This chapter has inspired one of the longest threads for discussion in the Chapter by Chapter subforum! Fascinating.
Much as I do not wish to intrude upon the direction and tenor of the discussion, I would like to clarify a couple of points.
Quote:
davem posted:
From this perspective it is Celeborn, not Galadriel, who plays thee 'satan' role, playing Devil's Advocate. He states the 'facts', the case for the prosecution, while Galadriel supplies the defence.
|
This was not, strictly speaking, my use of the 'satan' role. In fact, Devil's Advocate is quite the opposite from my use. In the Catholic Church, when people are being considered for sainthood, a long and ardulous process is now followed. A formal role is defined in the process, the role of the 'Devil's Advocate.' This person's job is to dig out the dirt, to disprove the evidence that the person is worthy of sainthood and that miracles have been legitimately ascribed to this person's intercession.
This is not what the 'satan' does. The original meaning of satan is a role rather than a person: that of an obedient servant (such as an angel of the Lord) who opposes human plans and desires. Perhaps the satan is sent to help people avoid worse harm. One of the clearest examples is the Book of Job where the satan persuades God to act against Job in order to prove Job's integrity and worthiness. It was this kind of testing I implied with Galadriel's vision into the heart of each member of the Fellowship, holding out to each what he most desired and letting each one determine for himself the right way to handle that desire. This is not the same thing as uncovering sin or error: it is a tempering of the steel of integrity in the fire of goodness.
Thus, while I admire the neatness of your argument, I think this dichotomy does not allow for the kind of power which I see Galadriel wielding. It is stunning, I think, that Tolkien turns this around on her with Frodo's offer of the Ring. This I regard as an example of Tolkien's perceptiveness and originality--what he brings new to the table of moral challenges.
I don't think there is an easy answer about the depiction of Celeborn. I think we must ultimately rely solely on LotR as Galadriel was invented for it and back written so to speak into The Silm. Who was it here--
Child?--who pointed out that this is one of the few relationships in LotR which is not depicted as successful. Maybe we simply have to accept that Tolkien conceived of a very powerful 'goddess' or sorceress figure and this was his way of understanding the dynamics of such a woman. Jumping ahead, we know that the two do not stay together. Maybe we simply have to accept that this was a dynastic marriage and when the political context changed, so did the nature of the relationship.
Aiwendil, thank you for that reference to Beleriand and Broceliande from CT. However much Tolkien derived his name from that of Troyes, my sense of the enchanted forest in the chanson bears greater affinity to the descriptions of Lothlorien than to those of Beleriand.
EDIT: I just read
Saucey's final word on Celeborn. Now, what's a picture worth?
