tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post6445141733390937948..comments2023-11-07T06:20:12.181-08:00Comments on Tolkien: Medieval and Modern: Creativity, Sin, and Sympathy for the Devil"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"http://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-40502538149784191552014-06-06T01:39:17.985-07:002014-06-06T01:39:17.985-07:00I like the idea you propose that the human drive t...I like the idea you propose that the human drive to change only makes sense in a flawed world, as a means to repair that world, and the extension that humanity as we know it would be very unhappy in paradise. This situation brings up one question for me, however: what would happen if humanity actually succeeded in its task? So long as humanity is constantly striving to turn earth into paradise, the impulse to change remains good, and all is well. The completion of that striving, however, would undo itself; once the world becomes perfect, the impulse to change becomes evil, and human nature becomes a flaw that disrupts the world's perfection. There are a few ways to get around this problem: human nature could slowly evolve to accept stasis, as part of the reparation process, human nature could be altered, as a divine gift, upon completion of the world, or the creation of paradise on earth could be treated as an impossible goal that will never be reached, with the striving being the important thing. I would guess that Tolkien subscribes to this third idea in relation to Middle-earth, since the task of remaking the world is given to Eru. Significantly, however, this remaking still remains connected to humanity, since The Silmarillion says that “of old the Valar declared to the Elves in Valinor that Men shall join in the Second Music of Ainur; whereas Ilúvatar has not revealed what he purposes for the Elves after the World's end, and Melkor has not discovered it” (The Silmarillion, 42).<br /><br />-James Brooks"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-10116823765790995552014-05-12T08:45:53.137-07:002014-05-12T08:45:53.137-07:00Insightful meditation on the problems of evil and ...Insightful meditation on the problems of evil and creative acts, and very provocative stance! Yes, I think we can thank Milton for making the Devil a sympathetic character, but are the alternatives really only outright perversion of creation or singing only from God's sheet music (a fantastic image!)? I particularly appreciate your reading and incorporation of Sayers and Augustine, with respect to the idea that human creative agency is only possible in a world in which the fall has happened. <br /><br />I'm not sure that Augustine would read any change as perversion—that is to say, the mutable goods are subject to change, but so much as they still tend towards the ultimate immutable good (God) they are still good (Augustine in particular can't read created matter as evil, because he is knee-deep in a battle against Manichaeans, who see the physical realm as an evil battling the good spiritual beings.) Otherwise, how could medieval builders take the raw materials of created nature and use them to assemble glorious cathedrals and beautiful books and illuminations to glorify God? I think perhaps this is what distinguishes creation from sub-creation—sub-creators work within the parameters of the original creator, which means that they use the created materials (that by their created nature glorify the Creator) to glorfiy the Creator. Thus, I'm not sure I agree that “the only things there are for an aspiring creative to change are the things that shouldn’t be changed: like the direction in which you’re sailing your ship.” Numenoreans build great temples and sea-faring vessels, taught other peoples of middle earth great craftsmanship, etc. Does this not count?<br /><br />--Jenna"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-55972773271387767412014-05-07T13:24:18.049-07:002014-05-07T13:24:18.049-07:00There are two things I wanted to comment on. The f...There are two things I wanted to comment on. The first is the idea of change and its role in he idea of Evil. I think the desire to change things is very important in understanding why someone like Frodo or Sam was able to bear The Ring and Gandalf would not be. Gandalf greatly desires for the world to be better, he desires to see change. Frodo and Sam desire to save The Shire, to preserve it, but not to change it. I think this is important in understanding the strength of Hobbits, and perhaps even Tom Bombadil. They are less affected by The Ring because they do not desire to change the world for good or for evil. They wish to preserve it as it is.