certainly are.

Free will.

I think the infinite becomes finite through the thoughts of the Ainur and the subsequent courses of action they each begin to set in motion with their powers of subcreation. I think set patterns begin to be woven into the tale of Arda from the moment that each Ainu begins to form his or her own variations within the great theme of Ilúvatar. When Ilúvatar shows them the vision of the world "that will be", he doesn't say, 'Behold my music." Why not? Perhaps because his music cannot be wholly contained within Arda, limited as it is within Time and Space? The infinite needs to become the finite in order to shape the world, which is why Ilúvatar creates the Ainur to ultimately create Arda.. They serve to narrow all those uncontainable possibilities into more limited and directed courses. They are generators of Arda’s “dooms” because it is through their thoughts and actions that “things” become manifest and begin intereacting with and affecting other “things” .

I think somehow that it is noteworthy that not all the Ainur and Maiar choose to descend into Eä. I tend to forget this, (maybe we all do) and generally consider that all the fragments of Ilúvatar’s thought are contained within those that will become the Valar. But right from the very beginning of its physical manifestation, not all of the participants in the First Music participate in its story, not all of its singers and interpreters take part in Eä’s formation, not every note is represented within Arda. This pivotal choice is freely made by those Ainur willing to accept Ilúvatar’s condition “…that their power should thenceforward be contained and bounded to the World, to be within it for ever, until it is complete, so that they are its life and it is theirs.” I think that it is extremely important that Ilúvatar doesn’t compel any of the Ainur to take on the blessing and burden of becoming a Power of the World, that he doesn’t send any of them on a mission to carry out a singular plan, to check off a “to do” list made by an omniscient power. Instead, he creates the possibility for each to interpret those little “moments” of infinity that they have glimpsed (and yes, I think that even thousands of centuries can be construed as “moments” within such a boundless concept), and he guarantees them that these interpretations will become part of the fabric of Arda, regardless of their ramifications. This is what really breathes the “life” into Arda, this is what gives it the dynamic of a living, evolving story that is more (to me, at least) than some kind of staged theatre piece .

Whilst I do not dispute that every infinite possibility had the potential to become manifest, Iluvator knows before it occurs which possibility will in fact become manifest. How do I know this? Because what is Mandos but the mouthpiece of Eru? Surely anything that Mandos knows is known by Iluvator as well. I think that Mandos' main role in the story is to inform us of the inevitability of at least certain aspects of the tale.

But if Ilúvatar is separate from Time, then there is no “before”, is there? Like you, I am quite certain that he would know the whole story of Arda from beginning to end and back to the beginning in all its infinite permutations. Absolutely everything would be “doomed” from Ilúvatar’s perspective, would it not?

I, too think that Mandos is there to inform us of the inevitability of certain key aspects of the tale, but why are they inevitable? Because Ilúvatar has ordained them to be in place, so that they simply must be, or because Ilúvatar has created the possibility that, through subcreation and free will, certain paths will indeed become inevitable? What is Mandos actually seeing? Fragments of a creator’s predetermined plan that was set before the "offspring of his thought" were kindled with the Imperishable Flame, or the pivotal intersections of various paths that have been set in motion through the freely made choices and actions of their designers? To me at least, there’s a big difference between those two things.............I think.

[Jnyusa]

Lovely to see this here!

Just wanted to say that. If I've posted in the middle of a conversation that is being moved, just delete my post.

Jn

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Ath, I must say, my thinking is moving back in your direction. I'll need to think about what you have written some more, but I'm also going to post what I have been working on, which is a response to something that you said earlier.

In one of his letters, Tolkien says something to the effect that in gifting the Ainur with both free will and the powers of subcreation, Ilúvatar must accept all the potential outcomes born from these forces as part of the great unfolding tale that he began. The only assurance he gives, unchanging and absolute, is that no "subdesign" conceived by any one of them can ultimately usurp the greater themes of his thought, and though individuals may fall and be corrupted, though death and pain and despair may long hold sway, no evil can overcome the blessedness of his Children, for whom Arda was created.

This inspired me to go through Tolkien’s letters to try find what you talking about. Doing so gave me, I think, a much firmer grasp on Tolkien's conception.

