And it slips through our fingers

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Sorry Cel but the world is doomed. We'll just be long dead by then.

Thank you to everyone for making such brilliant posts. I have found it very hard until now to jump in with a thought of my own.

Well....it's not really my own. It's pretty much what Lalwende said, albeit twisted slightly and rendered less eloquent.

That being, the diminishing of the world, of a race, of an age, can be compared with the diminishing of a single human life. We have our childhood, we swiftly reach the peak of our physical powers and quite often our happiness; certainly the peak of our hope. Then these slowly decline. We get weaker physically, we stop hoping so much and start looking back much more. We often become more melancholy.

Not everyone, of course, but I think it can be applied to humans generally, at least with some argument.

[Folwren]

Originally posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim
That being, the diminishing of the world, of a race, of an age, can be compared with the diminishing of a single human life. We have our childhood, we swiftly reach the peak of our physical powers and quite often our happiness; certainly the peak of our hope. Then these slowly decline. We get weaker physically, we stop hoping so much and start looking back much more. We often become more melancholy.

That's depressing, Eomer. (Though true.)

And I have nothing else to say.

Except that the end of the World may be closer than you think.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I doubt it. Barring those wildcard asteroids, it's going to take a very long time for the world to fall apart or be pulled apart or whatever.

The human race, though, might well be reaching its end. I don't think we're going to seriously challenge the dinosaurs in that regard. But it will not fade away rather than burn out; it will just fade away.

I don't agree that the human race reached a high point and then fell from grace. I think that it just shifted and morphed slightly. So there will be nothing tragic about the end of human beings. It's going to be very unromantic.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Originally posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim
That being, the diminishing of the world, of a race, of an age, can be compared with the diminishing of a single human life. We have our childhood, we swiftly reach the peak of our physical powers and quite often our happiness; certainly the peak of our hope. Then these slowly decline. We get weaker physically, we stop hoping so much and start looking back much more. We often become more melancholy.

Do we stop hoping? Does hope even diminish as we age? I don't believe that. I might have said this when I was younger, but not now. I wonder if you will still feel this way as you get older.

I do sense melancholy in Tolkien, a wistfulness and an acknowledgment that there can never be complete victory, at least in the frame of this world. Yet I never sense loss of hope. Perhaps we are missing the boat on this thread. Yes, in Tolkien's mind the long defeat is there, but so too are the victories won at such a hard price. To take those away, to ignore or belittle them, is to wipe away what makes it all worthwhile. The diminishing is there, yet so is the meaning that stands behind our actions.

Frodo was injured, not just in his body but in his heart. Even so, there is no sense at the end of the book that his sacrifice was without meaning as I often get from reading so many other contemporary novels. We do not ultimately know what happens to Frodo, but we do know that his friends made sure that he would be taken some place where he would at least have another chance. If the diminishing and the melancholy are there in Middle-earth, so too are the flashes of meaning and a treasure like the phial of Galadriel that symbolizes light and hope and can help lead us down the path.

In the last analysis, when I set the book down, it is not the diminishing that sticks in my mind but rather that promise that Man will not give up trying, no matter how hard it gets. Whether we are talking about the course of history or a single individual who walks the open road, subject to the vagaries of life and aging, it is this presence of hope that draws me back to the story.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Child of the 7th Age

I do sense melancholy in Tolkien, a wistfulness and an acknowledgment that there can never be complete victory, at least in the frame of this world. Yet I never sense loss of hope. Perhaps we are missing the boat on this thread. Yes, in Tolkien's mind the long defeat is there, but so too are the victories won at such a hard price. To take those away, to ignore or belittle them, is to wipe away what makes it all worthwhile. The diminishing is there, yet so is the meaning that stands behind our actions.

I see that there is a lot of hope too, indeed it comes through as strongly as the sense of sadness and regret. But this hope is very bittersweet. It is all that is left to cling on to when Middle Earth gets really difficult. There are few certainties, and for some of the characters at times they have no other certainty than their sense of hope; here I'm thinking of Frodo and Sam in particular.

The years have brought the same cycle to Middle Earth, slow descent into war, the feeling that all is lost, and then victory, brought about by hope building the courage of the people. But some people forget the lessons of the past. It brings to mind what Tolkien himself experienced, taking part in WWI, supposedly the war to end all wars, only to see his own son enlisted in an even more horrific war; and it was hope which bolstered the morale needed to acgieve victory in both situations. Sadly, war still goes on, as does persecution and suffering.

