Arwen's Mother?

[Rinberethial Bloom]

I know Elrond was Arwen's Father but either I don't remember or it wasn't mentioned but who was her Mother?

I can't refer to any of the books but I think I remember in the appendix something about her living with the elves in Lothlorien and them being reffered to as her Mother's people. I could be totally wrong here I just kinda recall something like that.

[Elrian]

Arwen's mother was Celebrian, daughter of Celeborn and Galadriel. She was captured by Orcs in TA 2509 and recieved a poisened wound. She was rescued by her son's and departed Middle Earth and sailed into the West the next year.

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

Notice how when departing our world, Elves "go West". I wonder if that's a deliberate reference to WWI forces slang...

[Aralaithiel]

Hmmm...interesting theory. I will have to peruse my mind on that. I wouldn't mind "going West" after the day I've had today! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Elrian]

Or, it could be that the Undying Lands were in the West. [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

[Letty]

And since LOTR is an allusion to WW2,is it possible that the Elves,being the Chosen people,are an alllusion to the Jews?

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Sorry, Letty, but LotR is in no way an allusion to WWII - Tolkien himself said that he was not attempting to make reference to the primary world in his story. His own war experiences were in WWI and certainly influenced him, but there is no direct connection to his story. There is no people in his works that is intended to be similar to the Jews; there are direct quotes concerning this in his 'Letters'.

[Bêthberry]

Perhaps Letty you could also read the Foreword to the Second Edition, included in the Harper Collins paperback edition of LotR, for Tolkien's rejection of allusions or allegory to World War II.

[Boromir88]

And since LOTR is an allusion to WW2,is it possible that the Elves,being the Chosen people,are an alllusion to the Jews?~Letty

I would have to disagree with you there, or atleast me personally. Tolkien hated allegories and he didn't want to use them in LOTR, becuase this would restrict the meaning of his books. He opened his books out there with no intent on trying to relate to a specific event in his life or in time. Here are just some of MANY quotes where Tolkien personally denies trying to allude to anything:

Its sources are things long before in mind, or in some cases already written, and litttle or nothing in it was modified by the war that began in 1939 or its sequels.~Foreward to LOTR

The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or conclusion.~ibid

...my mind does not work allegorically~Letter 144

The story is not about JRRT at all, and is at no point an attempt to allegorize his experience of life.~Letter 183

There is no symbolism or conscious allegory in my story.~Letter 203

Tolkien repeatedly strongly denied using allegories. But he does say this:

Other arrangements could be devised accordingly to the tastes or views of those who like allegory or topical reference. But I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and have always done so since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence. I much prefer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicablity to the thought and experience of readers. I think that many confuse ';applicability'; with ';allegory; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.~Foreward to LOTR

In some cases Tolkien would tells us what he was trying to show (for example he says the Numenoreans to him seemed more like Egyptians). However, what he does to is give freedom to the readers to come up with their own meaning. And which is why he refused to deal with "allegories," because this set strict meaning upon the text. If his readers so desired they could find "allusions" and "allegories," but Tolkien personally did not write them into his story with an intent of saying "This is my experience from WW2." If that's what the reader thinks, than that's the readers own personal interpretation. But, I disagree with the statement that LOTR is an allusion of WW2, because that sets a strict meaning to LOTR, and that's not what Tolkien wanted to do.

So, LOTR is NOT a book alluding to WW2. For me personally, in some cases it looks like it in some cases I think not. For me personally, "The chosen people" is not an allusion to "Jews." If that's your interpretation, then that is your opinion and your interpretation when reading Tolkien's books. But, to say that that was Tolkien's opinion, I think he would disagree with you.

of course Celebrian!

[Raynor]

There are at least three letters which prove that Tolkien's approach is a little bit more nuanced than Boromir88 presented it

Originally Posted by Letter #109

Of course, Allegory and Story converge, meeting somewhere in Truth. So that the only perfectly consistent allegory is a real life; and the only fully intelligible story is an allegory.

Originally Posted by Letter #131

I dislike Allegory - the conscious and intentional allegory - yet any attempt to explain the purport of myth or fairytale must use allegorical language.

Originally Posted by Letter #163

In a larger sense, it is I suppose impossible to write any 'story' that is not allegorical in proportion as it 'comes to life'; since each of us is an allegory, embodying in a particular tale and clothed in the garments of time and place, universal truth and everlasting life.

