Faramir's (and Boromir's) Dream

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Well, Radagast was a Maia of Yavanna Kementári, whose epithet means "Earth-Queen", and Man can be defined as an artificing animal (Homo faber); but in Middle-earth, artificing isn't the sole province of Men - the Noldor were there before, and your interpretation of Radagast and Saruman certainly fits what we're told of them in LotR. (By the way, I don't think everybody ever said that "AQ must be wrong because it was created for role playing" - just that using it as an interpretative approach can be useful in some cases but less useful in others.)

While Kementári translates as "Earth-Queen," Yavanna is "Giver of Fruits." Looking at her history as tender of the first plants and patroness of the Ents, I associate her with plants more than anything else. Radagast seems to deal with animals more than plants, but I could see where he would be associated with her.

Reviewing the Valar, I’m not sure anyone is associated with the element Earth as clearly, for example, as Ulmo is to the sea. Even there, Ulmo is of the sea rather than of all water. If one was determined to dwell on an elemental theme, one might say Elbereth is associated with air, but she is better associated with the stars and protection from Shadow.

Anyway, there are too many Valar for the four elements to be the major theme. If elements were the major theme, the four most potent Valar ought to be clearly associated with the elements. This doesn’t feel right to me.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

(By the way, I don't think everybody ever said that "AQ must be wrong because it was created for role playing" - just that using it as an interpretative approach can be useful in some cases but less useful in others.)

Perhaps they did not use these words, but I have found it best to plagiarize on these boards when expressing ideas found in AQ. If I attribute ideas to the true source, I get flack, so much of the time I don’t attribute anymore. While AQ is hardly canon, the author and his circle took a much more systematic and inclusive approach to Tolkien than most fans.

AQ does have a filter. Trying to be detailed enough for a set of role playing rules means a lot of gaps have to be filled with extrapolation and guesswork. Still, it seems like everyone has some sort of filter, for example filtering Middle Earth through the lens of the Arthur mythos and elements. Others seem to believe all of Tolkien’s works ought to be consistent, and find themselves hacking away at bits and pieces of various stories in an attempt to remove conflict with other stories. I would rather let each work stand on its own.