Vanyar re: I suppose they must have been calm since they were not proud. (anger as the direct consequence of pride)
Quote:
|
Tolkien is trying to construct an account of the Valar's behaviour which would be consistent with the later form of the Mythology
|
Where is the bad thing in that?
Somewhere in preceeding posts you also mentioned that when authors were all elves it made it even more confusing as to why accounts differed to that extent. It is fine by me (as was quoted in someone's signature around here, "some people are wise, and some are otherwise") - some scribes knew better, some not. Most of what was written accounts the history of elves this side of the sea. Possibly, those allegedly calm Vanyar and other dwellers of beyond the sea were exactly the people to know better (all them kinds of things - that sun was round, that Manwe was wise and not confused - they were on the spot to judge it, whilst those on this side had their sight dimmed with distance and, yes, again, you guessed rightly, with their pride)
Quote:
|
bit like the parent about to beat his child senseless saying 'this is for your own good!
|
Three cases (or possibly four, if we separate sindar as distinct group)
A) Men
Valar were not in a position to be viewed as parents to men - men were too great a thing for them to handle. Even if we hold on to my argument that difference of their freedom is only in their death. If we lean on
your argument of men having
different kind of freedom, than it is impossible ofr Valar to help out men whatsoever. Indeed, how can creature moving in one direction at atime only (i.e., actualizing
this particular theme and not other, step out of its rails and change the course. So, dead lock:
1. If Valar are after actualization of the Music, they can not let such an actualization be and change their course. For the pause when they do nothing is already in there in the Music, and can not be altered whatever Manwe's personal position
2. If we hold on to what I think can be the case - i.e., all, including Valar and Men, have their freedom expressed as simple choice - "do-don't", whilst each action is measured in this respect against built-in standard of "good-evil", than judgement comes in and defines further action. What kind of judgement prevailed, see up there
I hold the second clause to be true. In this case, Valar and Men are coeval. But still Valar can not go and give them guidance and protection, for:
Men's fate
after death is to go where elves knew not [but assumptions there are that to Eru directly]. Death came around as a result of the Fall (again too), when men
ceased to listen to Eru's voice. So men were not to be tinkered with by Valaron two additional grounds :
1. Before the Fall, there was Eru to guide them. Were the Valar to walk in and take the Men away?
2. After the fall, two more points: 2.1 As shutting of Valinor against Noldor is just, so denial of help to those who rebelled not against mere Manwe, but Eru Himself is even more justified. 2.2 There is not time enough even if Valar choose to go for it - men die soon and go to Eru. If you take Men to Valinor, it can bring disastrous results (I'll try to provide you with quote later, for now, summary: fea will want to go, but hroa in the bliss of Valinor would have the powerto, ehich bind it. In case of stronger fea, it will break free by force. In case of stronger hroa, man will degenarate into kind of monster or zombie. And fea and hroa will hate each other). Valar can not themselves go to Beleriand to protect Men on the spot for the reasons given above.
That's why Earendil is essential - to repent on behalf of both races. And existence of a person to do so for both would not be possible without Valar letting things develop a bit. (not to mention whole line of kings of Numenor etc)
B) Noldor
Noldor chose to go away freely, though they were warned. But coming back to parent argument - is there a parent which would not want for their children to grow up, but to remain small for ever? Not to be able to do things for themselves, but look up to parents for ever? Here you seem to try to eat a cake and have it - let them be proud and independent, but when push comes to shove, why do not we get a help, it is unjust! But that is not a kind of argument I oppose you with, it's just an impression I've got, beggin your pardon, if you follow my meaning, kind sir
, pray correct if I err.
C) Sindar
Sindar knew their peril when they decided to stay behind
D) Dwarves
Dwarves were more the concern of Aule, than of all Valar combined. Ask of him what he did not...
But it seems to me, above given exerpt explains it more or less adequately, without further need for me to find additional ones
Besides, I'm running out of steam, I suppose, for I have a feeling of forgetting to put something important in and can't tell what precisely. Maybe because of late hour it is, so, with the hope of morrow bringing better judgement, I stop here for now.
later