“Not all those who wander are lost.”

[Anguirel]

I'm most intrigued by Boromir's point about lost wanderers, the negative side of wandering, if you like. The Silmarillion is full of such travels.

At first, thinking of Turin, I wondered if forced wandering-Turin's travels to Doriath and Nargothrond, for instance-born out of desperation, tended to have baneful effects. However, I dismissed this. The forced wanderers Beren and Tuor are both successful, while the voluntary wanderer(ess) Aredhel is doomed.

My next formula involved shoehorning in this thread's thesis that mortals adapt more easily to wandering than the Firstborn. I explained Turin by his status as Adanedhel-is he, in terms of outlook, an Elf when it comes to wandering? Certainly, at various critical moments it is stubbornness and stasis that does him harm.

The Elves start by wandering all the way from Cuivenien-but a schism is caused by this and a Vala is needed to spur them on. Thingol's wanderings end in Melian's arms. The returned Noldor are the first completely voluntary wanderers we've seen, and yet, ultimately, they are all lost. Their delight in the new land fades in Morgoth's presence. They hide themselves in fixed positions, and few emerge from them; most are caught in their realm's fall.

During this fixed period, they attempt to settle and fix Men, and are only partially successful. Driven by knowledge of death, and perhaps by lack of rest in Arda, the wanderings of this race will be momentous.

After the Nirnaeth, the Sons of Feanor are specifically described as wandering in Ossiriand. In fact, all the way through Feanor's line has been an exception to the Elven psychosis. Feanor yearned for change-hence he was "unfriend" to Galadriel. He provoked the greatest stravaige in history, over the sea or Helcaraxe. Celegorm and Curufin-the sons superficially most like him-wandered out of necessity, but used this for political and recreational ends (the pursuit of wolves/Luthien, the usurping of Nargothrond...) At last all seven were without their homes, also without their ties, the one child left behind. They wandered constantly, they longed for change, they strove for it, but they are lost all the same.

Of course, the most clear lost wanderers are Maglor and Daeron (perhaps sharing that doubtful honour with Alatar and Pallando). "The Noldolante, that Maglor wrote ere he was lost..."

[davem]

It seems there are different reasons for wandering. Men are wanderers in part because they have been destined by Eru nver to be satisfied within the circles of the world & therefore they will always be looking for something else, always wondering what's over the next horizon, about what tomorrow will bring. This brings as much hope as despair, but it also makes dissatisfaction an inescapable part of human nature.

Elves do not wander for the same reason, because they belong within the circles of the world - they may experience deep unhappiness with what happens in the world, with the marring of Arda, but they dream of Arda Unmarred, not of a place beyond Arda. Or at least that was the original situation for them. Once the world was changed & the Blessed Realms removed from the physical Arda their position would have become more complex.

What both Men & Elves had in common was that they were exiles & their wanderings came ultimately from that feeling of being 'displaced', of being far from home.

But at root none of the inhabitants of Middle earth feel that they are where they ought to be. Elves are driven by the feeling they belong in Aman, Men by the feeling that they belong somewhere else entirely.

I think this sense of being exiled runs rght through the Legendarium & perhaps its what we feel when we read LotR. Why are we drawn to Middle-earth? What does that place mean to us, what does it 'stand for'? Why, in some ways, does it actually feel more 'home like' to so many of us?

Yet, if the situation of the Elves is complicated after the re-sahping of the World, it becomes increasingly so for Men due to the existence of the Elves. Men envy the Elves their immortality within Arda. Their innate sense of dissatisfaction, their inability to rest within the Circles of the World, comes increasingly to conflict with their fear of death & their desire to live in Middle-earth forever & have dominion over it. Men are 'torn in two' & in a way we see this conflict in Sam - he is drawn to stay with Frodo - or to go West with him (ie he is drawn to 'spiritual' things) - & to remain in the everyday world with Rosie & his children. It sems that Sam's solution is to live in the world fully, to live out his 'human' existence but to retain his hope that one day, when his worldly tasks are done, he will be able to move on.

