Immortality and the sons of Elrond

[William Cloud Hicklin]

However, whilst mortals could never normally aspire to immortality, the Elven-kind could renounce immortality (example : Luthien)

But Luthien was a very, very special case, a unique case: one where Mandos and Manwe made an exception to 'the Rules' only with Eru's express permission.

[Mithadan]

Mouth of Sauron's reference to Elrond's children having "the life of the Eldar" was a statement made by Arwen herself quoted in the 'Tale of Aragorn and Arwen'. It is interesting that Arwen should use such unqualified language.

In 'Many Partings', Arwen tells Frodo "mine is the choice of Luthien, and as she so have I chosen, both the sweet and the bitter." This choice was apparently made in Caras Galadhon even before she and Aragorn were wed. Appendix A discusses Elrong learning "the choice of his daughter" shortly after Aragorn and Arwen plight their troth. Then as Aragorn speaks to Arwen as he lays in Rath Dinen, she reiterates "that choice is long over."

These quotes suggest that her unique circumstances, her love for a Man at an important juncture in time, somehow allowed her to make the Choice of Luthien, i.e. she was an Elf, by birth not by choice, who was allowed to live the life of a Man. This is consonant with the language from 'Akallabeth' I quote above and my interpretation of that language (which is logical and consistent).

Where there is conflict is the language used by Elrond, speaking to Aragorn years before Caras Galadhon. There Elrond says, as Galin mentions, 'That so long as I abide here, she shall live with the youth of the Eldar (...) And when I depart, she shall go with me, if she so chooses.' This implies Arwen has a choice in the matter independent of her then non-existent love for Aragorn (this might be important, these words are spoken only days after they first met and years before they fell in love).

Can the language be reconciled? Should we reject the statement in 'Akallabeth' because it was published posthumously? Should we discount the quotes in the 'Tale of Aragorn and Arwen' becuase the appendices were completed hurriedly and likely lack the attention for detail Tolkien accorded LoTR itself? Or are the words of Elrond ambiguous enough to be interpreted otherwise?

[William Cloud Hicklin]

I don't think there's a meaningful contradiction unless we want to indulge in unrealistic legalisms. The 'legal' position regarding the Halfelven (admittedly unclear) was laid out by the Valar at the end of the First Age.

Statement one (from A&A) and Statement 2 (from Akallabeth) on the "life of the Eldar" aren't contradictory at all. Arwen is speaking in the present tense: rather obviously, she and her brothers have been enjoying the life of the Eldar for centuries, and will continue to do so for a while.

Nor is Cerin Amroth really a contradiction. Whenever according to The Rules her choice might have become operative and irreversible, as far as Arwen herself was concerned her sworn word to marry Aragorn made it inevitable at some point in the future. That doesn't mean that her "Elvish life" was suddenly terminated at that moment.

When did it happen, i.e. at what precise moment was Arwen's future permanently switched from the "quasi-immortal/Mandos" track to the "mortal/Heaven" track? Dunno. Possibly when Elrond took ship, but I don't think so. It probably was the act of physical union with a mortal, by analogy to Melian becoming fully incarnate by similar means- and already just after her wedding Arwen told Frodo that she could not sail West. Perhaps we could also look at Elladan and Elrohir, who plainly stayed on past Elrond's departure, but who also (I am convinced) would never have abandoned their parents and pretty much everyone they had ever known for all eternity, and thus remained of the Elf-kind.

It's very murky what exactly the "change" was in Arwen or when it occurred. I'm not sure there was any physical chenge at all. When Aragorn died, 120 years after their wedding, she was "not yet weary," a stock Tolkien phrase for unaged. My cautious hypothesis is that the "change" was psychological, and spiritual: Arwen laid herself down and died because she couldn't live without Aragorn, not because she 'had to' by virtue of some external compulsion; and the Choice meant that she was permitted to follow him rather than be immured in Mandos.

This implies Arwen has a choice in the matter independent of her then non-existent love for Aragorn

Well, yes, she does: but why would she choose to become mortal, except for her love for a mortal? (To take a trivial analogy: I always had the theoretical option to become a Catholic, but no real reason to exercise it and join the Rome Team until I married a Papist).

[Galin]

In 1972 Tolkien appears to make a distinction (letter 345): 'Arwen was not an elf, but one of the half-elven who abandoned her elvish rights.'

To my mind Arwen's satement: 'Do not wonder! for the children of Elrond have the life of the Eldar.' isn't exactly the same thing as simply saying 'we are Elves' (in any case). I think her choice historically echoes that of Luthien (an immortal in any event), in ways similar enough to draw connections, but as WCH notes, Luthien was a unique case.

[Faramir Jones]

We should remember that while Arwen and her brothers had Elrond Halfelven as their father, they had Celebrian, an Elf, as their mother, so were in 'ethnic' terms 75% elvish.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

It's very murky what exactly the "change" was in Arwen or when it occurred. I'm not sure there was any physical chenge at all. When Aragorn died, 120 years after their wedding, she was "not yet weary," a stock Tolkien phrase for unaged. My cautious hypothesis is that the "change" was psychological, and spiritual: Arwen laid herself down and died because she couldn't live without Aragorn, not because she 'had to' by virtue of some external compulsion; and the Choice meant that she was permitted to follow him rather than be immured in Mandos.

