Quote:
|
However, I can't agree that in Tolkien's world, the characters' actions affect only their own souls. For example, while Frodo's sacrifice may not have made any difference to the fate of the world in the long run, it made a huge difference to everybody living in Middle-Earth in the meantime. Maybe if Frodo had failed (e.g. by killing Gollum instead of having mercy on him) and Sauron had regained the Ring, the Valar or Eru himself would have intervened to prevent Sauron from gaining dominion over all Middle-Earth, but even in this case, what would have been the cost in human/elven/dwarven suffering, if another War of the Powers, another Drowning of Númenor had occurred?
|
Of course, we don't know what Eru can or can't/will or won't do. Would Eru have permitted Sauron to win? Would he have permitted Frodo to fall if that would have allowed Sauron to win? Point being: if Eru's ultimate victory is guaranteed this not only sets out the end of the journey, but actually sets its general direction. The really interseting thing in this context is that while only Gandalf among the good guys may truly know the outcome of things, among the bad guys both Saruman & Sauron know it too - yet they actually try to bring about a different result.
Clearly, once the Sil appeared LotR became a different work. An absolutely different work. Once you've read the Sil you can't read LotR in the same way again. For better or worse it becomes a different work - it has suddenly become a small part of a greater whole, & events take on a different meaning & significance. Actions are seen in a different light. What were originally odd (in both senses of the word) references to 'the One, the West, the Valar (interestingly appearing in Gandalf's speech at Aragorn's coronation only in the second edition of LotR) suddenly gain new relevance - in fact, in a way, come to dominate in the reader's mind. I'm reminded of the letter by Tolkien which has just been sold at auction, & which did not appear in the Carpenter collection
Quote:
http://www.christies.com/LotFinder/l...b-47091f3318ed
'A DREADFUL YEAR OF LOSS AND FRUSTRATION': on the death of C.S. Lewis and the 'simultaneity of different planes' in The Lord of the Rings. Tolkien responds to a sympathetic letter from his correspondent to pour out a tale of 'a dreadful year': 'The loss reached for me its climax on Nov. 22nd, not for me the day Kennedy was murdered, but the day C.S. Lewis died'; then, Tolkien and his wife were so ill as not to be able to celebrate Christmas; the next disaster was in their son Christopher's divorce -- 'A shadow, only guessed by us, has been falling on my son Christopher and his wife ... soon after Christmas disaster came on them and us. His wife walked out ... I fear they have left their allegiance to our Mother [the Church]'. The letter continues with a detailed discussion of The Lord of the Rings, considering Mroczkowski's suggestion as to 'the simultaneity of different planes of reality touching one another ... part of the deeply felt idea that I had ... Beyond that too I feel that no construction of the human mind, whether in imagination or the highest philosophy, can contain within its own "englobement" all that there is ... There is always something left over that demands a different or longer construction to "explain" it ... This is like a "play", in which ... there are noises that do not belong, chinks in the scenery', discussing in particular the status of Tom Bombadil in this respect. The letter concludes with apologies if this seems too earnest, and references to his wife's ill-health.
|
These mentions of events/characters from the Sil are very much like these 'noises that do not belong, chinks in the scenery', which 'demands a different or longer construction to "explain" it'., & when it is so 'explained', transforms the original work profoundly. The Sil is transformative of LotR - motives, values, the sruggles of the characters are shown in a diefferent light. The fate of the world is seen not to be in Frodo's hands, or Aragorn's, or Gandalf's (who are all capable of 'dropping' it) but in Eru's (who is not). In the 'limited' world (for all its apparently overwhelming size the first time we read it) of LotR is suddenly seen to be tiny in both time & space. The journey is longer than we could have imagined, greater, more meaningful....yet, it also becomes, in a sense, more 'limited' because we are given the beginning, middle & end, & so we know that all would have been well in the end anyway - even if Sauron had won the battle he would have lost the war. What's more, Sauron himself must have known that too. 'They cannot conquer forever!' is truer than we realised - its a simple statement of fact.
So, does the existence of the Sil detract from LotR, or add to it? Does it detract from the sacrifices made, the struggles undergone? Actually, shouldn't, mustn't, the bad guys be able to win, ultimately & for all time, if individuals are to be truly 'free'? The existence of a figure like Eru means absolute freedom, of choice & action, & moe importantly, absolute good & evil, are impossible. Only good is true, evil is a corruption of it, & 'good' therefore must win in the end. But then, why fight at all? Surely its only the battle that could really go either way that is worth the fight?