The Silmarillion: A Group Reading [update 4.12.05]

[Rhaella]

Nimbrethil

THINGOL (pompously): I feel the need to be an overwhelming jerk without redeeming qualities. It's probably a defense mechanism that can be traced back to low self-esteem and unresolved childhood issues. But who cares? I'm the King of the World!

NIMBRETHIL: You're my unfriend.

Eeexcellent. 3nodding

I hate Thingol, but I feel the need to argue his case. Probably because I have the strangest desire to argue Annals with Falathrim, but realise that this is so the wrong place to go into that... sweatdrop

As much as I love Finrod, I've got to admit that he can be as sneaky as the rest of his family. Thingol asks him about the evil deeds the Noldor, and he basically claims that they haven't done anything. Not the perfect little Elf lord after all. domokun

Can you blame Thingol for being angry at this point? Finding out the hard way the truth about the children and grandchildren of his dear friend Finwe.

As for the language issue... there's an interesting take on it I heard once. Look at the situation: an alien culture has come into your land out of nowhere (basically). A powerful, rather magnetic alien culture which threatens to usurp and replace your own. Finding an excuse to ban the language, thus ensuring the survival of your own? A defence mechanism, perhaps? hm....  

[Nimbrethil]

Finrod was less "sneaky" than "put on the spot and unwilling to point fingers". He didn't want to lie (and he didn't!) but he didn't want to be disloyal or tactless, either.

Sure, I can see why Thingol's a little pissed-off. It makes sense that he'd want nothing to do with these crazy people. But I can't help but think that someone like Fingolfin or Finrod would have handled the situation Thingol was in with a little less bitchiness and a little more grace. Or, perhaps the language of the text just doesn't lend itself easily to a sympathetic reading of Thingol, and had it been written a little differently, his good qualities would be way more obvious to someone like me who isn't necessarily looking for them.

That is an interesting perspective on the language thing. I guess I didn't say that it didn't make sense, just that it was... interesting. Different. Unexpected. Maybe it's me.

imyavie

Note that I said she was all independant and stuff before I actually finished the chapter and stuff. Still, for some reason, I think she's kinda cool....dunno why.

Sorry if you thought my response was attacking yours in some way. I think she's awesome, too, and that she probably was meant to be portrayed as really strong and independent. I don't know if Tolkien was intentionally subverting this during her, um, "interactions" with Eol, but I just thought that it was strange that she didn't just kick him in the face and take off.  

[Rhaella]

Nimbrethil

Finrod was less "sneaky" than "put on the spot and unwilling to point fingers". He didn't want to lie (and he didn't!) but he didn't want to be disloyal or tactless, either.

Sure, I can see why Thingol's a little pissed-off. It makes sense that he'd want nothing to do with these crazy people. But I can't help but think that someone like Fingolfin or Finrod would have handled the situation Thingol was in with a little less bitchiness and a little more grace. Or, perhaps the language of the text just doesn't lend itself easily to a sympathetic reading of Thingol, and had it been written a little differently, his good qualities would be way more obvious to someone like me who isn't necessarily looking for them.

Well, yes. I'm not accusing Finrod (I heart him wink )... I don't think he could have handled the situation any differently (personally, I think his biggest mistake was coming in the first place) at that point, but I still think that lying - even only by omission - is secretive, underhanded... basically sneaky.

I'm not sure how Fingolfin or Finrod would have handled the situation... Everyone has different ways of handling very bad situations. Fingolfin makes suicidal challenges, Finrod basically abdicates (both with a high level of gracefulness, though), Thingol throws his nephews out of his kingdom and acts like a supreme jackass. And though much of it, at this point, was justified, I can't defend him. I don't want to.

Thingol? Good qualities? Highly unlikely. wink  

[Nimbrethil]

Blarg! I am teh late this week.

sad

Postage tomorrow. I'll just edit this.

Of the Ruin of Beleriand and the Fall of Fingolfin

Quote:

There came a time of winter, when night was dark and without moon; and the wide plain of Ard-galen stretched dim beneath the cold stars, from the hill-forts of the Noldor to the feet of Thangorodrim. The watchfires burned low, and the guards were few; on the plain few were waking in the camps of the horsemen of Hithlum.

That's an example of why I like reading this so much: not only does it contain the detail of an extremely well-imagined world; but the way passages like this one are written is, in my opinion, so gorgeous that I had to type it out and talk about it.

I think the name "Gasping Dust" is really great, too. ^_^

The English Major in me wants to look at the symbolic role of fire (possibly versus ice and whiteness) as we've seen it so far in the history, but I'm going to pass on that, because if there's even an argument there to make about it, I'm sure there's enough to write an essay on. And nobody likes essays. Not even essayists.

