![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I'm sorry it has taken me so long to respond, irl duties and school and all that have kept me somewhat busy these past few weeks.
On the Basic Structure I agree with Aiwendil that the structure of Findegil's drafts are often very piecemeal, but I am on his side: the more detail the merrier. He and I used to clash very often over stylistic issues I had, so I find sympathy with the issue of choppiness in the drafts. However, what about the AAm text is inherently better or worse than the LQ text? On the MT questions The "Arda as a solar system" situation I feel very strongly that, as you yourself pointed out with the quote from Ainulindale C and D Aiwendil, Tolkien had changed the cosmology from its old concept of "Arda globed amid the Void" to "Arda amid the innumerable stars." This is not a concept necessarily bound up with a round earth cosmology, as Arda is perfectly capable with being bound by the "circles of the world" as described in, say, the Ambarkanta, as well as amid many stars and planets of Ea. I would thus say that, while the term "solar syatem" clearly doesnt apply to the flat-earth/sunless version of the primordial cosmology, Arda is still very much a "planet" in space, with layers of atmosphere and a flat surface (Ambar) but instead of globed amid the Void of nothingness, it is globed amid the vast halls and spaces of Ea. Thus, I was very amenable to Findegil's inclusion of the MT material about the earliest movements of the Valar in the deeps of space, and Melkor's arrival in Arda. It is the fullest account of these events and is not contradictory to any of the latest versions of the flat earth canon. The "primeval light" of Varda While in the MT text, the light given to Varda by Iluvatar is clearly meant to be the foundation of the Sun, not the trees, I see no reason to exclude it once the Sun has been removed from the narrative. There are many instances of using the LT in the project, notably in the Ruin of Doriath or Earendil chapters, to add depth while changing the application of the words from their original use. This is, in my opinion, not a very drastic change, as Varda is said to be tied to light intrinsically, and the making of the stars and trees could not be said to have been done without special light. However, that being said, the creation of the Sun later with this light might need revision from Findegil's version, as for Varda to give this light to Arie, it would mean she had some already, and if so, why could she not use it to give light to Arda. It is therefore a difficult question, but one that could be said to be inherent in the mythos as written. If Aule can produce mountains, and Ulmo water, and Manwe air, and Yavanna cause trees to grow, why can Varda not seem to produce light? It would seem that this question went unanswered by Tolkien, and so must remain a logical issue in all versions of our text. Thus, I think overall, it wold be best to include the descriptions of Varda's light, as they do not contradict (by themselves) anything from the latest versions of the flat earth cosmology, even if their original application was different. the "Dome of Varda" I can see no real reason not to include this feature, as it is not explicitly tied to the round earth structure. It simply seems to be Tolkien's latest thoughts on the matter. However, the two starmakings of Varda are in the essay on it changed from 1) before Arda, 2) before the elves to 1) before Arda, 2) the dome of Varda. Whether we keep the two original starmakings (as we must) and simply add the Dome as a third (which seems easiest to me) is a very minor point, and I think could be done without much editing or loss of Tolkien's sense. BoT-17: I think it gives a sense of completeness and detail that AAm lacks, so I am with Fin on including it. That being said, I see the redundancy of the following passage and agree that the two references to the "going to war" should be reduced to one. Aiwendil's version of this combination looks great. BoT-20: I think the description of Melkor as desirous of Light is not simply born out of the round earth ravishing of Arie story. I think in Tolkien's philosophical considerations of the nature of Melkor and the Valar and Eru, he went into great consideration of the motives of each of these players. The "unfallen" state of Melkor as a being of Light and beauty fits with his later ideas of Melkor beginning with great power and glory and falling into darkness and smallness through self-involved nihilism. I think the brightness of Melkor in the beginning is, in fact, relatively essential to his progression as a character and type of a Satan figure in the mythological structure, and as a motivating and defining character state. BoT-23, -24: I agree with Fin that the LQ bit should be used, as per MT, so I would combine it thus: Quote:
Building of Valinor: I agree with Aiwendil's points here. Descriptions of the Dwellings of the Valar: I agree that this should be later, as in AAm. Growth of the Trees: agreed Names of the Trees: As you have already agreed to use Silpion, I just want to say that I favor Aiwendil's general change of Silpion > Telperion, as Tolkien did himself, but in this and the few other cases in the Sun and Moon story where it is appropriate to use Silpion, I think we should. Waxing and Waning of the Trees: It seems we are all in agreement that Yavanna's speech should be kept, but the wording issues will no doubt be resolved in one of your drafts which are to come. Gathering of the Lights: This seems to be the most controversial point in the chapter, as it is a difficult one. If Kullulin/Silindrin are to be removed, then many of the LT descriptions of Valinor need heavy editing, and the Tale of Sun and Moon