<br /><br />Secondly I wanted to comment on your sympathy for Melkor. I also sympathize with him, but I think our sympathy comes from being human. It is important to realize that Melkor as an Ainur failed in a way very different from the Numenoreans. As we have said it is in the nature of Man to become bored and desire some sort of change, to play against the Music or Iluvatar, but Melkor is not a Human and therefore it should not have been in his nature. And while I can sympathize with him, it is because I am human and I cannot understand him in any other way, even though he is different. It may be human nature to play against music, because we came into being in the Third Theme, and Melkor has some responsibility for that theme. But what is nature to us, should not have been nature to him. I feel that we cannot find Melkor blameless as a man bored of singing the same thing over and over, because he is not a man. <br /><br />S. E. B. "Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-73923147032762420472014-05-07T09:43:36.077-07:002014-05-07T09:43:36.077-07:00Forgot to sign; Chloe B. Forgot to sign; Chloe B. "Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-19976414935001400562014-05-07T09:42:01.675-07:002014-05-07T09:42:01.675-07:00Though I understand Melkor's motivations in ch...Though I understand Melkor's motivations in changing the theme, I'm not convinced I should sympathise with him. I feel that since he has a greater knowledge of Illuvatar than man he should have a better understanding that changes to God's creation would be evil <br />But onto my main question. In the Ainulindalë (page 26 of Silmarillion I think) The changes that Melkor make to the theme result in rain, snow, mist, etc; which are deemed to be beautiful and good. At this point, has there already been a fall? Can it be a redemption if it resulted from the original act of evil? I may be missing the point, but i'm having trouble reconciling these ideas. "Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-82437898565429516912014-05-07T08:07:17.589-07:002014-05-07T08:07:17.589-07:00I think your post covers a lot of good points and ...I think your post covers a lot of good points and I especially agree with your idea that in a paradise-fallen scenario the only way to find any sort of redemption is through change and creativity, even if creativity is what brought the setting to its doom. The one thing I have to disagree with is your sympathy for Melkor, and the sympathy for the devil (excellent reference to the Rolling Stones). I do not agree that Melkor’s decision to stray from the theme was because he was bored with the consistency of the scenario and unchanging environment. His idea of change involved a more selfish background, and he purposely corrupted the music of Iluvatar. What makes Melkor evil is that he was attempting to act in place of the artist, Eru, to make an anti-theme and therefore a corrupted “paradise,” an anti-paradise. <br />After our discussion in class it almost seems that the fate of the Valar was inevitable. Just as we discussed, prior to creating Hamlet, there was no anti-Hamlet and this is the same for the creation of Arda. Once Eru created Arda and the Valar, there had to be an anti-Arda and an anti-Valar, hence Melkor’s role. Although we can sympathize with the idea of boredom, Melkor’s actions were extreme none the less.<br />E.Q."Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-52836840748965853212014-05-06T18:58:32.948-07:002014-05-06T18:58:32.948-07:00With apologies to Jeremiah 2:20…et dixisti, “Non c...With apologies to Jeremiah 2:20…et dixisti, “Non cantem!”"Tolkien: Medieval and Modern"https://www.blogger.com/profile/04348913969813157482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-30437217474853196212014-05-06T02:59:59.291-07:002014-05-06T02:59:59.291-07:00Forgot to sign,
James MackenzieForgot to sign, <br />James MackenzieJfrMackenziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01785363229959333642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5746173806126403959.post-41295699922829292422014-05-06T02:59:20.828-07:002014-05-06T02:59:20.828-07:00This discussion reminded me of a line from Milton&...This discussion reminded me of a line from Milton's Paradise Lost: "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven." The comparison between Satan and Melkor is fairly obvious as far as analogies go, but Milton was one of the few to actually tackle the idea of Satan and the Fall from a more internal perspective, at least in his day. <br />While Melkor gets no such sympathetic treatment anywhere in the Tolkien-verse as Satan does in Milton's work, the question of free will and its potential opposition to good runs throughout both works. Melkor brought about a discord that was counter to Illuvatar's vision of good, thus we could classify the world which came about as a result as "Hell" in so far as Hell is defined as a place where good is countered. Melkor sought agency in his work, as did the men of Numenor, in their own way. <br />Yet interestingly, the downfall of Numenor was brought about by attempting to wrest the paradise, or a form of good, for themselves. The Fall shows a figure bound by good break away in order to gain agency. But the men of Numenor already had agency. Sure, they were going against the will of good, but were still attempting to claim that perfection which had been denied to them.<br />JfrMackenziehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01785363229959333642noreply@blogger.com