'Which is as Fate to all Things Else’

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by davem

But didn't the Numenorean assault on Valinor 'exceed what He willed'? Yes, he stepped in & stopped them - in a pretty extreme way: a way that suggests that he not only wanted to stop the invasion but also to punish the sinful Numenoreans as a people.

And what's to say that the Numenorean assualt was not a part of Eru's ultimate plan? If all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru, then he had already put into his plan that they would 'rebel'. Which means that it was also his plan to intervene and drown Numenor. A certain flood from the Bible is coming to mind.

[Aiwendil]

Gurthang wrote:

If all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru, then he had already put into his plan that they would 'rebel'.

This assumes that "all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru" - which seems, to me, to be quite unsupported by the text. Even setting aside the (strong) argument that a world without free will contradicts Tolkien's Christian ethos, it seems clear from the Ainulindale that Men are free. This is actually made even more evident in the first version, the Lost Tales "Music of the Ainur", and I see no reason to think that the underlying idea ever changed.

A certain flood from the Bible is coming to mind.

But, on anything like a traditional interpretation of Genesis, the flood was not part of God's original plan. God's original plan was for humans to live in the earthly paradise of Eden.

Davem wrote:

My argument (following Flieger) has been that Elvish freedom is restricted to the moral sphere.

This is one place in which Flieger's argument makes little sense to me. Flieger seems to take it for granted that Elves do not have free will - i.e. their actions are pre-determined. But Flieger clearly thinks that they have moral freedom, and she seems to allow them freedom with respect to their immediate actions (which she must do, because such immediate actions generally follow from one's internal/moral stance). But there are numerous cases in which an Elf's immediate, short-term actions have very clear and direct large-scale results. It seems too far a stretch to me to say that, had Feanor not urged departure at Tirion, the Noldor still would have returned to Middle-earth, or that had Maeglin not betrayed Gondolin it still would have fallen, or that had Thingol not sent Beren on his quest he still would have been slain in a quarrel with the Dwarves.

Flieger's entire argument here seems to be based on the "extra" freedom given to Men in the Ainulindale - from which she surmises that Men have free will and Elves do not. I do not think this is a trivial conclusion. It seems to me that Elves do have free will, moral and actual. There are other ways to interpret the additional freedom given to Men.

[Gurthang]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

This assumes that "all that Men do is already set in stone by Eru" - which seems, to me, to be quite unsupported by the text. Even setting aside the (strong) argument that a world without free will contradicts Tolkien's Christian ethos, it seems clear from the Ainulindale that Men are free. This is actually made even more evident in the first version, the Lost Tales "Music of the Ainur", and I see no reason to think that the underlying idea ever changed.

See my theory (yes, I am not convinced wholly of it yet) that I typed up in post #5.

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

But, on anything like a traditional interpretation of Genesis, the flood was not part of God's original plan. God's original plan was for humans to live in the earthly paradise of Eden.

I will only say that I disagree with you. I think that saying more would lead to a discussion that is altogether not allowed on the Downs'.

[davem]

Flieger's entire argument here seems to be based on the "extra" freedom given to Men in the Ainulindale - from which she surmises that Men have free will and Elves do not. I do not think this is a trivial conclusion. It seems to me that Elves do have free will, moral and actual. There are other ways to interpret the additional freedom given to Men.

My reading of Flieger is that she sees Elves having freedom of thought & the freedom to choose how they will do things, but not the freedom to choose what they will do. The problem is, Tolkien says the Music is as Fate to all but Men.

I suppose we could interpret that to mean that only Men are free from 'fate', while all other races have their fates set out in the Music. But maybe its less definite. When Tolkien says Men are not bound by the Music he is possibly talking about the whole race, rather than individuals. This would mean each individual (or at least certain individuals) has freedom of action as well as free will, but that, overall, Elves will follow the pattern set out in the Music.

Of course, Men do seem to have individual fates - Halbarad foretells his own death before entering the Paths of the Dead. But was that his unavoidable fate - ie, did he have no choice but to enter the Paths oif the Dead & fall on the Pelennor. Or was it that he could see that only if he took the Paths he would die. Could he foresee multiple futures/fates for himself (ie was he generaly foresighted) or only the consequences of that particular future which he had instigated by following Aragorn.

