The Mystery of Light

[Rimbaud]

Lal - I think I read this scene in a different fashion to you. For me, the conversation about colours is a superficial symbolism, the whole of the import hinging actually on the aphorism "and he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom".

This is not so much about white being 'good' and other colours being 'lesser', although that is the surface meaning - and little do you need telling why it would be read so. Neither do I think this is a comment on the appliance of science, which through the very deconstruction of perceived ideas, 'breaks things to see how they work'. Rather, I think this is about changing what is pure to suit your own ends, and thusly making that which was pure impure in turn.

That is to say: Saruman believes that the constituent parts of colour, of light itself, were greater than the whole. However, Gandalf argues that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in creation.

[Aiwendil]

I think that Rimbaud is correct; the discussion of light here is entirely metaphoric. However, the analogy with science is not wholly out of place. Science itself is not evil. But Gandalf tells us exactly how Saruman left the path of wisdom: he broke something to find out what it was. Gandalf's injunction can hardly be applied to Newton, whose experiment was quite innocent. But to actually break something, to destroy it, in order to learn about it - to trade the thing itself for knowledge of the thing - that is folly. The pursuit of knowledge is not at fault, but the pursuit of knowledge at the expense of the world is.

[Lalwendë]

There's plenty of food for thought already here, excellent!

Now, if the use of the breaking of light into many colours is indeed metaphorical, then why did Tolkien choose this metaphor? Did he himself disagree with what Newton did? Did he see it as wrong in some way? I'm asking these questions from the angle that Tolkien was a Catholic, and clearly Light as a concept would have been important to him. Throughout his work I keep coming across Light as a concept of Divinity or purity.

What is troubling me is that according to Newton, white light is not pure, it is the sum of the coloured light. And in effect, Newton did break the light to discover its properties. Yet Tolkien uses white Light as a symbol of purity and says that Light should not be broken. And the fact that he also used this metaphor in Mythopoeia would suggest it is a scientific theory he was well aware of.

[drigel]

i see the interesting angle as:

Saurman starts (and was sent forth originally) as white. He "constructs" the prism that breaks his white to many colors. Its still starts white, but to the physical world it has been broken up in to different colors. I wonder if there is a metaphysical symbol here as well.

[davem]

I think the best starting point is Flieger's Splintered Light. the Light begins as a single pure source of life & holiness - the Secret Fire. It appears first in Arda in the Lamps which Melkor breaks. Its next appearance is in the Trees, but there it is not the pure, single, unwavering light of the Lamps, it is now twofold, Gold & Silver & more imporatantly it fluctuates. When the Trees are killed, it survives in threefold form, in the Silmarils, & in the Sun & Moon. So, as Flieger points out, we have an increasing fragmentation, a splintering, of the Light.

Language comes into the equation also - the High Elves, the Calaquendi (lit Cal = Light & Quendi = speakers) speak the langauge of Light, while the Moriquendi speak the language of the Darkness. On the Noldor's return to Middle earth Thingol forbids the use of Quenya & demands that the exiles speak Sindarin. So, the splintering & subsequent lessening of the Light brings about a kind of linguistic devolution. There's a movement from the pure Light towards the darkness due to this fragmentation, & an equal linguistic movement from Quenya to the Black Speech, a language in which all 'light' & beauty is absent.

I think the Breaking of the White Light is to be understood in theological rather than scientific terms.

My own feeling is that the argument between Gandalf & Saruman is the argument between theology & science. Saruman is a 'scientist' & thinks of light as a physical phenomenon, a thing which can be broken up into its constituent elements, while Gandalf is a 'theologian' & thinks of Light not as photons but as the physical manifestation of the Secret Fire, the Holy Spirit of Eru. In other words Gandalf has retained his 'spiritual vision' - he remembers the Music - while Saruman has become lost in a materialistic worldview. In short, there is light & there is Light. Saruman's breaking of the white light is wrong in Gandalf's eyes because Saruman is following the path of Melkor, & exacerbating the shattering of Arda which Melkor began.

Everything is becoming 'dark'. Its interesting that Gandalf claims to be a servant of the Secret Fire, while Saruman is clearly attempting to become its master. He is attempting to manipulate it to serve his own ends. Gandalf is attempting to get Saruman to understand his 'sin', because Saruman (he hopes, I suppose) doesn't actually understand what he is really doing. The Light is Holy in Middle earth, because it is the Light of God. IF we could run the story of Middle earth backwards we'd see a movement towards greater & greater Light, culminating ultimately in Eru Himself. What we actually see is a movement away from the Light, through increasing fragmentation, towards darkness - not simply an absence of Light, but its opposite, its negation, symbolised in creatures like the Nazgul - & set forth in the confrontation between them, nine fragments of 'nothingness' & the Light symbolised by Glorfindel who drives them back with a combination of the Light of Aman in his face & the Light's physical manifestation - fire. There is no symbolic difference between mundane fire & the Secret Fire in this sense - & that's why the Nazgul fear fire - in Middle earth the most mundane things can be 'holy' or unholy - & this is what Saruman has either forgotten or is denying.