as well (but this we already know). I think personally that there is no reason to remove them, as it says that the Maiar removed the light from the wells and watered the friths and fields of Valinor with in in AAm, so why is it contradictory to have the cauldrons and the wells of varda? I agree that they are most likely abandoned, but there is nothing against their inclusion alongside the wells. ALternatively, we could simply say the Wells of Varda are the cauldrons, and have them made after the trees, leaving the part about the lack of light for Aule's building out. Reckoning of Time: This has been resolved already, so I have no further comments. Joy in Valinor and Twilight in Middle-earth: I agree with everything Aiwendil said for this section. Phew that was a lot. I hope I have articulated myself well enough on each point. Last edited by ArcusCalion; 10-22-2017 at 06:50 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | ||
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
BD-12: It seems we a situation of turned tabels. Both of you agree to skip that passage about the reckoning of time but now I have made some caacluclations and might be willing to include it incooperating the 144 YS = 1VY:
Quote:
Quote:
Respectfully Findegil |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I assume you are refferring to the 144 YS = 1 Year in Aman from the MT text: Aman. I had thought about this as well. It would increase the amount of time before the sun and moon, but as this was Tolkien's plan, I think it might be worth it. If we agree that this is the best solution, then we need to go through the drafts and find every place where we have removed specific dates or amounts of time.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | ||||||||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
On the MT Questions I'm now coming around on the question of the opening section and the "measureless regions" of Ea. The cosmology in the Ainulindale C and D already matches this conception, which shows that this feature is independent of the changed cosmology of Myths Transformed. On the other hand, I'm still rather convinced that the Primeval Light and, most especially, the Dome of Varda, are part and parcel of the Myths Transformed cosmology, and that in rejecting the new story of the sun and moon we must reject them as well. I think this is clearest in the case of the Dome of Varda. The Dome is introduced thus in MT III: Quote:
Quote:
The “Primeval Light” also seems to me to have been introduced as a direct consequence of the new story of the Sun. That, at least, would again appear to be Christopher Tolkien’s view: Quote:
BoT-23, -24: I think the LQ and AAm extracts still slightly contradict each other, as they ascribe the failure to overcome Melkor to different things. If we agree that the explanation from LQ is to be preferred, since it agrees with MT, then I think we need remove the AAm (BoT-24) extract completely. Quote:
Quote:
BD-12: I’m extremely hesitant to simply alter the math here to get a number close to 144. Actually, the more I look into this issue, the more confusing it seems to become. First, in AV and AB (c. 1930), and retained in AV 2 and AB 2 (mid to late 1930s), the Valian year is stated to be equivalent to ten years. In the drafting for what became Appendix D, given in HoMe XII, the Eldar are said to reckon in yéni, one of which is equivalent to a century, 100 years of the sun. This was written in 1949 or 1950. Then in AAm as originally written (around 1950-1952), the Valian year was again said to be 10 years (I had not really noted this until now). This was emended such that the Valian Year (based on the waxing and waning of the Trees) was equivalent to 3,500 solar days, or about 9.582 solar years. Another thing I hadn’t noted earlier is that this whole passage on the reckoning of time was marked to be removed from AAm and transferred to the Tale of Years - which indeed it was, being included (with a few minor changes, but nothing affecting the math) in two manuscripts of the Tale of Years. Then in the text published as Appendix D to The Lord of the Rings in 1955, the yén is stated to be 144 years of the sun rather than 100 that it was in the draft. I find it very doubtful that the yén/Valian year was changed from 10 years to 100 years then back to 10 years and then to 9.582 years and finally to 144 years. It seems clear to me, instead, that appendix D with its 100 -> 144 figure and the Annals with their 10 -> 9.582 figure are talking about different things. That is, at least up to the mid-1950s, the yén and the “Valian year” were not synonymous. Note that the appendix is speaking only of the Eldarin calendar, while the annals (at least in the elaborate passage in AAm) are talking about the reckoning of the Valar. These two systems need not be assumed to be identical! (And indeed, I think that what we can conclude from the passages mentioned above is that they were not identical). Now, in MT XI Tolkien gives a different explanation for the Valian year in reference to the rate of change perceived by the Valar, and in a related note on the proposed much-expanded chronology, he wrote “144 Sun Years = 1 Valian Year”. Here, it would seem, the Eldarin yen of Appendix D and the Valian year of the annals have been identified with each other. Christopher Tolkien sees this as directly tied to the new cosmogony: Quote:
My inclination, then, is to either retain the 9.582 figure, on the assumption that Eldarin yéni and Valian years are different units, or to remove the whole passage and leave things ambiguous. Quote:
Last edited by Aiwendil; 10-24-2017 at 08:35 PM. |
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
So I think we all agree to take AAm as basis text for the draft to come.
