Of another world

[davem]

Originally Posted by Anguirel

So...in short...Hellenic similarities come down to coincidence and fundamental motifs in myth and legend. Persian influence on Judaism and Christianity is more hirstorically traceable; it must be remembered that Christianity is a religion of the east.

Point taken, though I think there was a good deal of 'Eastern' influence on the Hellenic world. Certainly the Eastern influence on the Roman Empire was profound. A major influence on Christianity was Mithraism. The following words from the Mithraic Rite may strike a chord:

"He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made one with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation."

[Sardy]

Mithraism, Mithrandir... hmmmm...?

[Aiwendil]

Davem wrote:

This just strikes me as yet another example of Tolkien attempting to make the Legendarium 'fit' in response to challenges from Christian correspondents. 'Oh, its really there, but I just didn't mention it' is a cop out. The real point is that for the purposes of the Legendarium there was no need for a Fall of Man - it played no significant part - unlike the Fall of the Elves.

Yet the 'Athrabeth', as a private piece of writing, can hardly be viewed as an apologist work. I cannot believe that Tolkien was not 'serious' about introducing elements of Christian theology into the Legendarium when he wrote it - even if the impetus to do so did originally arise from his defensive replies to Christian critics. If Tolkien considered a criticism to his work and altered it in response, does that make the resulting work any less valid?

The Athrabeth is a work of great beauty & profundity, but if it is read as a reference to the Christian story it ties the Secondary world too closely into the Primary world

Please clarify: is this thread dedicated to the facts about Tolkien's works or to Davem's opinions of them?

You're free to view the Athrabeth any way you like, but let's leave such subjective appraisals out of the discussion.

Of course, this is the danger of the Translator Conceit, because the TC actually does attempt to tie the Legendarium into the Primary World.

Are you arguing that Tolkien did not intend Arda to be a fictional version of the real world - an "imaginary history"? I find this hard to believe given the fact that he spent so much time linking his sub-creation with our world.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Davem wrote:
Yet the 'Athrabeth', as a private piece of writing, can hardly be viewed as an apologist work. I cannot believe that Tolkien was not 'serious' about introducing elements of Christian theology into the Legendarium when he wrote it - even if the impetus to do so did originally arise from his defensive replies to Christian critics. If Tolkien considered a criticism to his work and altered it in response, does that make the resulting work any less valid?

It doesn't invalidate it at all. the question is whether it weakens its effect or not.

Please clarify: is this thread dedicated to the facts about Tolkien's works or to Davem's opinions of them?

Shan't.

You're free to view the Athrabeth any way you like, but let's leave such subjective appraisals out of the discussion.

Shan't

Are you arguing that Tolkien did not intend Arda to be a fictional version of the real world - an "imaginary history"? I find this hard to believe given the fact that he spent so much time linking his sub-creation with our world.

(Of course, I can only respond to this question because of my obstinate refusal of your request to me to leave out personal appraisals & opinions.....)

I am not arguing that Tolkien did not intend Arda to be a fictional version of the real world - an "imaginary history". I actually said:'Of course, this is the danger of the Translator Conceit, because the TC actually does attempt to tie the Legendarium into the Primary World.. I was referring to the danger involved in the idea that the events of the Legendarium were Primary World historical events - because we know they weren't. This was ultimately the cause of the confused mess CT presents is 'Myths Transformed'.

[Aiwendil]

Davem wrote:

I am not arguing that Tolkien did not intend Arda to be a fictional version of the real world - an "imaginary history". I actually said:'Of course, this is the danger of the Translator Conceit, because the TC actually does attempt to tie the Legendarium into the Primary World.. I was referring to the danger involved in the idea that the events of the Legendarium were Primary World historical events - because we know they weren't. This was ultimately the cause of the confused mess CT presents is 'Myths Transformed'.

Okay . . . actually, I largely agree with you. But whether this tying together of real and fictional worlds is a good thing and whether it exists in Tolkien's works are two separate questions.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

Okay . . . actually, I largely agree with you. But whether this tying together of real and fictional worlds is a good thing and whether it exists in Tolkien's works are two separate questions.

That's what I was saying