We begin with this basic statement about the Valar:

Their power and wisdom is derived from their Knowledge of the cosmogonical drama, which they perceived first as a drama (that is as in a fashion we perceive a story composed by some-one else), and later as a ‘reality’. (Letter 131, p. 146.)

This analogy of the Valar perceiving the “cosmogonical drama” the way that we perceive a story is of critical importance to understanding the Valar relationship to the Eldar. Tolkien later wrote:

The Ainur took part in the making of the world as ‘sub-creators’: in various degrees, after this fashion. They interpreted according to their powers, and completed in detail, the Design propounded to them by the One. This was propounded first in musical or abstract form, and then in an ‘historical vision’. In the first interpretation, the vast Music of the Ainur, Melkor introduced alterations, not interpretations of the mind of the One, and great discord arose. The One then presented this ‘Music’, including the apparent discords, as a visible ‘history.’

At this stage it had still only a validity, to which the validity of a ‘story’ among ourselves may be compared: it ‘exists’ in the mind of the teller, and derivatively in the minds of hearers, but not on the same plane as teller or hearers. When the One (the Teller) said Let it Be* (* Hence the Elves called the World, the Universe, Eä), then the Tale became History, on the same plane as the hearers; and these could, if they desired, enter into it. Many of the Ainur did enter into it, and must bide in it till the End, being involved in Time, the series of events that complete it. These were the Valar, and their lesser attendants. They were those who had ‘fallen in love’ with the vision, and no doubt, were those who had played the most ‘sub-creative’ (or as we might say ‘artistic’) part in the Music. (Letter 212, p. 284.)

I want to first address the remarkable bolded section, because it relates so starkly to a question that has run through this whole multi-venue discussion: the particular question of Melkor’s free will in opposing the will of Eru. This quote certainly suggests that Ath is most correct; that Melkor’s actions were not determined by Eru but were in fact the product of Melkor’s free will. Of course, that free will itself was part of the “plan”, but what form it would take was clearly (from this statement) not pre-determined by Eru.

(A second detour could be a discussion of Tolkien’s views about the artist as a sub-creator, but I think that discussion requires its own thread.)

Turning back to the analogy of the Valar perceiving the Design of Eru in the way we perceive a story, I love the image of One saying Let it Be, and the Tale becoming History, and the Valar entering into the Tale and laboring to reproduce the Design of Eru in actuality, by exercising their own powers of sub-creation and free will. For it seems clear to me that the actions of the other Valar are no more pre-determined that that of Melkor, other then as a result of the fact that it was Eru that gave them the free will to act, consistent with the nature of being that Eru created each of them to be.

Turning back to the earlier letter, Tolkien wrote:

The Knowledge of the Creation Drama was incomplete: incomplete in each individual ‘god’, and incomplete if all the knowledge of the pantheon were pooled. For (partly to redress the evil of the rebel Melkor, partly for the completion of all in an ultimate fitness of detail) the Creator had not revealed all. The making, and nature, of the Children of God, were the two chief secrets. (Letter 131, p. 147.)

I find the conception that Eru’s hiding of the making and nature of the Children of Eru was partly to redress Melkor’s evil wonderfully counter-intuitive. But it is the very incompleteness of the Valar’s individual and collective knowledge that allows them to act with Free Will, which itself is an important part of the design.

The following quote is one I know Ath has cited before, and may well be the one she was referring to.

But the One retains all ultimate authority, and (or so it seems as viewed in serial time) reserves the right to intrude the finger of God into the story: that is to produce realities which could not be deduced even from a complete knowledge of the previous past, but which being real become part of the effective past for all subsequent time (a possible definition of a ‘miracle’). According to the fable Elves and Men were the first of these intrusions, made indeed while the ‘story’ was still only a story and not ‘realized’; they were not therefore in any sense conceived or made by the gods, the Valar, and were called the Eruhíni or ‘Children of God’, and were for the Valar an incalculable element: that is they were rational creatures of free will in regard to God, of the same historical rank as the Valar, though of far smaller spiritual and intellectual power and status. (Letter 181, pp. 235-236.)

Here we come to the critical point. Elves and Men are “an intrusion” into the Plan, at least so far as it was revealed by Eru to the Valar. The Children of Eru also exercise free will, subject only to the nature of their being as created by Eru, and thus are unpredictable to the Valar.

As Tolkien said:

Elves and Men were called the ‘children of God’, because they were, so to speak, a private addition to the Design, by the Creator, and one in which the Valar had no part. (Their ‘themes were introduced into the Music by the One, when the discords of Melkor arose.) The Valar knew that they would appear, and the great ones knew when and how (though not precisely), but they knew little of their nature, and their foresight, derived from their pre-knowledge of the Design, was imperfect or failed in the matter of the deeds of the Children. (Letter 212, p. 285.)

I think much of the Valar’s seeming naivete in dealing with the Elves is explained by this. Imagine thinking you know a story, but then seeing it turn in a different direction that you thought it must be going. That must of been how the Valar were reacting to the actions of both Melkor and the Eldar.

But what I find most interesting is the realization that not only is there room for Free Will of both the Ainur and the Children of Eru, but that the exercising of that Free Will is actually necessary for the realization of Eru’s Plan.

I, too think that Mandos is there to inform us of the inevitability of certain key aspects of the tale, but why are they inevitable? Because Ilúvatar has ordained them to be in place, so that they simply must be, or because Ilúvatar has created the possibility that, through subcreation and free will, certain paths will indeed become inevitable? What is Mandos actually seeing? Fragments of a creator’s predetermined plan that was set before the "offspring of his thought" were kindled with the Imperishable Flame, or the pivotal intersections of various paths that have been set in motion through the freely made choices and actions of their designers? To me at least, there’s a big difference between those two things.............I think.

After reading and thinking about the quotes that I cited above, I agree with you that there is a big difference between the two, and that the latter was what Tolkien intended to express.

One more quote. In the Shibboleth of Fëanor, Tolkien’s talks about Míriel’s decision to forsake her body and go to the Halls of Waiting.

So the Valar were faced by the one thing that they could neither change nor heal: the free will of one of the Children of Eru, which it was unlawful for them to coerce - and in such a case useless, since force could not achieve its purpose. (Shibboleth of Fëanor, p. 334.)

Was Míriel’s choice to accept death pre-determined by Eru? I would say, clearly not. It is the fact that she could chose to "die" that is critical to the Plan. It is the exercising of Free Will by all of the creations of Eru-- the Ainur that did not choose to go down into Arda and enter into the Tale, the Valar and the Maiar that did enter into the Tale, and the Children of Eru--that is most necessary for the final actualization of the "cosmogonical drama."

[Sassafras]

<rubs hands togerther>

Ooo. An Athrabeth post

I've only read this through twice (a mere cursory glance) but it seems to me that we are (mostly) in agreement. The main difference being our different use of the language.

Ath wrote:

They serve to narrow all those uncontainable possibilities into more limited and directed courses. They are generators of Arda’s “dooms” because it is through their thoughts and actions that “things” become manifest and begin intereacting with and affecting other “things” .

Now I may be trying to fit a square peg into a round hole but I really do believe we are saying the same thing. Your language is more fluid than my staccato ... but I see no condradiction here.

I said:

As I see it, within the laws of Tolkien’s universe, the fall of Melkor and the setting of the Elves on the path of the long retreat, the long defeat is so that the world of Men may have dominion. And that has been decided by the very fabric of the music from it’s first inception. HOW those two major events are played out is left up to the participants.
To use an anology…. The frame dictates the final shape of the house but the decoration is left in the hands and minds of the inhabitants.

Back later with more.

Absolutely everything would be “doomed” from Ilúvatar’s perspective, would it not?

I especially want to think about, and comment upon this ... only I'm a bit mentally deficient these days so it might take me a while.

Edit: And a Voronwë post ....
O Happy Day!

[Cerin]

Hey there!

I wasn't able to figure out who was speaking in that first post, but I noticed someone asked, 'Cerin, are you reading this?'

Alas, I never was reading it on b77, because I have only read the Sil once and didn't find the time to catch up, and so didn't think I dared venture into the thread. But I really hope to catch up now and participate.