[Aiwendil]

Some who wander are lost

Edit: Somehow I missed Anguirel's post above, which brings up some of the same points as mine. Just to give credit where it's due.

I don't know how relevant this is to the points under discussion, but when I think of wandering in Middle-earth there are some Silmarillion characters that spring immediately to mind.

First of all, there are Daeron and Maglor. It's interesting that these two, the greatest musicians of Arda, share such similar fates. Daeron leaves Doriath seeking Luthien (after she escaped from her tree house) and wanders "upon strange paths" far into the east and out of the story, making laments for Luthien. Maglor casts his Silmaril into the sea because it burns his hand; thereafter he wanders the shores of Middle-earth lamenting the loss of the Silmaril. Here we have two wanderers who are very much lost; moreover, each wanders precisely because he has lost the thing most precious to him. Actually, one could take the parallel even further - each lost their valued thing through their own actions. In the "Lay of Leithien" it tells that Daeron twice betrays Luthien to Thingol, but the third time, when he learns of her plan to escape, he remains silent. It was, then, within his power to prevent Luthien's (temporary) loss. Similarly, it is through the actions of Maglor and his brothers that he loses the purity required to touch a Silmaril; and of course, it is he himself who casts it away in the literal sense.

These are two very evocative figures in my opinion; their wandering is inextricably tied to loss - both to the loss of things and to becoming lost. They survive into a time that is not their own, seeking things that are gone forever (or at least until the end of the world). It seems to me that they are quintessential representations of the overwhelming sense of nostalgia that pervades the Silmarillion.

Very different from those two, but very different also from the heroic wanderers of LotR, is the post-captivity Hurin. I admit that he comes to mind largely because of the title of the HoMe text "The Wanderings of Hurin" - but it's Tolkien's title, so it may be considered significant. Hurin is a powerful figure here. He is not lost like Maglor and Daeron; on the contrary, his wandering is quite purposeful. He is a great man who has become grim and embittered by his long imprisonment and by the misfortunes of his family; he brings the shadow of Morgoth with him wherever he goes. In a way, he seems to be the negative image of a character like Gandalf; both "wander" quite deliberately, and with a singular, hardened purpose - but of course Gandalf brings aid to those he visits while Hurin brings death and destruction.

The last character from the Silmarillion that comes to mind as a quintessential wanderer is Earendil. Earendil is a fairly unusual character. He is one of only a few unambiguously heroic characters (the others that come to mind are Beren and Tuor). He is also perhaps the only character in the Silmarillion who achieves a real, unambiguous victory. Nonetheless, he is a wanderer in something of a similar sense to Maglor and Daeron. Actually, Earendil's wanderings ought to be divided into two separate cases. First of all, there are his sea-voyages seeking Aman. Like Daeron and Maglor, he is seeking something that was (in a sense) lost to the Elves and Men of Middle-earth. Also, tied up in this quest, is his desire to find his parents again - a desire that bears a striking resemblance to Daeron's search for Luthien. Of course, unlike Maglor and Daeron, Earendil is succesful in his quest (i.e. in his quest to reach Valinor; he does not find Tuor and Idril). But there follows for Earendil a second period of wandering, one that (like Maglor's and Daeron's) is open-ended; he wanders the sky in Vingilot until the end of the world. But (again quite unlike Maglor and Daeron) this is not really presented as an unhappy fate. He is not seeking something that can never be found; he is in fact not even sundered from Elwing, who flies to meet him when he draws near to Arda. Indeed, his celestial wandering is a sign of great hope to those in Middle-earth.

I don't really know what point is to be drawn from these four cases, which present the theme of wandering in three very different ways. But I think that, particularly in a topic such as this, to examine only LotR is to leave aside several major pieces of Tolkien's thought.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Some excellent replies here - I'm glad there's a renewed interest in this topic!

I think the latest posts show that the title is not setting up an absolute, general rule:

Not all those who wander are lost. (my emphasis)

There are lost wanderers, as Anguirel and Aiwendil's posts show - interestingly, these examples are taken from the Sil, which is quite different from LotR in many ways. The element of loss is certainly more pervasive there.

