![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
BD-03: I agree, this is better in the Valaquenta. I'm a little concerned about the stylistic dissonance between the Valaquenta and the more informal MT text, but perhaps we should discuss that in the Valaquenta thread.
BD-16: Right. Sorry, I did not look carefully enough at my own text, nor recall our previous discussions, before posting it! Quote:
All right, I will find some time to study the texts more carefully, and then give you my thoughts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | ||||||
|
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
I'm working on a long post comparing our versions, discussing the general approach, and then getting into some particulars. This should be done soon, but in the meantime I thought I'd just mention a few typos and (I believe) some missing editorial marks that I noticed in Findegil's text.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I apologize, re-reading my comment it sounds very brusque and rude. Please forgive my curtness Aiwendil! I was just somewhat confused that it felt like you were rejecting our version, which was obviously not the case at all. So sorry about that
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
No need to apologize; I didn't think you were being rude at all!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||
|
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Apologies in advance for the length of this.
I am going to first present my synopses of both my text and Findegil's. I indicate here only the major sections, not noting smaller additions from other sources. The idea is just to have the basic structure of each text visible in a digestible form for comparison. Findegil's text: Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | ||||||||||||||||
|
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
![]() ![]() |
Obviously, the big difference here is that Findegil’s text is assembled in a more piece-meal fashion from Ainulindale, AAm, LQ, MT, and LT, whereas mine is based almost entirely on AAm, with fewer additions from the other sources. One might say that Findegil takes a maximalist approach, erring on the side of including passages from most sources when in doubt, while I take a minimalist approach, only breaking up Tolkien’s text when there seems to be a very good reason. As I reviewed both our texts, I became increasingly convinced that what would be best is something somewhere in between those extremes.
The danger in my approach is of course that we leave out material that could profitably be included, and I think my text does suffer from this. As I think both Findegil and ArcusCalion tend toward the “maximalist” side of things, I trust I don’t have to argue much to persuade you of this fact! On the other hand, there are a few dangers I see in taking Findegil’s approach, and I think his text also suffers as a result in some ways. First of all, there is the simple fact that chopping up Tolkien’s text into relatively small pieces disturbs it from a literary point of view, breaking up the rhythm of Tolkien’s language and the unity of his writing. This is of course unavoidable in our project, and we have explicitly decided that we are not going to trouble ourselves too much about stylistic descrepancies. Yet at the same time, I think that we ought to be careful not to hurt the text in this way unless necessary. Beyond this general point, I think the problems that a lot of chopping up of the texts can lead to are mainly redundancies and contradictions. As we saw in some of the later chapters, it’s surprisingly easy for redundancies to creep in when one assembles a text from multiple sources. I think there are several places where this happens in Findegil’s texts of chapters 1 and 2. It’s also possible to inadvertantly introduce contradictions without noticing it, if subtly different ideas lay behind the different texts. As a bit of an aside, in reviewing these texts I find myself getting a bit confused about the relative dating (and therefore priority) of the Ainulindale, AAm, and LQ. Of the AAm manuscript, Christopher Tolkien writes: Quote:
All right, having said all that, let me try to get into the texts a little more closely and discuss some issues I see. Myths Transformed II Findegil’s text makes heavy use, in the beginning of chapter 1, of the narrative from MT II. This narrative was Tolkien’s first (and I think only?) attempt to put into ‘literary’ form the story of the beginning of Arda with the new cosmology (round earth, sun and moon existing from the beginning). We have decided, of course, to reject the new cosmology, but Findegil’s text presupposes that we can still use some of the narrative. I’m uncertain as to whether this is usable. As Christopher Tolkien discusses here and in his discussion of the ‘Athrabeth’, the new cosmology conceives of Arda as being equivalent to the solar system, with the sun a star, and innumerable other stars elsewhere in the vast reaches of Eä. And it seems to me that, even if in the first few paragraphs there is no explicit mention of the round earth or of the sun, this conception underlies the narrative. In MT II and in Findegil’s text, while the Valar locate Arda and begin their labour there, other Ainur go out into other parts of Eä; this is an idea not present in the earlier texts, and I think it goes hand in hand with the idea that Arda, our solar system, is just the realm of one star among countless others. Similarly, the text here says that Melkor could have ruled in other parts of Eä, but that he instead sought for Arda. In the earlier cosmology, there is no suggestion that Arda could be difficult for the Ainur to locate once they entered Eä, nor that there were other places (other solar systems, I take this to mean) where Melkor could have set up shop on his own. In short, I can see a good argument that the opening of this narrative is inextricably bound up with the new cosmology - and that therefore we must reject the whole narrative, not just the parts that explicitly mention a round earth or the sun. There is one addition from MT II in Findegil’s text of chapter 1 that does not appear to have any cosmological implications, and that is BoT-17. This could stand even if we accept the argument above. However, I’m not sure whether this is true as Findegil says: Quote:
Quote:
The First War and Spring of Arda For these early parts, aside from the question of MT II, Findegil’s text and mine differ mainly in that Findegil takes a little bit more from LQ and Ainulindale, while I often take the equivalent statements from AAm. But these are pretty minor differences, and I don’t see any particular problems with Findegil’s text here. It couldn’t hurt to take another look at the bits where I used AAm and Findegil used other sources, and decide for each one which source is best for that spot - but this is minor detail-work, not a big issue. BoT-19, -20, -21 Here we have in Findegil’s text two passages from the Ainulindale followed by one from AAm. There are two things I question here. First (and perhaps this is just my failure to understand something), Findegil has in BoT-20 taken a passage about Melkor taking physical form that in the Ainulindale comes much earlier, at the beginning of the first battle between Melkor and the Valar. Why was this moved here? I assume it’s because there is a canonical statement post-dating the Ainulindale somewhere that this is when Melkor took physical form, in which case that’s fine. Otherwise it should be moved back to where it was. The other point is that I see a redundancy here between BoT-19 (from the Ainulindale) and BoT-21 (from AAm). We have: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
In this same section is BoT-22, of which Findegil wrote: Quote:
BoT-23, -24 Here Findegil already notes that he finds a bit of redundancy between LQ and AAm, and I agree. But I think the main problem here is a slight contradiction between LQ (BoT-23) and AAm (BoT-24). LQ and AAm seem to give different explanations as to why Melkor escaped from the Valar at this time. LQ attributes it to his increased strength and the fact that he now has many servants; AAm, on the other hand says that it is because the Valar were busy restraining the tumults he had caused. Again, here I propose eliminating the addition from LQ and using AAm as a whole: Quote:
Findegil’s text returns to LQ at the end of this paragraph for: Quote:
Quote:
Let’s move on to the part that Findegil breaks off as chapter 2, “Of Valinor and the Two Trees”. Both Findegil and I begin this with AAm and then insert some material from LT. However, Findegil also inserts a bit from LQ in VT-LQ-01, and I think this leads to another redundancy: Quote:
Quote:
We both follow this with excerpts from LT that tell of the Valar finding a wide land beyond Avathar and raising the mountains, so this is fine. I find another redundancy in Findegil’s text here, though: Quote:
LT Descriptions of Valars’ Dwellings Findegil and I both include excerpts from LT giving details about the dwellings of the Valar, but we differ in where we place them - Findegil places them just after the gathering of light and materials, while I place them much later, incorporating them into the passage in AAm that describes (in far less detail) the places where some of the Valar dwell. I think Findegil’s placement of them leads to another redundancy, because that passage from AAm (at the end of this chapter) now seems to repeat some things that were told earlier. I also think the LT descriptions of the dwellings fit rather well in that AAm passage. So in this case, I prefer my placement of those passages. Building of Valimar In AAm, the building of Valimar, the city, is apparently distinct from the building of the mansions of the Valar. In fact, this is stated rather explicitly: Quote:
Quote:
It’s also worth noting that in AAm, the statements about Valinor becoming more beautiful even than Middle-earth in the Spring of Arda, and about Middle-earth being left in twilight, occur just before the building of Valimar. Findegil’s text moves these to after the creation of the Trees, but I’m not sure I see the justification or necessity for that. Growth of the Trees Here Findegil includes a description of the Trees’ growth from LT which I did not include. I think that this is a good addition. There may be some minor details of the descriptions to look into more carefully, but to first order I think that Findegil’s text for this part (up to and including VT-EX-27) is good. Names of the Trees I agree that it’s nice to have the detail of Yavanna and Lórien naming the Trees, but as Findegil’s text stands, there is a slight feeling of redundancy between this passage from LT and the following passage from LQ, which gives the many names of the Trees. This can perhaps be fixed by some light editing. In the LT, the Valar name each Tree immediately after it grows, rather than naming them both after they both have grown. If we followed that, I think the editing of the text of the LT passages would be a little less tortured. It’s true that in the earlier story, one Tree grew entirely first, before the other had even sprouted, whereas in the later story they seem to be growing a bit at the same time - but I still think there’s room for the Valar to name Telperion before we move on to the description of Laurelin’s growth; then they can praise Yavanna’s work and name Laurelin once it is done growing. A bit of an aside: in the later texts, I think “Telperion” is the more