Just a few random replies:

If everything is set according to some great predetermined master plan, then why should its maker mess with the design at all? On the other hand, if things can indeed go awry with the great predetermined master plan, doesn't that that imply that its maker is capable of error? Neither seem quite right to me, somehow.

I think 'going awry' would be when free will is manifest in some way contrary to Ilúvatar's plan, which he must then set right, but still in ways that do not negate the free will of the created.

To me, this is the beauty of Tolkien's construct: that "God" creates sub-creators capable of free will and the inherent ability to make their choices "be", and regardless of what outcomes these choices will generate, they become part of "the plan".

I think the crucial point is that the free will of the sub-creators is manifested, but in ways Ilúvatar would have foreseen and therefore planned ways to integrate into the theme.

I still maintain that if Ilúvatar is somehow "infinitely every-thing", then that must mean that absolutely every possible outcome springs from him at the instant his thought takes form, from the creation of the Ainur to the propounding of the Third Theme of Music, in which his "Children" have their beginning.

I think it is there in its entirety in his knowing, but it still has to come into being through the exercise of free will of the created.

If, as you suggest, there are an infinite number of possibilities because all possibilities are within the realm of Ilúvatar‘s thought… WHAT determines a chain of events? Mere haphazard circumstance? What gives shape to the pattern? For patterns there most certainly are.

I would conjecture that what determines a chain, or a pattern, is Ilúvatar bringing all things back into harmony with his un-usurpable underlying (overriding) theme.

And that has been decided by the very fabric of the music from it’s first inception. HOW those two major events are played out is left up to the participants.
To use an anology…. The frame dictates the final shape of the house but the decoration is left in the hands and minds of the inhabitants.

My impression is that everyone is in basic agreement about this?

All the conditions are pre-set. The Two Trees made by Yavanna. The decimation and consumption of the light by Melkor with Ungoliant’s help which will now make inevitable the request to Fëanor to hand over the jewels to the Valar. His arrogant nature, his covetedness which will not allow him to part with them sets the entire downfall of the Quendi into motion. Although I would postulate that the path they must travel is a forgone conclusion. It must be so.

I think it must be so only because it is foreknown what every one will do. Or as someone said earlier, 'He necessarily knows everything of what will be, because to Him what will be is no different then what is, or what was.'

Knowing all beforehand, Ilúvatar can pre-emptively compensate for all the decisions that are freely to be made, thereby turning what would be disaster into good in a very long-term sense, that does not deprive the creation from experiencing the consequences of free will in the short term.

Fragments of a creator’s predetermined plan that was set before the "offspring of his thought" were kindled with the Imperishable Flame, or the pivotal intersections of various paths that have been set in motion through the freely made choices and actions of their designers? To me at least, there’s a big difference between those two things.............I think.

I would say, fragments of an eventuality pre-known by the creator, and therefore pre-set by the inviolability of the free will that determined it along with the shaping hand that turned everything to ultimately serve the non-usurpable theme.

If what will be is known, then what will be is what must be, but it is not what must have been. That was determined by choices.

[Impenitent]

May I please go back to the darkening of Vallinor? I know you have all moved on, so I won't if it would be a distraction, but I was all excited and prepared to post on the Silmarils (a subject that interests me intensely!) Let me know.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Impy, please!!!!!!!!

[truehobbit]

I think from reading this that there is not much disagreement, really, and my own view is nothing else that what has been said here already, too.

The way I see the free will vs predetermination question is a bit like game of chess.
There is always just a finite number of possibilities, the number is just so large that no one can see them all.
All these possibilities also influence each other. I.e., what you do in your fifth move will have consequences on the choices you'll have in your 36th move, only no one is able to foresee these consequences.

So, maybe you could compare the free decisions anyone makes to deciding on a move in a chess game, with Eru being the one who can see all the possible results of all the possible moves. He wouldn't know whether you decide to move your Knight or your Bishop in the fifth move, but whichever it is, he knows exactly what the consequences of this will be for your 36th move.

Not sure if that makes sense all the way, but I think it goes with what Ath (I believe) said about infinite possibilities becoming finite.
There were some more things said in this thread so far I had meant to point out as comparable to what I just said, but there was so much to read, I forgot what was where!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I would like to ask if we can talk about some of the questions the chapter itself raises (maybe after we've had another look at the darkening that Imp proposes, so as not to confuse things too much) - or have you already talked about other issues of this chapter?
Could I just throw in a few questions about the events of this chapter maybe?

