[Tar Elenion]

----------
Quothe Man-of-the-Wold:
My perspective is to treat The Lord of the Rings as gospel, rejecting anything contradicting with it.
-----------

I agree, with certain qualifications, ie some errors are noted and corrected elsewhere. A prime example is in App A. Tar-Ardamin, the nineteenth ruler of Numenor, was left out. This is corrected and commented on in UT, 'The Line of Elros' and also commented on in PoME, History of the Akallabeth.

--------------
Quote:
The Silmirillion and The Hobbit are only just in the same category.
---------------

The Hobbit yes, with qualifications, noting the intent of the story. It needs to be taken as written as a children's tale for Hobbits and thus with some embellishment for some events (for example I just can't picture Elves singing 'tra la la lally').

The published Silmarillion no. It needs to be looked at with CT statements in the Forword ('a complete consistancy is not to be looked for'), before taking anything in the Silmarillion as 'canon'. It needs to be remembered that while mostly formed from completed narratives some of these were written very early (for example the 'Fall of Gondolin' was initially written in 1917 and while certain emendations could be gleaned from later writings on the subject JRRT never did a complete rewrite to bring it in line with the rest of the legendarium, which is likely the most regrettable event in the history of the corpus) and conflict with later writings (for example the parentage of Gil-galad (later writings make him the son of Orodreth and Orodreth the son of Angrod), or Galadriel being a _queen_ of the Woodland Elves (in 'Of the Rings of Power', written in the late 40's) while other later sources not that she was not (see UT, History of Galadriel and Celeborn, Amroth and Nimrodel (pg 245) and Letter 210)). Also note that for example, 'Of the Ruin of Doriath' was cobbled together from various narrative sources with emendation from CT and Guy Kay (see CT's excursus in WotJ, pg. 354+).

----------
Quote:
In terms of everything else (UT, Letters, HoME, &c.) -- some of which I'm still trying to get at, now, finally, after nearly 20 years of withdrawal -- I attempt in my imagination to make the absolute most of it all, at least by way of generalizations, such as what I expounded above,
-------------

Yes, and use it to recognize how things might or should have been. Letters et. al. give great insight into what JRRT intended.


-----------
Quote:
Road Goes Ever On?
Where does this fit into the set of sacred text?! I remember thumbing through one years ago, and I'm not sure about its availability now, or worthiness for reading. Still, what is quoted above can be accepted at face value, especially since it does not contradict anything in The Lord of the Rings (phew!).
---------------

Considering that JRRT saw fit to publish it, and it contains his own commentary, I place it right up there with LotR as 'canon', and ahead of 'The Hobbit'. It is fully compatible with his intent as late as 1967 (when its second edition was published).


-----------
Quote:
Therefore, Galadriel was clearly subject to some sort of ban or hinderance imposed by or through the Valar to her initially returning to Eldamar.

Still, I'm left in doubt, because in The Silmirillion the far more culpable Maedhros and Maglor are invited by Eonwe to return and seek pardon.
--------------

The passage you are looking at comes from 1937 (and Galadriel had yet to be invented), but even so does not say they were pardoned or would be granted a pardon, nor were they 'invited'. They were told the _must_ return and face _judgement_ ("and to Valinor must Maidros and Maglor return and there abide the judgement of the Valar"). Maglor says that perhaps they might be forgiven, and Maedhros responds that they might not.

---------
Quote:
Moreover, the above quote is quite pithy and very much begs greater insight into the relationship and communication of Galadriel and the Valar in this regard.

My discomfort arises from trying to see this in legal or casual, human-type terms. Would the Valar have simply prevented entry, deported or imprisoned her for the lack of the proper Visa? Taking the chant literally, was Cirdan under order to not provide her with passage? But that might get at the mark, in that there was something unresolved there, with which Cirdan or others could not interfere.
--------------

Perhaps Galadriel, as one of the leaders in the Rebellion, would have had to face 'judgement' as well. There was no assurance she would be pardoned. 'Galadriel you are summoned to Valinor to face the Judgement of the Valar for your actions in the Rebellion of the Noldor', 'I will not go to be judged, for I have done no wrong', 'Then you are banned from the West', 'I have no wish to go there anyways'.

----------
Quote:
Nor, is this question of pardon a simple matter of being contrite and saying "lets be friends again." Rather, I tend to look at it more in a religious/chivalrous context. Galadriel was very high in the eyes of the Eldar, as well as the Valar, and perhaps even seen as dangerous unless clearly repentent; at the same time, she may have indeed been like a wayward child still needing to learn a great lesson.
--------------

Galadriel being 'high' in the eyes of the Valar at this early stage in her life (she was still relatively young at this point) come from late writings when JRRT was considering these changes to her history and character.

----------
Quote:
"I'm Sorry, If You're Sorry!"
<snip>
---------

An interesting way to interpret it. I agree with some parts, but I think the Ban is explicit, and a 'misunderstanding' contrived. I actually think my interpretation above ('summoned to face judgement', 'no') is more likely, especilly given her pride, so early in her youth.


----------
Quote:
Christopher Tolkien and Satisfaction
<snip>
-----------

I do not read into it that CT was 'dissatisfied'. He notes that while JRRT doubtless intended to make these major changes, he also notes that JRRT was increasingly reluctant to change things that had already appeadred in print.


-------------
Quote:
The Mirror of Galadriel

Lastly, I think the view of a simplistic ban, finally waived aside when Galadriel resists the temptation of the Ring, does not fully do justice to the depth of what transpires between the Ringbearer and the Lady of the Wood.
--------------

I think the late sanitization of her history and motivations actually lessens her character. Rather than a character with 'human' flaws who has to grow and learn she becomes, in effect, 'Virgen Mary' as was suggested by for example Father Robert Murray (see letter 142).

---------------
Quote:
This is someone who's been alive for eons, and is on some level the equal of Sauron, and the greatest of the Children of Iluvatar then dwelling in Middle-Earth!
----------------

That's a little overboard.

--------------
Quote:
No she's earned the right to go into the West -- with Frodo -- and to live at peace with the Valar.
--------------

Yes, but the point is she had to earn that right. Of course that is also my bias, I prefer the flawed Galadriel, who grows and learns through time and experience, not the sanitized version.