[Boromir88]

I like your comparison to the Scientist and Theologian, davem.

I think if we look more at the Scientist perspective of Saruman. What do scientists do? They try to analyze, study, interpret, certain data, and come up with a conlcusion. Come up with an "answer." Light is generally a symbol of "good," opposed to darkness. Looking at the scientifical side, Saruman breaks this "white light," trying to come up with an "answer," trying to find it's secrets, and being Saruman probably trying to find a way to dominate over the "white."

I also, view Saruman's "many colors" as a symbol that he has broken away from the "light." He isn't "white" anymore, he's broken away from the "white/light," and what happens when you do that, the variation of colors. Saruman is no longer "white," anymore, he broke away from it, and now is left with a mass of different colors, they aren't combined anymore to create "white," they are all seperate. I view it as symbolizing that Saruman is no longer pure, he is what "white/purity" is shattered, a bunch of colors.

Edit: Excellent thread topic Lalwende.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Davem

I was going to give you rep for that post because it is so beautifully expressed and so very true but unfortunately I couldn't.

Lalwendë - I do think this is how the confrontation between Gandalf and Saruman should be read and understood. Tolkien was speaking in a theological or even an historical sense rather than a strictly scientific or physical one. The breaking of the White Light refers to the whole sequence of events beginning with the creation and manifestation of the Secret Fire and its gradual marring and splintering down to the Third Age when the only physical fragment left to Arda was that which lay within the Phial of Galadriel. Saruman is just one of a long line of destroyers who would seek to hide the Light--in this case, manifested by his white robes-- masking it with other, less important things for his own selfish reasons.

I truly don't believe that JRRT was questioning scientific exploration in any real sense. There is too much evidence in the Legendarium that says otherwise. The Elves especially cherished the physical world of Arda and many of them spent long years trying to understand and even capture the mysteries that underlay that physical world. They didn't give the name "science" to their activities. Instead, they called these woodlore or art or craftsmenship, which others often interpreted as "magic". This strange and wondrous knowledge led the Noldor to craft objects like the Palantari that were enormously beneficial to those seeking to uphold the good. Today, we would probably call this branch of knowledge "science".

What Tolkien objected to was not science but its abuse, especially the prostration of technology for purposes of war. With the single exception of the ruling ring, none of the objects created by Elves was inherently evil from the beginning. (In many other fantasy worlds, this is not true.) The problem came only with the use to which these objects were put. And Davem (and Flieger) have identified what goes to the core of this dilemma, at least according to Tolkien. Without an understanding of our real place in the world we will fall into error and everything we touch--science, human feelings, even natural desires to build a community or a family--will be tainted. We are servants like Gandalf. If we seek mastery like Saruman desiring a "higher" place than that due to us, we will twist science and erect an Isengard.

Thus, the Silmarils become a curse to those who argue over them and seek mastery of the world instead of the beauteous reflection of creation that they are intended to be. Yet, even here, the reader is left with hope. In the end we remember not the Silmarillion with its long recital of tragic events but the eucatastrophe of the Third Age: the fact that a tiny splinter of the Silmarils nestled within the Phial of Galadriel becomes a beacon to two Hobbits whose initial motivation was to serve. And it is this tiny spark that provides the glimmer of light in Frodo's eyes that Sam so clearly recognizes.

The scene between Gandalf and Saruman is just one skirmish in a battle that will go on till the end of Arda. As Tolkien saw it, it was a long defeat marred by tiny, temporary triumphs. At the end of time, however, the White Light that Eru created would finally be restored:

This Legendarium ends with a vision of the end of the world, its breaking and remaking, and the recovery of the Silmarilli and the "light before the Sun"-- after a final battle..... Letter 131

[Lalwendë]

What I am a little afraid of is that Tolkien might have isolated Light as a metaphor because he disapproved of Newton’s work. This bothers me as I see theoretical science and metaphysics as very close, and often interlinked, areas of thought. The misapplication of theoretical science leads to misapplication of technology, and misapplication of metaphysics leads to dogma. In my opinion… What Child says is very much what I think, that science (or rather, technology, the practical application of science) cannot be allowed to stand alone:

Without an understanding of our real place in the world we will fall into error and everything we touch--science, human feelings, even natural desires to build a community or a family--will be tainted.