I'm also wondering whether it might be worthwhile to start an extra thread on Fëanor - as I said when we talked about the name of this forum, he's one of my least-liked characters - to investigate his character and motives etc. It could also be done here I suppose - or maybe has been done in the previous chapter discussion?

Please let me know how to proceed about this!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Hobby, ask away!

As for having an additional discussion about Fëanor to investigate his character and motives, I think some of those thoughts could be explored in the Shibboleth of Fëanor thread that I started.

[Alatar]

I hope to contribute just as soon as the really smart people stop saying everything for me.

Alatar

[Sassafras]

Hobby wrote:

The way I see the free will vs predetermination question is a bit like game of chess.
There is always just a finite number of possibilities, the number is just so large that no one can see them all.
All these possibilities also influence each other. I.e., what you do in your fifth move will have consequences on the choices you'll have in your 36th move, only no one is able to foresee these consequences.

A wonderful description Hobby.

Somewhere in my readings I once came across an illustration of the Buddhist way of looking at the conundrum of free will and determinism called 'The Net of Indra'. An enormous hall is decorated with mirrors or prisms hanging on strings at varying hights from myriad points on the ceiling. One single flash of light is enough to light the entire display since light bounces and reflects from surface to surface. It is meant to teach, I think, the interdependance of all things and how each action has consequences.

I'm not sure what this has to do with my feeling that the Elves are bound more by fate than they are by free will. Or that the marring of Arda was
meant to happen ...

Melkor introduced alterations, not interpretations of the mind of the One, and great discord arose. The One then presented this ‘Music’, including the apparent discords, as a visible ‘history.

I understand your reason for this quote, Voronwë, and it would seem that I ought to accept it at face value. Only I just can't shake the thought of Melkor's fall and the Doom of the Elves as accidental choices mechanized by free will. Somehow, to me, it seems a bit too facile.

But then we all know how stubborn I can be.
And I fully expect to be outvoted.

<If only I could express the muddied thoughts floating around inside my brain>
.
.
Alatar ... Please jump in. Say whatever you want, even if you think it's been said before. You always bring an interesting voice and a new perspective.

[Impenitent]

Please, don't ever wait on me! My intentions are good but life too often gets in the way.

I will return with the stuff on the silms and the Light soon but in the meantime...

This freewill issue is quite a nut to crack, is it not?

One interpretation I have brooded on goes back to the theme of music:

Ilúvatar provides the melody line for Arda - but each of the participants then gets to create the actual perforrmance piece - which instrument to play, which chords to build, which rhythm to tackle, fast or slow, pianissimo or fortissimo, jazz interpretation or blues...whether to choose to be a dancer instead of in the orchestra - whether to interpet the dance in accordance with tradition or whether to ad lib - and whether to dance solo or in the chorus or with a troupe where one's steps must take account of the steps of others.

And yet, the melody line remains the same.

I have found this metaphor personally satisfying when trying to envision how it is possible to have free will within a determinist framework. (I have posted this elsewhere more elegantly, but I'm in a bit of rush today. I know I'm not doing this thread justice, but if I don't post in a rush, I'll never post. )

Won't work for everybody, I guess.

As for Melkor: I consider him the yin to the yang of creation. There is a cycle of creation-destruction-creation outlined in the Silm and it reminds me very much of the Hindi cycle of creation/destruction where Kali is seen both as goddess of death and pathmaker for renewal. I'm sure Tolkien would have been familiar with this (though I doubt he would have used it as inspiration.)

I think we see this later with the Noldor too. I don't think it is much a matter of creativity/curiosity leading to disaster (although it does for the Eldar), but rather that any movement changes the status quo--momentum rather than equilibrium. And for many--the Valar and the Vanyar are good examples--change seems not to be comfortable, not to be sought.

The Noldor seem not be be afraid of change. If they had not sought the new--intellectually and creatively--what would have happened to them in Aman? At what point does "living in bliss" equate with "living in stagnation?". The Noldor become agents of change.

