going back a way in this thread, on the distinction between the two elvish words which translate as hope, here is another conversation from Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth
Quote:
|
Eru 'accepted and ratified the position' - though making it plain to Manwë that the Valar should have contested Melkor's domination of Middle-earth far earlier, and that they had lacked estel: they should have trusted that in a legitimate war Eru would not have permitted Melkor so greatly to damage Arda that the Children could not come, or could not inhabit it.
|
so
estel essentially amounts to
trust in Eru's plan, even if (as is usually the case) one does not know what it is, or foresee how things will work out in the end.
To my mind Gandalf is the greatest embodiment of estel, he knows that the scheme of having Frodo go to Orodruin with the Ring has no logical chance of succeeding. But Gandalf trusts (or has faith in) the unseen plan that put the Ring in Frodo's possession. "For not even the very wise can foresee all ends," Gandalf says--speaking coincidently of Gollum, who makes it possible for the plan to succeed.
Switching slightly to a movie subject, the invented scene in which Elrond says "there is no hope" to which Arwen replies "hope still lives". This is kind of a clever pun for people who know that Estel was Aragorn's pseudonym. But it strikes me as very against Elrond's character that he would be that lacking in estel. What are others' thoughts?