Glorfindel reincarnated

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Well I would agree that 'author's point of view' can become an all too easy explanation for seeming contradictions. I stressed 'possibility' above and am more inclined to agree with Nerwen's post and Tolkien's noted love of superlatives, although I do think -- at the point when the Annals were still meant to be different texts from Quenta Silmarillion -- some 'comparisons of interest' were perhaps intended.

That generally said, I would also agree that that has no real force when it comes to specific examples, unless Tolkien comments directly or makes something 'agreeably obvious' I guess...

... for instance did Maglor drown himself with his Silmaril (poetry, and one of Tolkien's letters) or walk along the shores (prose Silmarillion) after 'drowning' his Silmaril? Despite my opinion that this detail nicely lends itself to the confusion of history, so to speak, which would be nicely represented in the two very different traditions, the matter could simply be external.

Again if forced to guess: more probably external.

When Tolkien started off creating his mythology as we know he intended it to be new mythology for England, since we were sadly lacking in that area. He seemed far more content to go along with the confusion of myth and history.

However, late on his life mostly post LOTR I think there is a quite a change. Instead of being content to allow different interpretations and different stories to stand he seems determined to find a 'true' account of what happened.

An example of this is the question of whether 'Tuor' died or who exactly sent Gandalf back. These are things he either clears up completely or leaves us with very strong implications of what happened.

Since this is about Glorfindel, this is another such case. Tolkien could have left things ambiguous as to whether the two were the same. However, he clarifies this for the readers and there can be no doubt of the truth.

Even in the mythology about the Two Tree's he appears unsatisfied with leaving the account as Mannish myths. He tried very hard to make a translate the solarism myths into a 'true' account. For instance the Morgoth messing with the orbit of the Earth or the intensity of the Sun's heat.

I am inclined to think that he would have liked to clear up as many conflicting tales as he could, except for a very few.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by cellurdur

When Tolkien started off creating his mythology as we know he intended it to be new mythology for England, since we were sadly lacking in that area. He seemed far more content to go along with the confusion of myth and history.

However, late on his life mostly post LOTR I think there is a quite a change. Instead of being content to allow different interpretations and different stories to stand he seems determined to find a 'true' account of what happened.

Hmm. Yes and no in general. Post-lord of the Rings we have examples of variant internal traditions too, and I believe that the notably variant The Drowning of Anadune is a later 'Tolkien-ratified' text, for example.

An example of this is the question of whether 'Tuor' died or who exactly sent Gandalf back. These are things he either clears up completely or leaves us with very strong implications of what happened.

No doubt Tolkien was concerned with consistency, and in my opinion that is the major ingredient -- however to be 'peppered' in measure with a purposed amount of inconsistency or ambiguity, for flavour.

Since this is about Glorfindel, this is another such case. Tolkien could have left things ambiguous as to whether the two were the same. However, he clarifies this for the readers and there can be no doubt of the truth.

Another post-Lord of the Rings internal purposed inconsistency is the history of the Elessar stone. Surely we can find [or arguably find] more examples of Tolkien trying to make things consistent, but that doesn't rule out a measure of purposed ambiguity or purposed [even seeming] inconsistency in his later years.

Glorfindel is a character living in Imladris during Bilbo's lifetime [and Bilbo's stay there]. Not exactly the same scenario as with Maglor however [not that you said it was], as to my mind his ultimate fate seems far more shrouded in mythic-historical mist...

... a good case for the poetry to describe that Maglor cast himself and the Silmaril into the Sea, while another prose text says he cast not himself but the Silmaril into the Sea. Is this the case? I don't know, but I'm not sure that Tolkien would have ruled it out in a post-lord of the Rings phase even if he was naturally, and generally speaking, concerned with consistency.

Even in the mythology about the Two Tree's he appears unsatisfied with leaving the account as Mannish myths. He tried very hard to make a translate the solarism myths into a 'true' account. For instance the Morgoth messing with the orbit of the Earth or the intensity of the Sun's heat.

Tolkien does try to re-write the existing myths, yes, but for whatever reason he never gets very far however, and we can find enough late[er] examples of JRRT characterizing the Silmarillion as a mostly Mannish account.

In my opinion this was the solution JRRT landed on rather than re-write the older, already existing legends -- at least drastically re-write them.

I am inclined to think that he would have liked to clear up as many conflicting tales as he could, except for a very few.

Maybe depends upon what a 'few' is

I myself have never been a proponent of taking Tolkien's extant work as 'all internal' and never mind the inconsistencies because it's like some Primary World example...

... however, again, I would say that The Drowing of Anadune is a great example of purposed inconsistency due to author variation, and I believe Tolkien was happy with this variation in a post-Lord of the Rings phase of his work.

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galin

Hmm. Yes and no in general. Post-lord of the Rings we have examples of variant internal traditions too, and I believe that the notably variant The Drowning of Anadune is a later 'Tolkien-ratified' text, for example.



No doubt Tolkien was concerned with consistency, and in my opinion that is the major ingredient -- however to be 'peppered' in measure with a purposed amount of inconsistency or ambiguity, for flavour.



Another post-Lord of the Rings internal purposed inconsistency is the history of the Elessar stone. Surely we can find [or arguably find] more examples of Tolkien trying to make things consistent, but that doesn't rule out a measure of purposed ambiguity or purposed [even seeming] inconsistency in his later years.

Glorfindel is a character living in Imladris during Bilbo's lifetime [and Bilbo's stay there]. Not exactly the same scenario as with Maglor however [not that you said it was], as to my mind his ultimate fate seems far more shrouded in mythic-historical mist...

... a good case for the poetry to describe that Maglor cast himself and the Silmaril into the Sea, while another prose text says he cast not himself but the Silmaril into the Sea. Is this the case? I don't know, but I'm not sure that Tolkien would have ruled it out in a post-lord of the Rings phase even if he was naturally, and generally speaking, concerned with consistency.





Tolkien does try to re-write the existing myths, yes, but for whatever reason he never gets very far however, and we can find enough late[er] examples of JRRT characterizing the Silmarillion as a mostly Mannish account.

In my opinion this was the solution JRRT landed on rather than re-write the older, already existing legends -- at least drastically re-write them.



Maybe depends upon what a 'few' is

I myself have never been a proponent of taking Tolkien's extant work as 'all internal' and never mind the inconsistencies because it's like some Primary World example...

... however, again, I would say that The Drowing of Anadune is a great example of purposed inconsistency due to author variation, and I believe Tolkien was happy with this variation in a post-Lord of the Rings phase of his work.

There are a few examples, as you mentioned with the Elessar, but quite a few of the variants in different stories are simply due to mistakes Tolkien made in later life. For instance when he refers to Celebrimbor making both Elessar's. This cannot really work and it is something that Tolkien probably would have rejected due to it contradicting what is in LOTR

Which contradiction in the variation n the Drowning of Anadune are you talking about?