I think you are right on the money, WCH.

I did not get the impression that Arwen became mortal or had death enforced on her when she married Aragorn. Nor that she had aged physically by the time she laid herself down in Lorien or was ever going to. And I don't think she would have been barred from entering the blessed realm were she to repent and sail West after the death of her husband. But this was never an option for her, although she might have wavered slightly when returning to the woodland realm. She had made the choice of Lúthien, to share the fate of her love, and had no intention of backing out of the deal. An absurdly idealised love story, but Tolkien was a grade A romantic, I suppose.

Makes you think of Elros too... Did he 'accept his gift' as a compulsion due to physical weariness, ie aging, or did he eventually do it to stay true to his word? He too was only a quarter of a man.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by skip spence

I think you are right on the money, WCH.

I did not get the impression that Arwen became mortal or had death enforced on her when she married Aragorn. Nor that she had aged physically by the time she laid herself down in Lorien or was ever going to. And I don't think she would have been barred from entering the blessed realm were she to repent and sail West after the death of her husband.

I must disagree. She had made her choice, and as Galin pointed out earlier, she was then bound to mortality. The quote Galin gave of her response to Aragorn's premise that she could "repent and go to the Havens" says not that no ships were available for her to board, but that none would bear her, and that she must abide by her decision, not that she merely wished to do so.

[Galin]

In letter 153 Tolkien does refer to the choice as irrevocable, and that it may be delayed but not permanently -- of course this is the very same letter that says the Sons of Elrond delayed their choice after Elrond sails! OK I can't fairly play both sides of that!

But in any case I think the choice is irrevocable, and though Arwen's response to Aragorn is open to interpretation, she does say she must abide the Doom of Men, whether she will or nill -- if Arwen is saying she must because there's no physical ship around -- in my opinion that loses force as far as the tale is concerned (that is, she is allowed to make a very important and hard decision, but then can repent when it gets tough to abide by it).

And still we know that Legolas built a ship after Aragorn died, which would arguably make her statement (if indeed not merely a poetic way to say 'it's too late my choice has already been made') not even so with respect to the possibility of finding a ship to sail West. Arwen is not some poor maid of Gondor of course, surely the wrights of Ithilien could have made her a vessel if desired.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Certainly Arwen was legally under a ban, not unlike that which had applied to her grandmother but of course for very different reasons. No elvish ship would have permitted her to board; and even had a ship of Men somehow found the Straight Road, she would not have been admitted. Her Aman visa had been cancelled.

The 'official witness' for legalistic purposes would likely have been Gandalf, whom Tolkien described as the plentipotentiary of the Valar in the context of Frodo. At what point was Arwen's "choice" deemed to have become effective? Either upon her marriage, or perhaps in a definitive statement to Gandalf as Manwe's temporary viceregent, I would venture.

But this of course implies nothing about some alteration to her body,* her hroa, which was of the Elvenkind, and thus immune to aging and sickness. One could I suppose imagine an "Oops-Arwen" lingering in Midle-earth for centuries, unable to sail West and unwilling to die, perhaps akin to the 'monsters' of Aman Tolkien posits. But instead she dies of her own (reluctant) free will.

*The movies' "Arwen is dying" rubbish, besides being nonsensical, is the most glaring evidence that PBJ never understood the book they were trying to adapt.

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I must disagree. She had made her choice, and as Galin pointed out earlier, she was then bound to mortality. The quote Galin gave of her response to Aragorn's premise that she could "repent and go to the Havens" says not that no ships were available for her to board, but that none would bear her, and that she must abide by her decision, not that she merely wished to do so.

As I read the story Arwen hasn't aged when Aragorn dies. Although I don't think so, it is of course possible she would have died a natural death from old age had she carried on - remember Elros lived unwearied for around 500 years - but to me that's a moot question. As is talking about the 'legal' situation regarding her Valinor entry VISA, although I appreciate WCH's and Galin's efforts on the subject.

The choice of Arwen, as an descendant of Eärendil, is of course to share the fate of mortal Men and leave the circles of the world, or to sail West with her father and remain bound to Arda until the end. When she gives her heart to Aragorn, she is taking the former path, which I think in practice means that when she comes face to face with Mandos sooner or later he will send her soul to where Men go (Heaven, I suppose), and not the Halls of Waiting. Within the context of the story, the idea of Arwen repenting of her choice and begging for admittance on a ship heading West, thus ie abandoning Aragorn, or just living on in Middle earth, perhaps joining Maglor in his wailing, is preposterous. We may speculate about many what ifs, but in the light of Tolkien's (in-book) idealised view of love and marriage, there were only two options for Arwen: to join Aragorn in life and death or to remain with her father and pass West. The technicalities of the choice and its consequences beyond this is speculative and in the end without import - well, apart from the continuation of this thread, which certainly has a value of its own.

Edit: Jeez, the mental picture of Arwen the Warrior Princess is not a pretty one haha.