[Letty]

ok guys,thanks for the information.

[Boromir88]

Raynor, it's not all that complicated, really. Tolkien denies using allegories consistantly. And he does so because this sets strict meaning upon the text. If Tolkien had intended "Sauron to look like Hitler and Saruman to look like Stalin" and the "West to be the allies of WW2," than that would be allegory.

Of course the L.R. does not belong to me. It has been brought forth and must now go its appointed way in the world, though naturally I take a deep interest in its fortunes , as a person would of a child.~Letter # 328

I much refer history, true or feigned, with its varied applicability to the thought and experience of readers~Foreward to LOTR

Allegories mean "This represents this" and that is the accepted interpretation of the text. Tolkien didn't want that, he wanted his readers to form their own opinions, therefor he says there's no allegories in his stories. But, as you show you can find them, and as he wrote, if you're looking for allegories (which I think most readers are) than you can certainly find them. However, it wasn't Tolkien's intentions to write an allegorical book, or to say "LOTR represents World War II," because this means that is what's accepted and what the readers have to interpret it as. Tolkien clearly didn't want that, he wanted his readers to experience freedom in their interpretation. He used a wide variety of resources and cultures and histories and put them into his writings, so the readers can interpret the stories and find the "allegories" that they want to find. But, he did not write the book as an intended allegory towards anything, because this would force the readers to see the book a certain way.

Some say Boromir's redemption is a Christian redemption, I say it looks more Anglo-Norman. And the interesting thing in Tolkien is that we can support both and believe both and be right about both. If Tolkien intentionally used allegories, one of us would be right, or in fact neither of us could be.

[davem]

Can only agree with B88. I do think Tolkien protested too much re 'allegory' though. He was very skilled in the use of allegory. I suspect what he disliked was 'hidden' allegory. When Tolkien used allegory he was usually very clear that he was doing so - the 'Tower' allegory in the Beowulf lecture, Niggle, & even the use of the Great Hall in Smith (for which he is kind enough to provide us with an 'allegorical' interpretation himself:

The Great Hall is evidently in a way an 'allegory' of the village church; the Master Cook with his house adjacent, and his office that is not hereditary, provides for its own instruction and succession but is not one of the 'secular' or profitable crafts, and yet is supported financially by the village, is plainly the Parson and the priesthood. 'Cooking' is a domestic affair practised by men and women: personal religion and prayer. The Master Cook presides over and provides for all the religious festivals of the year, and also for all the religious occasions that are not universal: births, marriages, and deaths. The Great Hall is however no longer painted or decorated. If antique carvings, whether grotesques like gargoyles, or beautiful and of religious import, are preserved at all it is by mere custom. The Hall is kept rainproof, weatherproof and warm: that is the prime object of any care spent on it. Festivals are mere public assemblies, for talk assisted by eating and drinking: there are no longer songs, music, or dances. The church has been 'reformed'. Memory survives of 'merrier' days, but most of the village would not approve of any revival of them. That a MC should himself sing is regarded as out of accord with his office.
Industry and sober hard work are mainly to be commended; but the profit motive for such assiduity is becoming dominant. The less commercially profitable an occupation the less it is esteemed. (One feels that though there is yet no hint of this, the time is not far distant when the office of ME will be abolished. The Hall will become a mere place of business, the property of the Craft Council, hirable by those who can afford it for great family occasions. If any Cooks survive they will become traders, opening cookshops and eating houses adapted to the various tastes of clients.)

Yet he still seems uncomfortable with admitting his use of it. At three points in his writings on Smith he warns us off doing what he himself proceeds to do:
This short tale is not an 'allegory', though it is capable of course of allegorical interpretations at certain points., 'There is no need to hunt for allegory.' &

BUT Faery is not religious. It is fairly evident that it is not Heaven or Paradise. Certainly its inhabitants, Elves, are not angels or emissaries of God (direct). The tale does not deal with religion itself. The Elves are not busy with a plan to reawake religious devotion in Wootton. The Cooking allegory would not be suitable to any such

In short, Tolkien himself was capable of finding 'allegories' in his own work, & of composing very effective ones. However, Boromir 88 is perfectly correct in that even where Tolkien does use allegory he would not, I think, want to impose them on the reader, who should be free to 'apply' his or her own meaning to the story - or apply no 'meaning' to them at all.