The Quenta Silmarillion Eucatastrophe-less

[Guinevere]

I wish I had noticed this thread earlier...! Imladris takes up an issue that has bothered me as well for a very long time.

When I first read the Silmarillon I was struck with the deep sadness of it. The whole mood is so very different from the one in the LotR !
In LotR the sadness is mixed with hope, and overall I get a feeling that there is a meaning behind it all, a merciful providence that will guide everything to the ultimate best. The sacrifices that are made, are not meaningless, courage and loyalty and pity are rewarded.
It's just this balance between melancholy and hope that makes me love LotR so much.

In contrast to LotR, the Silmarillon seems so sombre and pessimistic! To be sure, there are some glimpses of joy, some instances where the Valar interfere with mercy , as in the story of Beren and Luthien, or in the instance where the eagle comes to bear Fingon up to rescue Maëdhros.
The story which depressed me most is of course the tale of Túrin.
After having read the "Narn i hîn Húrin", where the characters are more developped, the tragedy and injustice of the fates of this family touches me even more. I just can't get over it. Whereas I can see that Túrin (and Morwen) in some measure brings trouble on himself by his pride and rashness, I can see no such character flaws in Húrin. He is only valiant and faithful and has in no way deserved such a terrible fate: to be forsaken by everybody and to end his own life in complete hopelessness.
I kept asking myself why Tolkien would write such an utterly discouraging story ?
Was it an expression of his bleakest and most depressive mood ??

I have read this whole discussion with interest, and I found several points with which I agree very much.

Saucepanman wrote:

This to me seems to me to be the essence of this question. It is not the "facts" themselves, but the manner in which they are recorded that inspires eucatastrophe in the reader.

Turgon wrote:

yet if your perspective is that the Sil is "eucatastrophic-less" would that not add to the realism of the tale? Isn't life after all full of tragedy and ecstasy; with no clear idea of what may come next except the glimmer of hope?

Quite true: After all, real life is like that: one cannot expect justice.

Bethberry wrote:

quoting Tolkien:

This raises an important issue: if The Silm does not have Eu (no pun meant about Eru), does that mean either that Tolkien was wrong about fairy, or that The Silm is in fact not a fairy tale but something else? For instance, is it more fitting to describe it as myth rather than as fairy? Are the two terms interchangeable?

"LotR is a fairy-story, but one written for adults" Tolkien said in letter 181.
In my opinion the Silm is something different, as Bethberry here suggested above - more like a myth or an epic tale like "Beowulf".

Bethberry wrote:

We might, in fact, reach a better understanding of The Silm if we ask whether Tolkien's ideas about fairy were something he came to after the main body of his Legendarium was written, or if in the writing and reworking he came to understand something which his text initially did not demonstrate.

I think you're on the right track here! I feel this might be the answer to my nagging questions .