Quote:

...for a great madness of rage was upon [Fingolfin], so that his eyes shone like the eyes of the Valar.

Shiny-eyed Valar? This kind of Shiny? Or Light-Up Eyes Treebeard Shiny?

*adds both to mental picture*

The decription of the battle between Fingolfin and Morgoth is also extremely well-written and I lurve it. It's even better read aloud. So are most books, come to think of it.

I just realized I haven't talked about the story yet. Meh.

"Swarthy Men". Hehehe.

Aaand I'm done.  

[Falathrim]

Blargh! I am late this week. And last week. Argh. The lack of many others participating really makes this not as fun as it could be.

Nandelle, you said you wanted to argue annals? How so?

Aredhel must have loved Eol somehow. After all, if she didn't, she wouldn't have had sex with him.

Thingol is a meanie most of the time, but I have a soft spot for him. He did, after all, foster Turin.

That's all for now. Sorry.  

[Rhaella]

Falathrim

Nandelle, you said you wanted to argue annals? How so?

Better do it now before we get started again...

Okay. This comment originates with your post concerning Maedhros and the waiving of the kingship of the Noldor.

While I'm not going to claim that the Annals don't give us more information in general than the Silmarillion, at times it seems to me that what we find in the Sil itself is more accurate, and thus we're left wondering when to go with which version.

For example... in the Annals of Beleriand, under the entry in the year 432, we find that Barahir is the son of Beor. This idea is clearly inconsistent even with what we find in Morgoth's Ring, where Andreth is the sister of Bregor, father of Barahir. Now, unless we want to discount the whole Athrabeth, and I at least am unwilling to do so, we have at least one place where the Annals are inconsistent.

I personally prefer the placement of Maedhros waiving the Kingship as it is in the Silmarillion. The Annals would indicate that for two years they were a united people, where before they seemed to have been nearly on the brink of war. How plausible is it that they could be "united" for two years without having chosen a king?  

[Falathrim]

The thing is, Chris drew from different sources for different chapters of the published Silmarillion. For example, the chapter Of the Return of the Noldor, is clearly derived from the Grey Annals. For the chapter Of Beren and Luthien, his source was the Lay of Leithien. The chapter Of Earendil and the War of Wrath was based upon the pre-Lord of the Rings Quenta Silmarillion.

Of the Ruin of Doriath is mostly Chris's own writing, assembled together from vague outlines and letters he worked to dig up.

When analyzing each chapter, you must look to the source material. Ignoring the Grey Annals entirely just because it is inaccurate in a completely unrelated aspect is folly.

Oh, and the United States were united (at least in the same sense that the Elves were) for some ten odd years before we got a good constitution down, and we never didn't go to war with each other.

EDIT: Basically, my point is that the Tolkien wrote one thing. Chris, for some unexplained reason, said another, despite it contradicting his source material. I'm inclined to go with what Tolkien wrote over what Chris wrote, what with it being Tolkien's world.

Amazing how unclear I was until the edit.  

[Rhaella]

Falathrim

When analyzing each chapter, you must look to the source material. Ignoring the Grey Annals entirely just because it is inaccurate in a completely unrelated aspect is folly.

Ah... I had hoped that I made it clear that I wasn't about to discount them altogether. I'd agree that usually they give you a far more accurate picture than the Silmarillion (and the dates help too wink ). There are simply things in them that can be contested.

Falathrim

Oh, and the United States were united (at least in the same sense that the Elves were) for some ten odd years before we got a good constitution down, and we never didn't go to war with each other.

Falathrim, you really can't compare the US before the constitution to the Noldor before Fingolfin was made High King. The Americans had just fought a war; they might not have had a united government yet, but Virginia was not about to go to war with Pennsylvania (not yet, at least).

The Noldor, on the other hand... Well, that's not the sort of thing where you can just let bygones be bygones and pretend nothing happened... even if you want to.

Falathrim

EDIT: Basically, my point is that the Tolkien wrote one thing. Chris, for some unexplained reason, said another, despite it contradicting his source material. I'm inclined to go with what Tolkien wrote over what Chris wrote, what with it being Tolkien's world.

Yes. Tolkien wrote one thing. And rewrote it. And rewrote it. And rewrote it again. And the forms of the names found in the Annals are not their final forms. 3nodding  

[Falathrim]

...actually, as far as Of the Return of the Noldor is concerned, the Grey Annals is the final form.

Find a more recent source. Go on, I dare you. razz  

[Rhaella]

Falathrim

...actually, as far as Of the Return of the Noldor is concerned, the Grey Annals is the final form.