I think that this is what is meant by a 'long defeat'. People soon forget the struggles of the past and start new wars. In the 20th century conflicts happened one after the other. Middle Earth was luckier in that it did have extensive peace between wars, but it is the same endless cycle. The New Shadow shows just how Tolkien couldn't picture Middle Earth even in the early fourth age totally without troubles. Yes, it's a bleak picture, but hope is still vital, even if it is bittersweet.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

The diminishing of things is one aspect of Tolkien's stories that has always fascinated me. The idea that things generally get worse or weaker over time certainly makes for less happy endings. It adds to the tragedy. There are numerous examples: the decline of Middle-earth in general; the Elves; Numenor; the race of Men; the Hobbits and the Dwarves.

The examples that you give all seem to point towards a progression from the "fantastical" to the "mundane", which I suppose is inevitable in a series of epic fantasy tales which are said to be set in our own pre-history.

Originally Posted by davem

Others have pointed out (Flieger for one) that Tolkien had an 'Elvish' aspect to his character, a yearning for a lost ideal past. Maybe that's what comes through in his writings. He can accuse the Elves of wishing to 'embalm' the world, fix it into an ideal state from which it can never move on, but he has this nostalgic tendency himself.

This is an interesting point. The Elves yearn for a lost past and so attempt to "embalm" the world to preserve as much of that ideal past as they can. This tendency in Elves, together with their immortality, has always seemed rather "unnatural" to me, since it seems to work against and suppress the natural cycle of life, which is very much concerned with sweeping away the old to make way for the new. In this sense, Men in Tolkien's world come across to me as much more "natural" creatures than Elves (which is, I suppose, pradoxical in some ways, with Elves being portrayed as very much more in touch with "nature").

It is interesting, I think, that Tolkien to an extent recognised the "Elvish tendency" as a shortcoming, while (as davem states) very much sharing that tendency himself. As someone who is very much in favour of progress (although not necessarily always the way in which it is used), I find myself very much at odds with the approach of both Tolkien and his Elvish creations in this regard, since progress (the new replacing the old) seems very much a natural process to me. And yest here is another paradox. Although progress is a natural consequence of our development of intelligence, it can (and frequently does) put us at odds with nature.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

As someone who is very much in favour of progress (although not necessarily always the way in which it is used), I find myself very much at odds with the approach of both Tolkien and his Elvish creations in this regard, since progress (the new replacing the old) seems very much a natural process to me. And yest here is another paradox. Although progress is a natural consequence of our development of intelligence, it can (and frequently does) put us at odds with nature.

I share your hesitation over the elven nostalgia, SpM. I have never really been an enthusiastic admirer of elves because their concept of art or perfection is this embalming.

However, I do question an assumption you make here. It is one thing to accept and welcome the replacing of the old by the new, but is this necessarily progress or is it simply replacement, change, difference?

Progress I thought entails some movement towards a future goal or cummulative improvement, forward or onward movement. (Unless of course it means a royal journey. )

I think you assume that the 'new' is better without logically arguing how or by what means.

[davem]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

This is an interesting point. The Elves yearn for a lost past and so attempt to "embalm" the world to preserve as much of that ideal past as they can. This tendency in Elves, together with their immortality, has always seemed rather "unnatural" to me, since it seems to work against and suppress the natural cycle of life, which is very much concerned with sweeping away the old to make way for the new. In this sense, Men in Tolkien's world come across to me as much more "natural" creatures than Elves (which is, I suppose, pradoxical in some ways, with Elves being portrayed as very much more in touch with "nature").

I've always seen this paradox as inherent in Elvish nature - its not 'wrong' its simply the way they approach things. 'Eternity is in love with the productions of time' as Blake said. They are 'outside' nature - for all their love of it it is different. Everythin else dies, they remain. Art is their only refuge & it would seem that what drives them is a desire to make the natural world like themselves - immortal. That, I think, accounts for their sadness. It is also what drives them to create the Rings. Their 'fall' in this comes not from their yearning but from their desire to 'actualise' it. They seek to dominate what they love, & re-make it 'in their own image' - Tolkien says they 'flirted with Sauron' - & I don't think he was simply referring to accepting his aid in the making of the Rings. Rather, I think he meant they 'flirted' with what he symbolised - control & domination of all life.

Of course, in the context of your point, 'progree' itself can be motivated by the same desire - control, domination & coercion of the world. So, even Men can 'flirt with Sauron' - not in the Elvish sense of 'embalming' but in the sense of wishing to re-make the world in our own image, the way we think it ought to be. And at least the Elves were driven by the desire to make the world beautiful. We don't even have that. We are closer to Sauron than they in that. Sauron desired control of the world without any thought as to whether it was beautiful or ugly & if anything that sums Men up perfectly. Perhaps if we were more like the Elves then we could call our changes 'progress'. As it is, I don't think we can. The Elves love the world for what it was, we love it for what it could be. They look backward, we look forward. They are driven by regret, we by hope - but I don't think either of those things necessarily manifest in our actions. Which should we make our judgement of the different races on - what drives us, or what we actually do?