So, if Halbarad's end was already laid before him, & he was destined to die on the Pelenor, was Feanor's end equally fated? The fact of the Music being 'as fate' certainly implies that a great deal of what happens to Elves is fated. In the light of that Statement it would seem odd if the destiny of a Man is set while the destiny of an Elf is not.

The easy answer as regards Feanor is that he actually went against the Music & led the Noldor astray, & that none of them were fated to go into M-e. Of course, it seems they were meant to go, as that was necessary for the fall of Morgoth to be accomplished.

Now, in response to that final point, I'm sure someone will come up with the old chestnut about God/Eru being able to bring good out of evil, & that He merely used the Noldor's revolt to bring about the destruction of Morgoth.

But we're still stuck with the fact that the Music is 'as fate' to the Elves, & the question of how much freedom of action as well as of thought/will they have.

[Raynor]

I would say there is a great freedom in deciding how to do a certain thing, even if you are 'fated' to do it; the way you do it can bring about the exact opposite of a 'normal' result.

To give but a few examples of the freedom of the elves:

Originally Posted by Ainulindale, Silmarillion

Therefore when they beheld them, the more did they love them, being things other than themselves, strange and free, wherein they saw the mind of Iluvatar reflected anew, and learned yet a little more of his wisdom, which otherwise had been hidden even from the Ainur.
Now the Children of Iluvatar are Elves and Men, the Firstborn and the Followers

No difference between Men and Elves; and an example to which I reffered previously:

Originally Posted by Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth

They were given a choice [to remain houseless or not], because Eru did not allow their free will to be taken away. Similarly the houseless fear were summoned, not brought, to Mandos

Moreover, considering that in letter #153 Tolkien describes them as having "certain freedoms and powers we should like to have" so I would conclude that the only freedom Man have exclusively is the leaving of the world, and that the only fate the elves have to obey is to leave Middle-Earth (due to the decay of their bodies, resulting from the fire of their spirit and the marring of Melkor). Also in the Silmarillion, Ulmo argues that elves should be left to walk freely in Middle-Earth and Melkor instills in them the desire to rule freely their own realms.

[Aiwendil]

Davem wrote:

My reading of Flieger is that she sees Elves having freedom of thought & the freedom to choose how they will do things, but not the freedom to choose what they will do. The problem is, Tolkien says the Music is as Fate to all but Men.

I do think that Flieger's view is an interesting and a valid one; I merely think that she overstates the case for it. There are problems with it, I think - for example, as I said before, it's not at all clear that what Elves will do is fixed irrespective of how they do and think things.

Clearly, Elves (even in Flieger's view) have freedom to choose what they will do immediately, for one's immediate actions have moral value. Also, it's worth noting that even such things as speech are, fundamentally, actions. Flieger's point, then, rests on the assumption that, whatever an Elf's immediate thoughts and actions might be, fate will contrive it that things turn out the same. Again, I don't see how this can possibly be so when one examines a few examples. I noted above Feanor's speech at Tirion, Maeglin's treachery, and Thingol's request for a Silmaril as examples of choices clearly laden with moral value (and therefore, even in Flieger's view, taken freely) that nonetheless have non-trivial consequences. It's hard to see how those large-scale consequences would be the same regardless of the choices of those involved.

I think there are other ways to interpret Tolkien's statement that the Music is as fate to all but Men. My own view is that, in Tolkien's world, fate and free will are not necessarily mutually exclusive. It seems to me that Tolkien, in setting up both fate and free will as real features of his Legendarium, was quite probably reflecting what he saw as a real and strange feature of our world.

In any case, there are, as you note, several examples of 'fate' applied to Men in the Legendarium. Though some might be dismissed as prophecy rather than fate (a distinction that must be made in some cases), others cannot be. The prime example is Morgoth's curse in "The Children of Hurin".

[davem]

Another problem, perhaps, is that Ainulindale is the work of the loremaster Rumil, which begs the question of whether the idea of only Men being free of the constraints of the Music has its origins in the teachings of the Valar or in Elvish belief.

What occurred to me on reading your post is the question of when we are dealing with fate & when we are dealing with a self-fulfilling prophecy. In the case of Turin I can't help thinking it is the latter, but with Halbarad I'm not so sure.