What was Saruman doing that he somehow managed to break the light? Was this something to do with the misapplication of the Palantir? And what might he have hoped to have achieved by breaking light? One theory of quantum physics is that light and time are related; if we look at the stars, we are looking at the past, hence, if we could apply the uses of light in relation to time, we may be able to see the past. Was Saruman experimenting with Light in order to see into the past and maybe find the Ring? Or am I, as I suspect, trying to read into his motives too much? I like to think that there are many tales waiting to be told of Saruman.

Onto the theological uses of Light by Tolkien in his work... Davem has expressed this splendidly. It had occurred to me that Light was used by Tolkien to express Divinity in his world (an idea originating a long time ago when I was thinking of the Silmarils) and I'm pleased to see agreement on this. It is not surprising he used this powerful metaphor, given his Christianity, and the fact that Light is a common symbol of ‘good’. I can see that, looked at in this way, Saruman, rather than breaking the Light for scientific purposes, is instead breaking it for diabolical purposes. One thought is that maybe in Saruman breaking the Light, he was being shown to be delving too deeply into the nature of Divinity, and this could be a lesson that faith is easily broken once the person breaks it up to see how - and, more importantly - why it works. The similarity of this metaphor to the Newton experiment still bothers me, though I might have to accept that Tolkien was not intending to criticise Newton’s actions!

I’m sorely tempted now to consider the darkness which opposes the Light, but I shall stop awhile before the men in white coats come for me.

[Lhunardawen]

What an enlightening discussion!

As I was reading this thread, I remembered the few things I have learned from my Physics class these past few weeks. We have been discussing electomagnetic waves (of which the visible light is one), and I was wondering how we got to this lesson when we were previously studying magnetism, and before it, electricity. It took me a long time to realize that the word electromagnetic has its roots from electricity and magnetism! Yes, I am that stupid.

Anyways, in this discussion insights related to LotR sprung up from the seemingly very irrelevant nature of light. I am now wondering if the things I mentioned above could be interpreted in the same way. Electricity and magnetism are two separate and very different entities, yet somehow together they give way to light(for one). Does this go to say that even things we never expect to give way to good does so in the end, the way Gollum did? Or am I just overanalyzing things?

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

What I am a little afraid of is that Tolkien might have isolated Light as a metaphor because he disapproved of Newton’s work. .... What was Saruman doing that he somehow managed to break the light?

I don't think that was Gandalf's emphasis.

White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten; and the white light can be broken."

'"In which case it is no longer white," said I.

I think what Gandalf is referring to as broken is the whiteness, not the light.

Saruman's color was white, and he was the head of his order. He was the top of the istari. Once he began dabbling, and wore "no longer White", or in his eyes "more than white", then he was no longer Saruman The White-- head of the order. His Whiteness was broken, like the overwriiten page, the dyed cloth, the white light that had been scattered. In Gandalf's eyes, Saruman's destruction of his own Whiteness- his own place in the order-- was foolish. And time and events prove it so.

(Speculative aside: perhaps that is why he went willingly into Moria despite Aragorn's dire warnings-- he knew or guessed that he was next in line?)

Not long thereafter, Gandalf is sent back as Gandalf The White-- Saruman's successor. Gandalf The White values what an Istar is supposed to value, and is not looking for world domination. He accomplishes his mission, and sails west. Saruman Of Many Colors is killed and blows away on the wind.

Was Saruman experimenting with Light in order to see into the past and maybe find the Ring? Or am I, as I suspect, trying to read into his motives too much?

Yes, I think so...

One thought is that maybe in Saruman breaking the Light, he was being shown to be delving too deeply into the nature of Divinity

I think he is turning away from divinity. He knew that he was sent to fight Sauron, and instead he's plotting to become the Next Sauron. Not his destiny, not his job description, not his marching orders... not not not! This is what Gandalf is protesting most deeply of all-- that Saruman has left the path of wisdom, and his shimmery clothes are just the superficial sign of it. The breaking, in contrast, goes right through the heart of everything that Saruman was designed and called to be-- everything that he turns away from and rejects.

Gandalf says "I am Saruman-- or rather Saruman as he should have been." Hence-- Gandalf The White.

I shall stop awhile before the men in white coats come for me.

Just don't dye the white coat into many colors in defiance of Eru and the Valar...