Why Does Good Suck So Much?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I'm not altogether sure Amandil was left to die. I don't have the Sil nearby, but if you'd provide the quote it may prove helpful. From my recollection, I believe Amandil's fate was unknown.

And the reason that his mission, as opposed to Eärendil's, was unsuccessful, was the simple fact that Eärendil had already gone to bat for the world in that way. A second time would not be the same, as Amandil himself well knew.

'For,' said [Amandil], 'it may well prove that you will never see me again; and that I shall show you no such sign as Eärendil showed long ago'.

Silm Akallabêth

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Hmmm..."screw you everyone"? Again, laying it on a bit thick, aren't you? The only reason she shed her Maiaric persona and appeared in mortal raiment was because of her love for Thingol. Has it ever occurred to you that Melian was deep in mourning and perhaps incapable of retaining her protection around Doriath? The traumatic death of a husband or wife can be debilitating, perhaps even for a Maia.

The Silmarilion itself seems to make that clear:

But now Thingol lay dead...and with his death a change came also upon Melian. Thus it came to pass that her power was withdrawn in that time....

Silm Of the Ruin of Doriath

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I have never perceived Thingol as being particularly "good" in the sense of having unassailable qualities. In fact, I don't believe Tolkien was interested in the Eldar being one-dimensional and above reproach. He was greedy, petty and at times evil. A well-rounded character, not some cardboard cut-out.

Thingol already had some arrogance, as he showed to Beren. Possession of the Silmaril and the Nauglamír imparted him with a fatal greed.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

The Valar were indeed not perfect, but they did have good intentions and never tried to actively harm the Children of Eru. But as you may have heard, the path to hell is paved with good intentions.

In the end, the Valar were created beings and were certainly capable of error. Also, their job was not to protect the Children of Ilúvatar at all costs, through all circumstances. The Valar were governors under the One, and all that they did, and more importantly, did not do, should be considered in that light.

[Galadriel55]

In Tolkien's works there is no "black and white". There is no perfect character, not even the Valar. There are hardly any completely evil characters. And even they did not begin evil.

There is some good and some bad in everyone. The fact that one is fighting against Morgoth doesn't make him an angel.


Personally, the first time I read The Sil I had a similar reaction, except that it was about Feanor's sons in particular. First Maedhros appeared a sensible enough guy, but then the second and third kinslayings and all that stuff...

And welcome to the Downs!

[Nikkolas]

The problem I take with the Valar is that the narrative does not make note of their flaws. It comments, quite often, on what the failings of Feanor and his sons were. But of the Valar? Constant hyperbole about their splendor and wonderfulness and blah blah blah.

I don't see it. i see a group of very powerful beings who are as flawed as any Elf or Man. In fact I find many of their acts, or thoughts, reprehensible. When Aulë made the Dwarves and was confronted by Eru, he was willing to kill them all. Oh sure he felt bad, but he was willing to commit genocide on his own utterly helpless creations.

What divinely good being would do such a thing?

And thanks for the welcome Galadriel.

Originally Posted by Morthoron

First of all, I must say that the title of this piece is rather over the top. I would say that it might be wise to lighten the tone (saying "suck" is a bit much) before someone does it for you.

Perhaps it was a bit much. My apologies.

Hmmm..."screw you everyone"? Again, laying it on a bit thick, aren't you? The only reason she shed her Maiaric persona and appeared in mortal raiment was because of her love for Thingol. Has it ever occurred to you that Melian was deep in mourning and perhaps incapable of retaining her protection around Doriath? The traumatic death of a husband or wife can be debilitating, perhaps even for a Maia.

Oh it certainly has occurred to me. Just as it occurred to me that Fingolfin was deep in mourning when he went to challenge Morgoth. He needlessly sacrificed his life.

This is a time of war. People are mourning everywhere. Melian is not the first monarch to lose someone she loves.

If she was a true queen and cared about her people, she would not have left them defenseless.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

And the reason that his mission, as opposed to Eärendil's, was unsuccessful, was the simple fact that Eärendil had already gone to bat for the world in that way. A second time would not be the same, as Amandil himself well knew.

And why was it unsuccessful? Why did the Valar and Eru Himself slaughter helpless women and children?
This is not simply a case of "And Man Grew Proud." It's a case of "And Man...were Men and then were used by a being with powers and abilities far beyond their own. A being who is only at large because the gods were inept."

In The Silmarillion I admire most characters like Turin. It is made very clear that he is flawed and yet he is also heroic. There is no pretense of great pureness there.

Speaking of which, I need to get to The Children of Hurin. it goes into greater detail of his life and character, right?

[Galadriel55]

It never says that the Valar are perfect. They are more poweful than the Eruhini. They might be closer to, but definitely not ideal.

The narrative doesn't need to say "however, they sometimes made mistakes". We know that. They do not know the future and the consequences of their actions (since Eru's vision was very unclear), and can err the same way Elves, Men, and Drawves can. The might not be as flawed, but because they have more power, the consequences are bigger.