There's no need to apologize for your post, Perky - you bring up a thought that could lead to an interesting debate. Are all who do not wander static? Is Bombadil right to stay within the small realm he has chosen for himself? Is his wandering within those narrow boundaries enough to keep him flexible? Should we list him with Radagast as one who does a little, but too little, for the good cause in Middle-earth? Could he have helped more effectively if he had ventured out of the Old Forest, away from Goldberry - or was he doing the right thing for a married man, and only those who choose to have no family are free to wander?

davem brings up the concept of exile in connection with wandering; should that be counted with the enforced journeying, as even one who voluntarily goes into exile has a reason beyond his own control?

Hmmmm, I'm finding more questions than answers... But then, maybe questions are the wandering of the mind!

[Kath]

I haven't read through this properly yet and so this will be short as it is just to pick up on something I noticed.

Esty originally said:

Those who change from fixed to wanderers: Théoden, Treebeard, …

I have to say that I disagree that Éowyn went from being fixed to being a wanderer. If anything to me it is the other way around. She wasn't fixed to begin with, at least in spirit if not physical movement. She was always looking outside her borders and limitations, trying to be equal to Éomer and do the things he could. Physically I would sincerely doubt that she sat inside Meduseld day after day learning how to make tapestries or whatever. We know that she knew how to fight and ride. With a horse she would have had the freedom to ride over Rohan, though possibly with various guards in tow. She can't have been a static spirit, she was too wild. Then comes the War and Aragorn, and she is able to wander further afield.

But then she is injured and she meets Faramir and her whole outlook on life seems to change, and only then does she 'settle down' and accept that you can stay still in life without it being a bad thing and become a fixed person. 'Not all those who wander are lost' is the title but it seems that whilst Éowyn she is lost, and only once she becomes fixed does she 'find herself'.

That's just my take on it, sorry if it's been said before.

[Angry Hill Troll]

Good thread topic, Esty!

I was about to start a thread on isolationism--namely, the tendency of civilizations in Tolkien's books to want to shut themselves off from the outside world and its problems. But then I realized that the topic is rather closely related to this one. Well, maybe not exactly, since it's the difference between an individual being a homebody, and an entire society wanting to isolate itself.

Examples:
Valinor (after Melkor and the Noldor leave) In HoME X, Tolkien says that

The lifting up of the range of the Pélori to a great height. It is possible to view this as, if not an actually bad action, at least as a mistaken one.

Nargothrond -- eventually gets overrun

Gondolin -- eventually gets overrun

Doriath -- eventually gets destroyed

Moria (isolated after the fall of Eregion) --eventually gets destroyed

The Shire -- gets saved, but suffers some very bad times at the hands of Saruman

Lórien -- survives Sauron's attack, but cannot continue in suspended animation once the Three Rings have lost their power.

Imladris -- similar to Lórien

(and various other examples)

Tolkien's view seems to be that all attempts to create a haven safe from the outside world's troubles are at best temporary, and often lead to very bad ends. What he seems to be saying (IMO) is that it is better to engage the outside world and all its problems, however bad they may seem.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Angry Hill Troll

I was about to start a thread on isolationism--namely, the tendency of civilizations in Tolkien's books to want to shut themselves off from the outside world and its problems. But then I realized that the topic is rather closely related to this one. Well, maybe not exactly, since it's the difference between an individual being a homebody, and an entire society wanting to isolate itself.

I think this is relevant, as it is individuals who make up a society after all. It may be a collective wish to be isolated or it may be the wish of their leaders; either way, there are many isolationist societies in Middle-earth. Why are they this way though? Is it through fear that they shut themselves off? Or is it to protect their power?

Looking at that list of different societies which are either shut off to, or not cooperative with, the outside world, it's interesting how many of these are places held by and for the side of 'good'. Where is Mordor? Well, it is a society which is not isolated; it is indeed closed off to its enemies, but it works closely with those other cultures which it has subsumed such as Harad and Umbar. Mordor counts amongst its hosts many soldiers and warriors of many different nations; these are well travelled minions, not restricted by staying at home. They wander more than most. I wonder what that means?