Quote: So it is to be trusted that for ME as imagery world (and for ours too, maybe) that is the truth, and the Arda Remade will indeed contain things eternally new. Still more, Finrods wording does not imply that 'forever beautiful and new' means 'unchanged'. Implication is assumed by you (I believe), as influenced by whole bulk of your own preceeding argumentation (which you are to be commended upon, by the way, kind sir) Eternal and indestructible need not mean frozen, just not subject to time and enthropy. So, as you yourself in one of your previous were defending the point that change is possible even without, or outside time, I believe it can be assumed here too?
Well, it may be that the individual's perception of eternal things may be 'eternally new', but the things themselves, being eternal, cannot be in themselves eternally new - except in Eckhart's sense of being eternally created, rather than being created & constantly 'held in existence' - which strikes me is the difference between what Eru does (constantly
creating all things) & what the Elves do by means of the Rings (creating an object
once & then preserving or
embalming it). From this I would draw the conclusion that the Elves' understanding of Eru's creativity is, while a genuine attempt at emulation (as all true sub creativity is), & is mistaken. They simply do not attempt to sub create eternal living things - which is what Eru does - they merely attempt to stop change. Change is certainly possible - if we accept the sequencial events, the process, clearly stated in Ainulindale - but do the Elves have a clear understanding of that? Galadriel tells Celebrimbor that she wishes to rule a land where Flowers & trees do not die; all Elvish sub creativity is an attempt to go back to an earlier, more perfect state. Change from that state is seen as 'wrong', so we cannot assume that in their conception of 'eternity' change plays any part. 'Frozen' may indeed be implied by Finrod - even if he wouldn't use that word.
Flieger quotes from an unpublished note of Tolkien's on Elvish Time:
'In Elvish sentiment the
future was not one of hope or desire, but a decay & retrogression from former bliss & power. Though it inevitably lay
ahead , as of one on a journey. 'looking forward' did not imply anticipation of delight. 'I look forward to seeing you again' did not mean or imply 'I wish to see you again, & since that is arranged/ & or very likely, I am pleased'. It meant simply 'I expect to see you again with the certainty of foresight (in some circumstances) or regard that as very probable - it might be with fear or dislike, '
foreboding '' Their position, as of later day sentiment, was one of exiles being driven forward (against their will) who were in mind or actual posture ever looking backward.
But in
actual language time & place had distinct expressions.'
If Elves are bound (psychologically at least) by the Music, then they would only be able to concieve 'perfection' as being the 'perfect' manifestation of the Music in space/time/matter. They would not consider a change in the Music to constitute 'perfection'. So to this extent, while, if they were exposed to the new form of the Music manifest in Arda re-made, they might find it
more beautiful, while in Arda Marred, knowing & able to relate only to the original Music, their concept of what constituted Arda re made would be based on their understanding of what the
original Music would have brought into being. A new Music, changed in any way from the original, would not appeal. They could not concieve it, they would only know it would be 'different'. Of course, as Finrod says, they hold to
estel & believe that Eru will cause Arda re made to be the ultimate state of perfection, but they cannot concieve it. Hence, their attempts at giving it some imaginative 'form' are limited, & are merely subtle variations on what they can concieve. An Arda re made which differed radically from the Arda they feel should have been produced from the original Music would seem to them strange & alien.
For Elves, the ideal of Arda re made would seem to be -everything remaining the same, but their
perception of it being constantly renewed. For Men I don't think that would suffice. They would require genuinely
new things to be possible, genuiine change & the possibility of new sub creation. So Elves would seek newness of perception, Men newness of that percieved.
Quote: 'only Valar and Maiar are actually bound by what was sung, and at that they actualise exactly what each of them was singing at the time.'
Not necesserally; they were capable of hearing some of the Music as a whole, & they sang in unison, so some at least had a sense of the wholeness of the Music.
Quote: 'Least of all I would accept "men can bring good out of evil", for men doing evil are evil (i.e. means are not justified by the end for the doer, or, Hitler's murderer may have averted much sorrow, but that would not have made him holy, he would still have been murderer). It is Eru who brings good out of evil, and in unexpected way, usually. But the 'tool' i.e evil-doer whos deeds resulted in new good, is not considered responsible for the good, he is still to be condemned on behalf of his evil deed.'
This is my fault for not being clear. What I meant was, there are things within Melkor's theme, which he inroduced for his own purposes - domination & destruction, of which we could include the potential for the production of jet engines , explosives, chemicals, etc. If Elves or Maiar were to choose to manifest Melkor's theme, go over to his side, they would not only be choosing to actualise his 'prototypes', build the things he has 'drawn up the blueprints for', they would also be choosing to suppport his desires & bring about his goals - because they cannot think beyond the themes, & have to choose one or the other. Men can take something which Melkor intended for domination & destruction - say a jet engine, & choose whether they will build a warplane or a cargo plane, or a rescue aircraft. Melkor's intent in producing the 'design' would have been to build the warplane, if Elves or Maiar had chosen to build a plane it would inevitably have been a warplane, because they can only choose to manifest his theme or not. But Men can take the idea of the plane &
choose to turn it to either good or evil.
Quote: Why, do you reckon, they were not told about the thing which is the main motive of their existence (apart from explicit Christian idea to be free beings other than God to be loved by Him), but for the Fall?
Here we are speculating on the mind & motives of Illuvatar - which is perfectly valid if we view Illuvatar as a character Tolkien has invented - we may question, criticise, do a character analysis (or assasination
) if we choose. But if we see Illuvatar as in any way synonymous (even if only in Tolkien's mind) with God, then we simply can't enter into such speculation, simply because the Mind of God is too great ( as the writer of The Cloud of Unknowing has stated, God
cannot be understood by the human intellect, only loved & worshipped). If one is Christian, one will accept the 'fall' (whether literally or metaphorically). If not, but is still a believer in God, then the reasons for Man's not knowing his role in the universe, & having to fumble to find it, could be manifold. In other words, Fall is not the only possible reason for not knowing why we're here - though one would have to assume that it is the one Tolkien himself favoured
Quote: PS. Since we are neck deep in philosophy by now, should we ask moderator to split our discussion (for we two are only participants for a while now) from the main thread starting at post where it began or a bit earlier, say, and make of it separete 'philosophy' thread? For title "Evil Things" is quite misleading. Your opinion?
Well, I know that Estelyn has been trying for a long time to get a serious thread on philosophy going, so I wouldn't have a problem - as long as you don't expect too much! I'm not a philosophy student, merely someone who has read a few books