About Aule: Creating the dwarves in the first place wasn't a very good act. Aside from "mocking Eru", Aule was impatient, he didn't tell the other Valar about his idea, and he didn't even think it through thoroughly. Not very good qualities, are they? When he understood what he's done, he wanted to undo it. In the end, though, we see how any act ultimately turns to good, like Iluvatar predicted in the Ainulindale.

Fingolfin wasn't in mourning, he was in despair. 'Fey'. Also, he thought there is nothing left to live for, so he might as well challenge Morgoth than just be killed by orcs.

As for Amandil... things don't happen twice (hm. I recall this line somewhere in Narnia. Which of the Inklings copied it off the other? ). The world was saved, and history brought to a climax point, by Earendil's voyage. It couldn't happen that way again (if it did, I wonder if the Ainulindale would sound like a record that got stuck and was playing the same thig over and over again... ). The next time history came to a climax, something else had to happen. It just had to.

This is not simply a case of "And Man Grew Proud." It's a case of "And Man...were Men and then were used by a being with powers and abilities far beyond their own. A being who is only at large because the gods were inept."

I don't really understant what you're trying to say here. Can you elaborte a bit?

[Nikkolas]

I'm saying that the entire tale of the Numenorians is obviously supposed to give a message. It's a story of how Men grew mightier, prouder and in all ways superior to any other race of Men to ever live.

Then they grew greedy. They had longer life than any other mortal but they wanted immortality. But it is not simply desire that drove them. Fearing your own death is a natural instinct. If you have longer to think about it, have longer to wait until "The End", the fear will be even worse.

But no matter what their failings, the true Fall of he Numenorians only happened because Sauron was there. And why was Sauron there? Because the Valar allowed him to be. When the Valar stamped out the rest of Morgoth's forces they let slip his most abled and deadly servant.

It is through Sauron's deception and malice that Numenor was undone, not just the Numenorians' own egos.

The Valar are as much to blame as anyone else for allowing his evil to endure and spread across the land.

we see how any act ultimately turns to good, like Iluvatar predicted in the Ainulindale.

I always liked that passage.

'Mighty are the Ainur, and mightiest among them is Melkor; but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilъvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.'

My interpretation of that dialogue is Eru created Melkor to be evil. Being evil was his purpose in creation. It's why I don't think Morgoth is truly evil in the modern sense that evil is a choice. He never really had one.

[Galadriel55]

Morgoth wsn't created to be the "base drum" of the ainulindale that covers all other sounds. He chose to do so. In the beginning, he wasn't evil.

Yes, Sauron helped destroy Numenor. However, the Numenorians chose to listen to him and follow his instructions. Moreover, all Sauron did was speed up the decline. He wouldn't have been able to do so if there wasn't a good fertils soil to plant on.

Some of the major virtues in the legendarium are pity and forgiveness. Those who do not understand them...

Originally Posted by The Voyage of Earendil and the War of Wrath

He thought that he forever estranged the Noldor from the Lords of the West, and that content in their blissful realm the Valar would heed no more his kingdom in the world without; for to him that is pitiless the deeds of pity are strange ad beyond reconing.

And look what happened to Morgoth!

We see many characters achieve certain wisdom through forgiveness/pity. Bilbo, Frodo, Faramir, Turin to some extent, etc. Eonwe forgave Sauron when he surrendered. Just like the other beings in Arda, he couldn't predict what this would cause.

[Nikkolas]

You cannot tell me that the Numenorians would have started sacrificing people to Morgoth had Sauron not come....

They also would not have attacked Valar. In fact, Ar-Pharazôn flat out refused to do so even as Sauron encouraged him. He did not dare it until he was at death's doorstep and thus had pretty much lost all reason in place of fear.

As for Melkor, he was born of Eru's mind. Eru Himself made Melkor to be willfull, fearful and proud. There's also the theological paradox present of whether free will can even exist if we are created by an omnipotent and omniscient being. Because even as we type these posts, this was foretold and destined to happen at the beginning of existence. Therefore free will cannot really exist.

But that really tangles up Tolkien's ideas with Christianity and that is a really heated debate I don't want to get into.

[Galadriel55]

Definitely a heated debate, which I would not like argue about in this thread. However, it can be boild down to this: If there is free will, there is choice. If there is no choice, what's the point of free will?

Numenorians might not have started sacrificing people in the name of Morgoth (since they didn't know who he is), but weren't they doing it already, without naming him and doing a special ceremony? Elendili were put to death for disagreeing, anyone who spoke Elvish was severely punished (I don't remember if it was a death penalty, though)... In other words, whatever Morgoth would want them to do, just without he ceremonies.

Maybe without Sauron Pharazon wouldn't have rebelled against the Valar. But his son, or grandson, or great-grandson (etc) would have. The reason Pharazon didn't go right away was because of elemental fear. How many generations would it take for the fear to decrease enough?