[Child of the 7th Age]

I feel that Tolkien's latter creative life was misspent. That's the shame. I would much rather have more of his creative power in writing story than the reinterpretive philosophizing and theologizing he spent his later years in. Maybe that's what giving up the Star was partly about in SWOM.

Strong words! Even fighting words....

This is a fascinating topic, and I imagine you are going to get some firmly worded replies. Readers seem to have such differing responses to the material that Tolkien produced during the final years of his life. Some love the stuff, and others hate it. Christopher himself seems to have mildly "disapproved" of the direction his father's writing took towards the end.

My own feelings are mixed. There were certain issues addressed in this period that I could do without. The first one that comes to mind is the "flat versus round earth" controversy. I have never understood why Tolkien felt the need to get into that. He was a mythmaker, even a philosopher, but surely not a scientist.

I won't respnd to the specific question of Galadriel (at least on this post) yet there are three things I feel compelled to say. I am writing this off the top of my head. If I spew out a fact that is blatantly "untrue", please bring it to my attention.

First, you are asking for the impossible. You are essentially saying that Tolkien should have stopped revising the basic structure of the legendarium and simply go ahead and fill in the gaps to craft a "completed" story. I frankly think that is impossible. Tolkien simply couldn't sit still.

If you look at the history of the legendarium, its composition and evolution, the one thing that strikes you is how much everything changes: the Tolkien of the early Lost Tales, the Tolkien of the Athrabeth and everything in between. There was no "definitive form" for Tolkien. He simply couldn't stop toying and changing things.... not just the details, but the very heart of the story. I think it is one reason why so many feel impelled to write fanfiction and rpgs (or for that matter, a revised Silm). They are essentially continuing a tradition that the Professor himself started: to pull, to shift and come out with something virtually new.

Secondly, those latter writings contain much that I think is priceless. You speak of "philosophizing and theologizing", but something like the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth is literally priceless to me (also the tale of Adanel). (And I am not, as you know, a Christian.) Tolkien was wrestling with some of the deepest issues in his soul, and the Athrabeth was, I believe, a reflection of that. Both its characters and ideas are among my favorites. The same is true for much of UT. For example, what I learn of Bilbo in UT gives me a whole new insight into what motivated him, the overall hand of providence in the great design, and the responses of his neighbors.

One of the things that strikes me is how "religious" issues/emblems/ideas crept into Middle-earth in the later years. I did not get a chance to post on the recent "Emblems" thread. However, my gut feeling is this: it is "artificial" to try and create a society devoid of religious content. To my knowledge, no such society has existed on this earth. (Bird and I once had a long talk abut this shortly after I joined the forum.) If you consciously try to keep religion out, as Tolkien claimed he did, it will come creeping back in some form or fashion. This seems to have been happening in the later writings.

Lastly, I would not agree that Silm was "finished" prior to the publication of LotR. It wasn't until LotR, I believe, that we get Numenor and all the events of the second age. Again, to me, these are among the richest of Tolkien's creations. I only wish that he would have focused on these in the last years of his life.

Misspent? No, I can't agree with you. I can look at any period in Tolkien's writings and find some tales and approaches I like better than others. That is as true of the last years as the earlier period. Tolkien wasn't just writing a body of stories. He was creating a world. And worlds aren't static. They change and evolve. Why should philosophy and theology not me part of that world? The more critical question to me is why Tolkien's emphasis shifted in this latter period. What was it that caused the Professor to bring up "philosophy" and "theology" more frequently in his latter works?