The Gift of Speech

[Mithalwen]

Not sure if this is a good moment to explain my rationality since I have been demented most of the day. I am not saying that a talking sword is impossible but I still think that given the state of Turin's mind the aural hallucination is not a peverse reading. It is not to be sure an issue that costs me any sleep. I don't think it devalues tolkien's imagination. I don't actually ever think of Tolkien's work as Fantasy. To me it is a fictional reality. And particularly in the Silmarillion the characters have a psychological depth which is sometimes lacking in the plot driven LOTR and hobbit. The events of the Silmarillion are so often character driven and so the mind set of the characters cannot be disregarded.

To clarify my differentiation of the three main works I would say that it is not that I regard the LOTR as being more true or accurate per se but say if LOTR is the Red Book of Westmarch it is presented as a book written and collated as very recent history, The Silmarillion would be Bilbo's translations from the Elvish and the Hobbit is the tale of Bilbo's adventures, andwe know that he economised with the truth about them..... if we have to accept them as "fact" in the same way as the LOTR then it means that most Elves of Rivendell metamorphasised in fifty years from being insanely camp and inane beings tralalalallying in their valley to being founts of nobility and wisdom (though not entirely uncamp). As for "translations" - well if only Elrond remains even at RIvendell who knows all the old lore correctly, must we take Bilbo's versions as Gospel? Although that is perhaps not the best choice of phrase since I don't take every word of the Bible as "gospell" and it didn't stop me being a Christian for many years - my lapse was entirely unrelated to cynicism about miracles.

I don't think it denigrates the immensity of Tolkien's creation to apply judgments about documentary sources that I would apply in the "real" world - in fact maybe it shows its strength.

[mark12_30]

The Silmarillion would be Bilbo's translations from the Elvish and the Hobbit is the tale of Bilbo's adventures, andwe know that he economised with the truth about them..... if we have to accept them as "fact" in the same way as the LOTR then it means that most Elves of Rivendell metamorphasised in fifty years from being insanely camp and inane beings tralalalallying in their valley to being founts of nobility and wisdom (though not entirely uncamp). As for "translations" - well if only Elrond remains even at RIvendell who knows all the old lore correctly,

Regarding tralalalallying: I do not think that the average elf was too stuck up for silliness. I think they were as changeable in their emotions as other folk; profound and merry, serious and silly. Recall Sam's opinion of Galadriel: "But I wish I could make a song about her. Beautiful she is, sir! Lovely! Sometimes like a great tree in flower, sometimes like a white daffadowndilly, small and slender like. Hard as di’monds, soft as moonlight. Warm as sunlight, cold as frost in the stars. Proud and far-off as a snow-mountain, and as merry as any lass I ever saw with daisies in her hair in springtime."

LOTR is written by Frodo back in the Shire, and I'm not surprised he remembered the uber-serious side of the elves, since he knew he'd be sailing west. Bilbo was a more relaxed sort, who enjoyed a good laugh. Frodo wrote about the Hall of Fire and songs to Elbereth; Bilbo wrote about dancing by the riverside on Midsummer's Eve.

Fordim Hedgethistle can be, and often is, quite profound. But he's not above throwing a gauntlet and being downright silly in the process. If he were unable to take himself lightly on occasion, I would be less likely to take him seriously the rest of the time.

Professor Tolkien could jest with his children, philosophize with other professors, drink beer while studying myths, and publish satires on old nursery rhymes. Judging by his own letters, he tried hard not to take himself too seriously. He wrote stories about the creation of the world, and he wrote stories about toy dogs lost at the beach. THe same guy that wrote The Lay of Leithan wrote Bombadil goes Boating.

Why are we so sure that Elrond wouldn't have joined in a round of Tralalalally? I'm not. I think he would have enjoyed it, taking a break from all the weightier matters.

Translations: "if only Elrond remains even at RIvendell who knows all the old lore correctly"-- where do you find this? Glorfindel doesn't count? And with all the travel Arwen does between Rivendell and Lorien, wouldn't she get the stories straight? Her grandmother knew them all, I'm sure.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Gurthang doesn't talk. Turin, or rather Tolkien through Turin, is projecting his other, conflicting personal torments: In his despair he justifies his imminent act (of suicide) by focusing on all the ill-things that he had done with ihis sword i.e. accidently killing Beleg, Brandir etc etc. (Turin)

But as Thingol turned the hilt of Anglachel toward Beleg, Melian looked at the blade; and she said: "There is malice in this sword. The dark heart of the smith still dwells in it. It will not love the hand it serves, neither will it abide with you long."