usual name rather than “Silpion”; should that not be the name given by Lórien? I don’t recall the history of the names of the Trees all that well, though, so maybe not. Waxing and Waning of the Trees I find another slight redundancy in Findegil’s text here, where a passage from LQ describing the daily waxing and waning of the Trees is followed by a passage from LT wherein Yavanna tells the other Valar about the waxing and waning of the Trees. More problematically, Yavanna’s speech to the Valar here assumes that Laurelin has just waned and Silpion is waxing - but that is because in LT Laurelin was the elder Tree. In our story, Telperion waxes first. Gathering of the Light As far as I can see we have the following stories about the light of the Trees: LT: Ulmo retrieves light from ‘blazing lakes’ and ‘pools of brilliance’ (presumably left after the destruction of the Lamps) and deposits it in the two great cauldrons Kulullin and Silindrin. The Trees are made by watering the ground with this light. After the Trees grow, Yavanna instructs the Valar to water each Tree with light from its respective cauldron every twelve hours when it wanes. Urwen and Silmo are tasked with this watering. LQ: The Valar gather all light to Valinor. The Trees are made. Varda lets hoard the dews from the Trees in great vats, like shining lakes. AAm: The Valar gather great store of light in Valinor. The Trees are made. Varda gathers the light that spills from them in great vats near the mound and the Maiar draw light from these vats and bring it to the more distant parts of Valinor, so that all the land will gain nourishment from it. MT II: (There were no Lamps. Melkor disarrays the sun and drives Tilion out of the moon.) Varda has a store of Primeval Light. The Two Trees are made (presumably with this light). In my opinion, Findegil’s draft includes too much from all these sources, so that they tend to repeat and contradict each other. For instance, in no text by Tolkien are there both great cauldrons from which the Trees are watered with light and great vats in which Varda gathers the light that is spilled. On the contrary, it seems to me that the vats of Varda replaced the cauldrons. Further, the “Primeval Light” mentioned in MT seems to me to replace the light (from the Lamps) that was gathered to Valinor after the destruction of Almaren, and I don’t think it has any place in our version of the story. Reckoning of Time I included in my text the sections from AAm on the Valian year. Findegil mentioned that he recalled us discussing the Valian year at some point and deciding not to include any specifics on it, but I cannot find this discussion. The issue, I suppose, is the later idea appearing in “The Shibboleth of Fëanor” of a Valian year being equivalent to 144 solar years, rather than the roughly 9.58 solar years of AAm. However, I have always been under the impression that this later version of the Valian year was adopted because of the revised cosmology. Even if that weren’t the case, I think an argument could be made that it is a proposed change that we cannot adopt, because it seriously distorts the pre-sun chronology. So I lean toward including this AAm passage. Joy in Valinor and Twilight in Middle-earth After telling of the Trees, Findegil’s text has passages from AAm, Ainulindale, and MT that seem to me to repeat and/or contradict each other. From AAm we have the statement that Valinor becomes more beautiful than Middle-earth in the Spring of Arda and that the Valar are joyful and leave Middle-earth in twilight (this has been moved here from its place in AAm, where it is before the making of the Trees). Then from Ainulindale we have a passage telling that Melkor walks abroad in Middle-earth and that the Valar dwell in bliss and seldom come to Middle-earth. And then we have from MT a section of outlining that says that the Valar go more and more often to Valinor and that then they are driven out of Middle-earth by Melkor and his servants. In my opinion, the AAm and Ainulindale passages are mostly redundant, and the MT passage contradicts them. In AAm and Ainulindale, Melkor does not drive them out of Middle-earth. Moreover, in the MT outline, it seems as if the Valar do not right away establish Valinor as their permanent home; they only “go there” sometimes, but that becomes more and more often. My preference here would be to leave out the MT excerpt and move the AAm passage but move it back to its original location (unless there’s a good reason to put it here). Then I suppose we can retain the full Ainulindale passage - even if it does slightly repeat the AAm passage, they are now far enough apart that it is not so obvious. Here, where from the Ainulindale we tell of Melkor walking abroad in Middle-earth, is where I would put the statement from LQ about Angband being built and given to Sauron to guard against attack from Valinor. Finally, we have the short descriptions from the Ainulindale of the dwelling places and activities of a few of the Valar. As I said earlier, I still think that this is the best place to put the LT descriptions of their dwellings. And then we have in my draft the Gift of Eru, but as Findegil has reminded me, we used this in the Ainulindale (and I agree that that is the better place for it). Well, that was long, but I hope it was useful. I feel as if I am starting to see a text take shape that is superior to both of our versions. I can try to produce a text that implements my proposals above. Last edited by Aiwendil; 10-16-2017 at 07:02 PM. |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||||
|
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
Thank you, Aiwendil, for this very through analyses and eloquent arguments for the structure of your draft, with which I mostly can agree.
