Relative Powers

[narfforc]

I was not saying that we should pack up and go home, we should carry on as normal, however I state again, quoting from anything not published during Tolkiens lifetime cannot be done with absolute certainty. A lot of arguments go back and forth until they descend into bickering, and then things get a bit heated. I just wanted to say that quoting from HoME can be very dangerous, some people may think that its the truth, in the same way the films have muddied the waters. As I said before, try to keep in mind when quoting anything:

1. Was this Tolkiens final word on the matter, ie: was it published whilst alive.

2. Are there any other versions that may contradict the matter.

3. Are there any other statements that may contradict the matter.

The reason I put number three in is because I would ask you, Who is the most beautiful of the Children of Iluvatar?

Tolkien states on one hand that Feanor is, then he says that Luthien is. Then there are other statements:

1. For Feanor was made the mightiest in all parts of body and mind, in valour, in endurance, in beauty, in understanding, in skill, in strength and in subtlety alike, of all the Children of Iluvatar.

2. Feanor was the mightiest in skill of word and hand, more learned than his brothers; his spirit burned as a flame. Fingolfin was the strongest, the most steadfast, and the most valiant. Finarfin was the fairest, and wise of heart.

3. Galadriel, most beautiful of all the house of Finwe..

How many contradictions are there in that lot.

Carry On Quoting.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Narfforc

Was this Tolkiens final word on the matter, ie: was it published whilst alive.

Of course, as we see with both TH & LotR Tolkien wasn't averse to altering even his published works for subsequent editions. Plus if we take into account the changes made to the published works since his death (between 300 - 400 changes to the text in the recent 50th anniversary edition of LotR) we seem to be on very shaky ground even with the works published during his lifetime.

[Lalwendë]

I can see the Four Horsemen of Canonicity approaching over the horizon...

I think what this illustrates is just how difficult it is to make any kind of objective judgement on 'power' or 'strength'. Putting aside what we would define as powerful ourselves, from what we interpret to be 'powerful' in Arda, we sometimes have no clear primary source to draw on. Tolkien's books are layered and complex, way beyond the complexity of just having lots of characters and places and storylines; they are complex because he has given an illusion of reality through having the translator conceit and rewriting versions of his work.

Maybe the arguing is all part of what he hoped might happen? Have we thought of that?

[littlemanpoet]

The translator conceit is one that Tolkien put into the work in order to create a feigned reality. That he succeeded is proved by how similar our discussing behavior is to that of theologians and historians. At the risk of seeming heresy, as the theologians who discuss the Christian Bible acknowledge one Author, so must we. Thus the translator conceit is a level of complexity, in fact a kind of game, that doesn't necessarily obtain for the purposes of this thread.

[davem]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

The translator conceit is one that Tolkien put into the work in order to create a feigned reality. That he succeeded is proved by how similar our discussing behavior is to that of theologians and historians. At the risk of seeming heresy, as the theologians who discuss the Christian Bible acknowledge one Author, so must we. Thus the translator conceit is a level of complexity, in fact a kind of game, that doesn't necessarily obtain for the purposes of this thread.

So are you saying we should discount any qualitative statements Tolkien makes, or that we should take them all into account - even when they contradict each other?

And I'd say that the TC cannot be left out of any analysis of the Legendarium. Its far more than merely a 'kind of game' - unless you conside sub creation as a whole a kind of 'game'.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I can see the Four Horsemen of Canonicity approaching over the horizon...

Saucepan neatly sidesteps one gaping can of worms and promptly falls into another ...

As regards the Feanor debate, I would repeat a question that I posed (and comment that I made) earlier:

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Does "power" include self-control? If so, Feanor should definately be lower. Turin too, probably.

Feanor's talents in many fields are undoubted. It is clear that he was an immensely powerful chap. But it also cannot be denied that he was incredibly lacking when it came to self-restraint. There are many examples of the adverse consequences, for himself and his kin, of his feiry hot headedness. The question is whether this simply represents a misuse of his undoubted power, or whether it in itself diminishes his power.