Find a more recent source. Go on, I dare you. razz

I dare you? You're trying to draw me into an argument, aren't you? whee Yay! I like debating...

Falathrim, Falathrim. You're going to force me to read over carefully every book I have. sweatdrop

I'm not going to be able to find a more recent source. However, I'd like you to prove that the Grey Annals is the final form. Not the latest work, but final form. I'm sure you can see the difference.

If this is finalised, why haven't the names been fixed?

And if it's not finalised, why must we discount another version that makes as much, if not more sense?  

[Falathrim]

Final form was a poor choice of words, if you're going to argue semantics rather than actual matter.

So, let me rephrase my dare. Find a legitimate reason for Chris to alter what was written in the Grey Annals. A legitimate reason includes later forms of the chapter, letters, etc. Go on, I dare you.  

[Rhaella]

Operation threadjacking is in effect.

Falathrim

Final form was a poor choice of words, if you're going to argue semantics rather than actual matter.

It was a poor choice of words regardless. 3nodding In this case, the semantics are very important. The difference between "final" and "finalised" are emmence here.

Falathrim

So, let me rephrase my dare. Find a legitimate reason for Chris to alter what was written in the Grey Annals. A legitimate reason includes later forms of the chapter, letters, etc. Go on, I dare you.

I'll look through the Letters sometime in the next week when I'm away from school without internet access gonk . Seeing as how it's 2am for me, I'm not about to take up your challenge at present, though I'd love to know the reasons behind the change - whoever made it - myself.

I, however, would still like an explanation as to why something that has been called the most recent writings on the subject, uses the older names instead of the new ones.  

[Falathrim]

If we want to continue with the semantics argument, final means last. The Grey Annals is the last writing on this chapter Tolkien wrote. Thus, final wasn't really that poor of a choice. That you think Tolkien didn't intend for it to be the final writing means nothing; the point remains that it was the final writing, and it was what Chris had to go by.

And if that paragraph makes no sense at all, I blame the fact that it's 2:00 in the morning. Certainly my ability to form sentences is not to blame.

As for your question: Because Tolkien didn't change the name spelling until after he wrote the latest version? Duh?

That seems obvious enough. The latest version of chapter Of Earendil and the War of Wrath still calls him Earendel. The change from Maidros to Maedhros was incredibly late. Inglor didn't become Finrod until the 50's. Finrod didn't become Finarfin until this point in time.

And discussions like these are what this thread is supposed to be doing. It's a ******** travesty that it took so long for the people in this guild to even get to this point. I thought we were Tolkien fans?

Chris took what was in the Grey Annals, and edited the names so they matched the 'final' versions.

And... I lost my train of thought, so I'll just submit this.  

[Rhaella]

Falathrim

If we want to continue with the semantics argument, final means last. The Grey Annals is the last writing on this chapter Tolkien wrote. Thus, final wasn't really that poor of a choice. That you think Tolkien didn't intend for it to be the final writing means nothing; the point remains that it was the final writing, and it was what Chris had to go by.

Final also means "Of or constituting the end result of a succession or process; ultimate" and "Not to be changed or reconsidered; unalterable." You have to take all the definitions into consideration.

Falathrim

And if that paragraph makes no sense at all, I blame the fact that it's 2:00 in the morning. Certainly my ability to form sentences is not to blame.

Very coherent for 2am, actually.

Falathrim

And discussions like these are what this thread is supposed to be doing. It's a ******** travesty that it took so long for the people in this guild to even get to this point. I thought we were Tolkien fans?

Ay, but it's no longer quite about the Silmarillion... well, I suppose in a way it still is. Anyway, it's still a relatively minor point. Wait till we get to Beren and Luthien. wink

Now. Another question. A lot of the mistakes made in the Silmarillion and the contraversy caused by it (ie: Orodreth as Angrod's son, Gil-Galad as Orodreth's son) are the result of the ever changing thoughts of JRR Tolkien. Mistakes like that wouldn't have been made had there not been any confusion in Tolkien's notes and writings.

Therefore, why would Chris randomly change something like that in the Silmarillion if there was no evidence whatsoever for it? It seems like a pretty easy fact to get down correctly, if fact it is...

Eh... and please don't answer with "because he is an a**..." domokun  

[Falathrim]

I am fine with Chris's confusin regarding the parentage of Gil-galad, the ancestry of Glorfindel, the origin of Celeborn... stuff that is unclear. I won't scold the guy for making Celeborn a Sinda, even though the latest development clearly states otherwise.

However, like you said, the current matter is so clear that there is no reason for any change. And this is where I oppose Chris.