Just to explain a bit how I arrived at the choice of basis text, which made up for many of the differences: In part one I took up the portion of text that we had worked on in the Ainulindalë thread and farther edited it. In the second part I made a similar research like Aiwendil to find out which text should have priority. My conclusion was that AAm and LQ were more or less contemporary. In such a case I assumed that a fuller text (and I considered LQ to be the fuller text) could be used instead of a probably slightly younger (AAm). I did not at that time observe the structural changes. Once the choice of the basis text was done and given my very well observed tendency to include as much details as possible the draft as presented was the logical consequence. However that might have been, back to the actual business. As said above I can agree to many of your arguments but not to all. And the most important point are the additions from Myths Transformed II I don’t think that the full content of the texts should be or can be rejected based on the fact that we have decided to reject the round earth cosmology. Let’s take an example from this actual chapter: We use part of the LT text even so many elements of the story were clearly at variance to what we considered ‘true’, like Laurelin sprouting first, or the story of the planting of the trees, ... now why is that possible? Because we consider that only that parts of the text, that were directly gainsaid by sources of higher priority must be skipped or such parts as are clearly depend on such gainsaid elements. This freedom is given under our rule 3). Now to MT, here are no contradictions with texts of higher priority. The reason why we do not use this text entirely is a decision following rule 2.b): a change proposed by JRR Tolkien but inadequately documented so that it is deemed unworkable by us. But this decision was up to this point only taken for the round earth cosmology. (And that question might have been the trigger for rule 2.b).) Your argument as I have understood is, that the changes introduce with MT are only needed to make the round earth cosmology work for the story. And I agree that these changes are needed for the round earth cosmology. But that the round earth cosmology does depend on these changes does not make the change depending on the round earth cosmology. So we have a high priority text not contradicted by a first priority text (LotR, Hobbit, RGEO, AdvTomB) but in an essential feature discarded by us due to the upheaval it would introduce in the project. Does that disqualify all the other features of the text? I don’t think so. At least we never handle other texts in a similar way. Now some comments on the single points Aiwendil raised: BoT-17: When I wrote my comments to the changes introduced it was years after compilation of the text. So I didn’t check if this was really new in MT. I fully agree that AAm §21 is similar enough. But if MT is seen as a valid text, than it has higher priority and would be preferable over AAm for such an addition. (If AAm is the basis text the addition is of course obsolete.) [b[]The First War and Spring of Arda[/b] I agreed to your statement about the first part. BoT-20: This was moved because the description of Melkor in MT does not fit to this. So I thought that at his first coming to Arda he was the bright and shiny guy he wished to be, but when he entered again, now to fight for his rule of the kingdom of Arda he appeared in that dark and frightening shape. I agree that we have some redundancy here and should amend that. But if the pure §21 of AAm is sufficient I doubt. But that can be checked later. BoT-22 might have been an artefact of my editing. I agree that it does not make much sense as it stands now. Probably I put it in to distinguish between the two passages, or both were added at different times, but I don’t really know. BoT-23 & BoT-24: If MT is a valid source than it might have to rule here, meaning that we should use this passage to describe the outcome of the war from MT II, outline: Quote:
Quote:
BoT-25 & BoT-26: I wanted the footnote and for that matter took the passage of BoT-25. But Aiwendil is right that the information of the footnote might be placed better at later point and probably in the text itself. Building of Valinor I agree to take rather the passages from AAm then what I proposed in VT-LQ-01. Also you are right that §13 of LQ can be removed. So we might add the ‘fair things’ from LQ into the LT material. If we use Silindrin and Kulullin here, we have to discuss. But it is linked with later times when the Light of the Trees is collected and used, so I postpone my remarks a bit. LT Description of Valars’ Dwellings The question is which text we split in order to include these descriptions. With your placement you had to split the LT material to small section that you could fit into the AAm passage. I took in the descriptions in here, where the story the mansion are build, as it was in LT in order to hold the text of LT more together. But in the end this did not work as well as thought, because I had to skip great part of the LT passage that I include completely leading to nearly the same sectioning of the text as your editing. So yes as I already said I can agree to follow