It harks to the difference between the Valar vs Melkor--seeing them not as opposites in terms of good/bad, but rather as creation/destruction, both of which are necessary for movement and change to be possible.

I think Tolkien was aware of that; of the sense of loss that comes with change, even with positive change. He commented on it extensively, if obliquely, in letters--starting with how he felt leaving Sarehole Mill and then with the changes that occurred throughout his life.

(Now, of course 'change' is not a good euphemism for the death and destruction that ensued from Fëanor's execution of his oath, but I think through a wide angle lens view, it can be seen as part of the ongoing and inevitable cycle of change... birth/rebirth...destruction/renewal.

And I don't believe that Tolkien questioned the right--indeed, the obligation-- of the Children of Ilúvatar "humanity" to do as they were created to do, in accordance with their gifts. Tolkien saw his work as sub-creation; and the Noldor themselves are also sub-creators. Isn't it said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery?

Erm... is there any way I can link this to a single other post in this thread? I seem to have gone off on a tangent, and I haven't even talked about the Light of the Trees! My brain works in mysterious ways.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Impy, I really like the way your mind works.

[truehobbit]

Imp, I'm not sure what you mean by "link to a single other post in this thread" - I think quotes are probably the most useful in such a case, but if you want to refer to a whole post, you can type the post number into the url, e.g.

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic. ... halloffire

This will open a new page with the post in question at the top of the page.

This is easier once a topic has more than one page, because from the second page on &start= is part of the code - it's not here yet, so I put it in. If you are on page 2 ++ already, you just edit the post number you get in the url.

(LOL, I'm not sure I can explain this without writing a reeeeeaaaaaly long post - if this is no good, I can try a longer explanation, if you think it helps (not so much time now) or a step-by-step explanation on IM might work, too.)

[Rowanberry]

Erm... is there any way I can link this to a single other post in this thread? I seem to have gone off on a tangent, and I haven't even talked about the Light of the Trees! My brain works in mysterious ways.

Imp, just click on the little sheet icon next to the posting date of the post to which you want to link, and copy-paste the URL to which it leads you. For example, here is a link to your previous post in this thread:

http://www.phpbber.com/phpbb/viewtopic. ... ffire#2493

OK, this was completely off the actual topic, to which I may contribute after properly rereading the chapter in question.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think (though I could be wrong) that Imp was speaking figuratively rather then literally, making the point that she was posting her own thoughts rather then responding to the things that others had written.

In any event, Imp, I thought that what you said followed naturally from what I and others had said. But then, my brain works in mysterious ways as well.

[truehobbit]

Voronwë, I wouldn't have read it that way - but at least we've learnt something about linking.
I knew there was an easier way, just couldn't find it - thanks rowan!

A comment on something Imp said:

There is a cycle of creation-destruction-creation outlined in the Silm and it reminds me very much of the Hindi cycle of creation/destruction where Kali is seen both as goddess of death and pathmaker for renewal. I'm sure Tolkien would have been familiar with this (though I doubt he would have used it as inspiration.)

I also doubt it, because it wouldn't have been necessary for him to take inspiration from so far away!
The cycle of creation-destruction-creation is one of the most basic human experiences, and it would be a strange culture and philosophy indeed that had not thought about it!
So, yes, I'm sure there are parallels in all the world's philosophies, and pointing them out is surely interesting, but I think when you point out possible comparisons in high philosophy there's a danger of overlooking how very fundamental the problem is!
The dichotomy of the desire in all humans to keep things that they like and that they find good, to have some stability and constancy and of the fact that we cannot survive if this desire is fulfilled is one of the big questions of our existence, I think.

[Impenitent]

Rowan and TH - I meant what V said. I realised there was no logical link between my post and the preceding conversation - my thoughts were rather lateral to the immediate topic.

But I can see how you would have read the literal meaning. I am often unclear due to posting in a rush. Nonetheless, thank you both for making the effort of trying to explain it!

TH, re: destruction/renewal cycle, again I was rather oblique in my comment. What I meant was, I see a parallel between Kali and Melkor. His is a similar role, to destroy what was built to make a path for renewal, although he would not have seen it that way. Still, his actions answered Eru's needs as well as his own.