TS 21

I believe it may have spoken, but not in the way normal people understand "speaking". Near the end of the Third Age the Ring may have spoken to Sam (see link above), although I think it was actually Frodo's voice being used by the Ring. But the Ring, an inanimate object, managed to project its thoughts.

Sure, Gurthang/Anglachel might not be as powerful as the One, but it still has a will. The hate of its maker perhaps flowed to it. Perhaps it even influenced Túrin to cause the downfall of Nargothrond (pure speculation).

If it could do that, surely projecting a "Yes, I will kill you" thought to someone is a piece of cake.

Besides, if Tolkien was just using the sword as an object for Túrin to "blame", why would he make Melian see the innate malice of the sword? Doesn't that add a loose thread to Vairë's (history's) otherwise smooth tapestry?

(NOTE: I begin to see an echo of the "Do Balrogs have wings?" debate. )

[Kuruharan]

Besides, if Tolkien was just using the sword as an object for Túrin to "blame", why would he make Melian see the innate malice of the sword?

Perhaps, since she had some degree of foresight, she was giving a sort of prophetic warning of his fate?

(You know how it is a requirement of the Prophet's Guild to speak about something by talking about something else entirely.)

[Lush]

Also, you have to remember the symbolic nature of swords, the way the often serve as an extension of their owner's character, personality, or, um, manhood...

Tee hee.

Seriously though, men and their swords have complicated relationships that can easily justify all sorts of speeches and conversations.

[the phantom]

if only Elrond remains even at RIvendell who knows all the old lore correctly

where do you find this? Glorfindel doesn't count? And with all the travel Arwen does between Rivendell and Lorien, wouldn't she get the stories straight? Her grandmother knew them all, I'm sure.

Glor, Arwen, and Galadriel knew everything Elrond did?

Wrong.

There were most definitely things that only Elrond knew or remembered accurately. From FOTR, The Council of Elrond-

Then all listened while Elrond in his clear voice spoke of Sauron and the Rings of Power, and their forging in the Second Age of the world long ago. A part of this tale was known to some there, but the full tale to none...

Glorfindel and Erestor were present and they didn't know. Hey, even Gandalf was there and he didn't know the full tale.

Then there's this from FOTR, A Knife In the Dark-

'I will tell you the tale of Tinuviel,' said Strider, 'in brief- for it is a long tale of which the end is not known; and there are none now, except Elrond, that remember it aright as it was told of old.'

And also, from appendix A-

When the kingdom ended the Dunedain passed into the shadows and became a secret and wandering people, and their deeds and labours were seldom sung or recorded. Little now is remembered of them since Elrond departed.

[mark12_30]

The point being referred to was not The Tale of the Ring-- for one thing, Galadriel wasn't in the battle of the Last Alliance, and Elrond was, so of course there would be eyewitness things that no-one but he would know, and possibly also he would not have revealed until the tactical situation made it neccessary.

Also regarding the Dunedain-- I can easily believe that there were sme things that only Elrond knew about them as well.

However, those are not the tales that are in question when we are referring to The Silmarillion, which (as we have it) is Translations From the Elvish by B. Baggins. The implication above was that only Elrond knew the stories contained in the Silmarillion, and by the time that Bilbo wrote them down, they were fraught with error syuch as Turin's talking sword.

However, this is illogical. Bilbo presented Frodo with his three-volume set as Frodo departed Rivendell just after the Ring was destroyed. Elrond was still at Rivendell. So was Glorfindel. So were many other elves. The tales were well-known: Valaquenta, Ainulindale; Beren & Luthien, Turin Turmambar, Alkallabeth. The implication there is that Bilbo wrote his translations while there were plenty of folk around him to check his accuracy. Chalking Turin's talking sword up to Bilbo's wild imagination is taking Bilbo's scholarship in to serious question-- why would he invent such a thing when he knew his volumes would be around for quite a while? And why would Bilbo assume that after he gave the books to Frodo, no-one familiar with the original tales would have access to them? On the contrary, Sam had contact with Aragorn and Arwen long after Frodo and Bilbo had departed.

Again, I am not saying that everyone else knew everything that Elrond knew. But in terms of the five tales listed above, I would be astonished if Elrond was the only person that knew the tale well enough to pass it on to Bilbo. I would also be astonished if Bilbo's three-volume set went unread by any knowledgable elf thereafter.