The first age is freaking weird

[Tinman]

I don't know if its just me... and I haven't entirely read through the simirilian yet, so bear with me, but the first age seems really weird to me. In a sense, it seems kind of like the Christian old testament compared to the new testament. Things seem much more grand, and in a sense, unbelievable, in the first age. Giant trees, a spider that poisons them, the lamps, sending the ship into the sky with the simiril, the epic scale of the destruction of Morgoth...

Then compare it to the story of the lord of the rings. While, epic, and fantastic, it is in no way near the same level of the first age stories. In fact, its SUCH a contrast, that the first age seems... well, "unbelievable".

Is it possible that the first age is to be taken metaphorically? Have the stories been exadurated by passing them through word of mouth over the generations, much like our own stories?

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

Well, it is supposed to be considered a mythology, I think. So whether it's technically "true" is an open question.

[Willow Oran]

At the same time, you can't take them to be purely metaphorical or even folkloric in the sense of stories passed down and changed within an oral tradition because we are to believe that within the story world the Silmarillion was a written text, probably one written by elves who had lived through the First Age, translated by Bilbo.

So the question isn't 'did the stories change over time' (we aren't ever given the mannish equivalent of the Sil, which probably would have been closer to existing oral traditions), but did the elves depict themselves accurately and what biases or unfamiliar modes of thinking might be present in their account?

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

IIRC, even Tolkien considered such things later in life (if not all along). It's certainly a challenge for a reader and seems to have been so even for him. In addition, there are portions of the published Silmarillion that were to be considered Mannish traditions, as opposed to those of the Elves, I believe.

[Willow Oran]

In addition, there are portions of the published Silmarillion that were to be considered Mannish traditions, as opposed to those of the Elves, I believe.

I wonder if he might have been heading towards the Sil being a selection of history-tales compiled for/by the halfelven. In that case the mixed traditions would make sense.

[Attalus]

He originally described it as a series of incidental tales, some short, some long and detailed, some cryptic, some graphic. But, he never finished it (the published Silmarillion, which strict Canonists refer to derisively as "Sil '77", has more than a little contamination by Christopher Tolkien and at least one other).

[Willow Oran]

I know. I was speculating about what he might have decided those stories were if he had lived long enough to finish them.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

But since Christopher's "contamination" is well-documented, by CT himself and others, the reader is (or can be) informed and can therefore make his or her own judgments about what to consider canon.

I think the reasons discussions sometimes devolve are often because posters don't always make their definition of canon known at the outset, assuming one's own definition is "the" definition. In addition, even upon learning that there are multiple possible definitions of canon in Tolklore, it is often difficult to accept that there isn't "an" answer but that answers vary according to a reader's understanding. Some people never accept that.

FWIW, I'm of the view that publishing (even when done by the estate of the deceased Professor) trumps all, and that while "Sil'77" obviously doesn't mesh 100% with either Tolkien's original conceptions or his last, it's the version that got published and therefore holds more weight than HoME or UT or the Marquette manuscripts.

That said, I understand and respect the opinions of those who approach the works otherwise.

[Willow Oran]

Except that HoME and UT and all the others have now also been published as completely as possible and with extensive notes by CT.

I tend to consider the Sil as the first source when looking at general timelines/geneaologies/maps etc. but when I want details for the longer stories that it just summarizes (Beren/Luthien, Fall of Gondolin) then HoME becomes a better first source and the Sil takes a back seat on the basis that even if one of those texts is very old and may have been due for revision, it's still the one he put the most work into writing and therefore likely to be closer to what he was going for (at the time he wrote it).

Besides, the idea of all the conflicting versions running around Middle Earth amuses me.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

Good point about UT and HoME.

And I like having multiple versions, too, as long as people don't try to convince me that one is the right version. The conflicting versions may actually make it more authentic.

Just as there are several real world versions of various myths and religious traditions, Tolkien's world has several versions of some stories, too. It's a pretty cool phenomenon.

[Attalus]

Originally Posted by The Dread Pirate Roberts

Good point about UT and HoME.

And I like having multiple versions, too, as long as people don't try to convince me that one is the right version. The conflicting versions may actually make it more authentic.

Just as there are several real world versions of various myths and religious traditions, Tolkien's world has several versions of some stories, too. It's a pretty cool phenomenon.

