As Saucepan man suggested, I’ll stick with judging Eru from what we can gather from the books.
Re: Galadriel’s mirror: The remarks about the mirror always intrigued me, reminding me of the modern horoscope predictions. Watch this: the mirror shows: ‘things that were, things that are, things that yet may be’, ‘what they desire to see, as well as things unbidden’, ‘some never come to be’. This pretty much covers all there is, doesn’t it?
Anything is possible! It’s as if Eru wants to play upon their creatures’ need and desire for knowing the future by offering them…absolutely nothing at all, that is, even more uncertainty. Unless of course you’re Galadriel, and have the gift of interpreting correctly what you see.
But given Frodo and Sam’s situation, they do see the future, and the future looks bleak. And herein comes Eru’s greatness: by his grace, they are not shown the outcome of their success (Aragorn coronation, everyone singing in their praise, etc), but the worst of what is to come. The matter of choice is clearly laid before them: This is what will happen. ‘Would you still do the right things even if you are reinforced for doing the wrong thing?’ (sorry for the psych terms). So, consequently, they are both tempted to turn back: Frodo sees the personification of his terror, an image that will come back to haunt him again and again, and he momentarily wavers; Sam sees the scouring of the Shire and immediately wants to go home. I am reminded here of Bethberry’s mention that ‘Satan’, as it were, is sometimes a ‘messenger’ of God. But in the end it all proves for the best. In choosing to go on, Frodo and Sam harden their wills against the worst instead of foolishly hoping for the best (hope here used as ‘looking up’ not the higher ‘Estel - trust’).
Re: Clash and Schism causing both discord and marvellous beauty – Now here is an idea that I like…it it esthetically pleasing to my mind, but one can argue against it.
Also one can argue the idea of
evil and suffering as necessary. With the risk of straying a bit from Tolkien, I’m reminded of Ivan’ ‘profession of unfaith’ – so to speak (in Dostoievsky’s Brother’s Karamazov): At the very end, when God’s majesty and wisdom is revealed, and the lamb shall sit with the lion and the victim shall embrace his assasin, therefore all sufferance will be found to have a higher meaning, Ivan will understand, but not forgive, and he will still hate God. Because all the benediction that is to come –still a promise of benediction and transcendance – will not be enough to pay for the tears of a single suffering child.
Yeah, there are those of us who will believe that…and as someone said, it’s a matter of opinion.
OT: WARNING SPOILERS: As for
Troy - eh...how can you learn anything of the gods and men as gods' puppets from that movie?? The movie does not even show the gods, the beauty contest which is the true reason for the Trojan War is inexistent, and...in a nutshell it's just a war from the history of Ancient Greece. All the magic is gone. Yeah, read the book, rather.