in this part the structure of AAm and with that to insert the description of the mansions of the Valar and their houses in Valimar later. Building of Valimar I agree to your proposal here. Since we do not specify any house in Valimar here we can still include the descriptions given in LT later together with that of the mansions of the Valar. Analysing AAm more carefully I see that the movement of the statement about Valinor becoming more beautiful than Mibble-earth in the spring of Arda was a mistake. From AAm it is clear that this was the case even before the Trees were in being, which I thought (wrongly) was reason for this. Growth of the Trees Agreed. Names of the Trees I agree to your proposal for a better editing About Silpion or Telperion as name given by Lóriën: I do not see any good reason to change this Silpion was still as valid in LQ. Even so Telperion was a more usual name, why should that change the fact that Lóriën invented the name Silpion? Would we create a new factum by changing this? I think we should avoid that. Waxing and Waning of the Trees The redundancy we should eliminate. I observed as well that Yavanna is speaking in a phase were Laurelin waned, but since it could have been half a day later I did not see a problem with this. I at least would like to keep the direct speech of Yavanna in that passage. Gathering of the Lights This is a problematic part and it has influences on earlier and later parts as well (gathering of the Lights of the Lamps in Valinor and Ungoliant draining the stores of light). One detail that we have to discuss is the use of Silindrin and Kulullin. In LT these are the reservoirs (to use neutral word) for storing the light of the Lamps that the Valar collect at this stage in the story and then they are later used to store the light of Trees. If we use them there we will have to deal with them later in the chapter The Darkening of Valinor. There Ungoliant has to empty them to generate the need of Yavanna for the light of the Silmarils. On the other hand the Valar did need some reservoir for the light of the Lamps. One way to deal with this could be to hold the lights fully separated. That means Silindrin and Kulullin are used only for the Light or the Lamps. The Light of the Lamps is in all later stories collected to Valinor but not used in the creation of the Trees. If we remove the element from LT that the light from Kulullin and Silindrin were used in creating (that we removed both) and refreshing of the Trees out of our story line, we could (implicit) say that the light of the Lamps was not suitable for watering the Trees or for the rekindling of the Trees after Ungoliants attack. (This could be exemplified by the spilling out of light from Silindrins and Kulullin with no avail that Vána and Lóriën did in LT. But this addition might be a bit ‘risky’.) In that way Kulullin and Silindirn could stay intact as they do in LT but still Yavanna could utter the demand for the Silmarils. I think that such a separating of the Lights is already hinted at when we come to the creation of the Sun. The juice of the last Fruit of Laurelin is in LT not collected in Kulullin but in a newly build reservoir: Tanyasalpë. Thus the vats of Varda for the watering of the Trees and the nourishment of the distant parts of Valinor would be needed and can be the only reservoir drained by Ungoliant. Since only in them was collected the of the Trees. It is mentioned in MT if the “Primeval Light” was used in the creation of the Trees. Note 19 to text II reads: Quote:
Reckoning of Time The issue, as Aiwendil called it, is not restricted to a secondary priority source like Shibboleth and at least not directly connected to the revised cosmology. From LotR, Appendix D: Quote:
Joy in Valinor and Twilight in Middle-earth The AAm passage about Valinor being more beautiful I already agreed to move back to its original place. The MT passage (if we decide to use any MT material) is near enough to what Ainulindalë §31 does tell, so that we might combine the two. Especially the first parts of both seem to very close. In both it is made clear that at first the Valar did go to Middle-earth more often, but then stayed more and more in Valinor and left Middle-earth to Melkor. I agree to put the statement about Angband here. I also agree to put the descriptions of the dwellings of the Valar here, in cooperating them into the short passage from AAm. And the placing back of the communication of Iluvatar about the gift of Men to the end of the Ainulindalë we already agreed up on. The most important point to be solved is the issue with the MT material. As I see now it will influence many more parts than I thought. As an example the Dome of Varda is also a part that we did not consider so far. The more I read in that source, the more I agree to jallanite’s position that it is possible to create a round earth version (though I have ever been leaning to his side). Nonetheless as said before such a fundamental decision can not be revised at this stage of the project. So I stay to the flat earth version we try to create. But as argued above that does not render all elements of MT useless. Respectfully Findegil P.S.: Long post will bear long posts. |
||||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|