I agree with this and have multiple versions of everything. One must, I think, realise that , at the end, Middle-Earth is a figment of JRRT's thought and he re-thought it many times. It's the insight into his mind as he did his re-imaginings that makes the whole thing so fasciating.

That said, I am a "Strict Canonist" and accept only works published duriing JRRT's lifetime as definitive. Obviously, that excludes Sil '77, never mind how tattered my copy (purchased in 1977) is.

[BeardofPants]

Originally Posted by The Dread Pirate Roberts

I think the reasons discussions sometimes devolve are often because posters don't always make their definition of canon known at the outset, assuming one's own definition is "the" definition. In addition, even upon learning that there are multiple possible definitions of canon in Tolklore, it is often difficult to accept that there isn't "an" answer but that answers vary according to a reader's understanding. Some people never accept that.

That's a really good point. For many, I guess, their idea of ME canon will be defined by the Hobbit & LOTR. There are also those - like me - who've read UT, HoME, Letters et. al, and have now completely forgotten everything.

[brownjenkins]

I'm a strict anti-canonist. I think Tolkien's ideas about Middle Earth changed and evolved throughout his entire lifetime. His initial idea was to create a folklore for the UK that he thought was lacking. Folklore, by definition, is mutable. It's the themes and ideas that are important, not the specific details.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

This is what I love about Entmoot.

I've frequented other boards where various ideas such as the last several posts in this thread would not be tolerated by militant posters who seem to approach discussion as if everything Tolkien wrote really and truly happened.

[Lefty Scaevola]

I consider one part of CT's "contamination", Thingol's death because of his greed about the silmaril, to be some of the best writting in the published Sil. It is much more inspired that JRRT's notes ruminating how he might complete that part.

[Willow Oran]

Folklore, by definition, is mutable. It's the themes and ideas that are important, not the specific details.

It is also, by definition, communicated orally, and the creative product of a community more so than an individual. Which brings up the interesting paradox that if Tolkien's original idea was to create a folklore or a mythology then the completion of that goal would be rendered impossible if everybody who read it agreed on a canon and adhered to it.

In that sense, 'contaminations', alterations, interpretations and extrapolations of all sorts, especially those that occur in pseudo-oral environments such as the internet, are actually a necessary step in the process of achieving the author's literary intent.

[Gordis]

Tolkien loved to play with the idea of numerous varying and sometimes incorrect versions of the story recorded in different sources. That's why he wrote 4 or 5 versions of the fall of Numenor. In some of them even the distinction between Valar, Maiar and Elves was lost - they were summarily called Avalai.

Originally Posted by The Dread Pirate Roberts

This is what I love about Entmoot.
I've frequented other boards where various ideas such as the last several posts in this thread would not be tolerated by militant posters who seem to approach discussion as if everything Tolkien wrote really and truly happened.

You have to admit that there is actually one poster (one of Earendil's ancestors) who makes the other board so militantly intolerant. I start to miss a certain banned nazgul very much - he was a nice counter-balance.

Entmoot is simply fortunate to have none of crazy canon fanatics, that's all.

[Valandil]

* thinks things have gone just a little bit too far *


* loads canons *

[Attalus]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Tolkien loved to play with the idea of numerous varying and sometimes incorrect versions of the story recorded in different sources. That's why he wrote 4 or 5 versions of the fall of Numenor. In some of them even the distinction between Valar, Maiar and Elves was lost - they were summarily called Avalai.

Tolkien wrote once, in the Letters (don't ask me which one, but it was one of the early ones) that he would love to have others take up the themes of his 'Legendarium' in music, painting, and yes, in writing. That is why Christopher Tolkien makes me so mad. I mean, I can understand his revereing his father's legacy, but quashing any attempt to expand on it makes no sense. Look how much George Lucas and we fans have gained form the "Star Wars Expanded Universe." The world would be poorer without Mara Jade Skywalker and Grand Admiral Thrawn.

[Tinman]

Originally Posted by Attalus

Look how much George Lucas and we fans have gained form the "Star Wars Expanded Universe." The world would be poorer without Mara Jade Skywalker and Grand Admiral Thrawn.

Yeah, and other great characters, like Xero the Hut and Trioculus