I am not talking here in terms of his morality and the negative consequences of this for others. Although a number of his deeds were of dubious morality, that in itself is not a reason to move him down the "power list", as it does not seem that we are holding the moral failings of Morgoth and Sauron against them. What I am considering is how his failings negatively impacted upon himself and his family. His Oath blighted his life and the lives of his sons. His rash pursuit of Morgoth led to his premature demise. These were consequences of his very nature, not simply the manifestations of his power. So can it not be said that, taken as a whole, his "power level" is diminished by his impetuous and hot-headed nature?

There are others, Luthien and Galadriel included, who, while lacking in his raw power, chose their courses of action more carefully, and in a more measured way. In many ways, perhaps, they were wiser. Should this not be considered as an aspect of "power"?

[Thalion]

There are others, Luthien and Galadriel included, who, while lacking in his raw power, chose their courses of action more carefully, and in a more measured way.

I think by going down this route you will be "knocking down a peg" a lot of Elves...first and foremost practically ever Noldor, or at least all those who followed Feanor...even Galadriel we are given at times to believe left Valinor because of her loath for Feanor and a desire to make sure he failed in his quest in Middle Earth (although thats simply this person's interpretation...I have a feeling, that it will still much contention)...and Fingolfin "rashly" charged to the gates of Angband...Fingon allowed his troops to move forward against the hosts of Angband too soon when Gwindor charged first...Thingol 'forces' Beren to go to Angband to get a Silmarill for his daughters hand...all of these cases (and more) can be considered rash decisions or more biased towards personal feeling or without much thought put into them...

[drigel]

The translator conceit is one that Tolkien put into the work in order to create a feigned reality..... in fact a kind of game, that doesn't necessarily obtain for the purposes of this thread.

If we are quantifying the qualities of the players, then the realization of the reality has to be a given. If the reality is feigned, then so is the list.

One could see one of the descendents of Feanor or one of their people ....producing the statement that Feanor was the 'greatest' of the Eldar, while one of the Elves of Rivendell produced the statement that Luthien was the 'greatest'

here is the rub that is presented, in terms of TC. Especially if one considers that much (or most) of the original history to have come from prose or song, then translated (and translated again and again etc.), one can easily get mixed messages as to who is "greatest". Or, ranking the "greatness". If I am a poet or a songsmith being commisioned by the House of Fingon, or the Court of Cirdan, the Family of Gil-Galad, you better believe I am going to ensure my sire is getting his/her's money's worth. Praise will gush forth in abundance. Subjectivity will be a casualty of convenience.

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by davem

So are you saying we should discount any qualitative statements Tolkien makes, or that we should take them all into account - even when they contradict each other?

And I'd say that the TC cannot be left out of any analysis of the Legendarium. Its far more than merely a 'kind of game' - unless you conside sub creation as a whole a kind of 'game'.

Of what use is it in this "relative powers" game?

[davem]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Of what use is it in this "relative powers" game?

When people start using quotes from the works to justify who goes where in the hierarchy we have to analyse those quotes to see who says those things, what they say, why they say it & what they leave out.

Overall The Sil has an anti-Feanorian bias (being, one could speculate, due to the fact that Bilbo, the principal compiler of the Red Book, used sources of information, both living & written, that he found in Rivendell). So, the Feanoreans look bad in the Legends.

Take Celegorm & Curufin's attack on Beren & Luthien - who wrote that is important because the writer attributes various motives to C&C which may or may not have been true.

Or take Feanor. Was Feanor's story written as 'journalism' or as 'tragedy'? If SpM is correct that a characters moral/psychological strengths & weaknesses play a part in how we judge their innate 'power' (& thus where they belong in the hierarchy) then we have to ask 'Who's writing the report? Are they dependable - have they recieved full psychoanalytical training? Or we're they producing a work of moral didacticism, which may have little relation to actual events?'

One final point - if the Elves (as stated in Ainulindale) are bound by the Music as by Fate, then can we consider any of their actions to be 'courageous'? Wouldn't they only be able to follow the 'program'? Also, wouldn't it take greater courage for Men (who have no idea of their post-mortem state - or indeed whether they have any) to lay down their lives than for Elves (who know exactly what will happen to them) to do so?