On the MT Questions Okay for the “measurless regions” of Eä. That means we should use a part of MT opening section. The Primeval Light and the Dome of Varda: I do not fully agree to your arguments, but I can see your reasoning and for the sack of safety I can go on without it. BoT-24, BoT-25: I do not agree to this. Following MT Melkor is to mighty at this time to be overcome. But none the less he can fell into fear seeing the reaction of the Valar and take to flight back to Utumno, which he reaches before Tulkas can overtake him. And in Utumno he is safe since the Valar could not afford the craft needed to overcome Utumnos fortifications because they had to save what could be saved f their work. Silpion: It seems we only can chose which fact we will create: either Lorien named the Tree not Silpion but Teleperion or the name given by Lorien did not become the normally used one. I tend to the second. Gathering of the Lights: If you feel safer not using the names, that is okay for me. So our solution is to use the descriptions of the cauldrons but name them “wells” as it was in the latest version and take the two as the only wells? BD-12: The argument that the Eldarin Yén form LotR is a different unit from the Valian Year referred to here does not hold any water for me. It is for me unbeleiveable, that he Eldar in Middle-earth (specially the Exiles) would use a longer entity for the measurement of time then the Valar in Valinor. If the relation would be the other way around (Eldar counting with 10 time of a Year of the Sun and the Valar with 144 times) I could agree to it. But why should the Eldar in Middle-earth use a longer period? So I think safety rules! Let as skip the passages and be ambiguous about the time scale and remove all references to “Valian Years”. Aiwendil wrote: Quote:
Respectfully Findegil |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | ||||||
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
But that's a moot point. If you find the issue too uncertain, we can do as you suggest, skipping the passage and avoiding references to Valian years. Quote:
|
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I like this combination Aiwendil!
I think I am with Fin on the Silpion issue, as I see no real reason to change it here. It seems a shame to lose the names, and I see no reason that they are not valid. Kulullin contains the elements kulu- and -lin, which mean "gold" and "a musical sound" respectively. Culu is a valid word for gold (the metal) in later Quenya, and is an element in one of the names of Laurelin (Culumalda, although culuma might mean orange, the element culu- is clearly related to gold.) Lin is a perfectly valid word in later Quenya. If the name needs updating at all, it would simply be to change the double "l" to a single one, but even that seems unnecessary to me. Silindrin is said to mean "Moon Cauldron" by Christopher Tolkien, and the element sil- is the "Qenya" term for moon, which in Quenya is "Isil." however, the verb silë in Quenya means "to shine," and could be used in a compound. -ndrin is less clear. There is no clear etymology for it, but using CT's analysis, it could mean cauldron. In "Qenya" we have the word tambë for cauldron, with a Gnomish cognate as tambos. However, this word does not reappear in Quenya or Sindarin, and so may not be valid. Thus, -ndrin could be easily thought to be an element denoting "cauldron" in Quenya, although the phonology is not up to date. Similar to the way Gwarestrin -> Gwarestirin in our version, we could do Silindrin -> Silindirin. As it is though, these names are not too difficult to salvage, and it would be a shame to lose them. In regards to the dating, I say ambiguity is our friend. About the placement of the descriptions of the dwellings of the Valar, I would say that there it would be somewhat awkward to describe them so late, but I do see the advantage of the Light and the trees in the descriptions. I have no preference either way, but if the fuller versions of the descriptions are to be used, it might be best to put them at the end, so we can use the parts that reference the Trees. Last edited by ArcusCalion; 10-26-2017 at 11:58 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |