Mechanical Monsters at the Fall of Gondolin? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Aiwendil · 08-06-2003, 08:11 AM

You make some very good arguments, Findegil, and I must say I am now very much in doubt concerning the whole matter.

For me, it was never a question of whether the mechanical monsters were acceptable or retainable - rather it was a question of whether they were in fact retained. I don't see them as incongruous with Tolkien's later writings at all (and you cite some excellent evidence for this). Personally, I would very much like to keep them. But what the decision ought to rest upon is whether Tolkien actually retained them - that is, if he had finished writing the later Tale of Tuor, would it have included mechanical monsters?

The fact is that there is no later reference to them, which is a bit odd considering what a striking feature of the old tale they are. I have argued, and I still think, that the absence of any future reference to them is strong evidence that they were discarded.

But on the other hand, Q30, the latest Fall of Gondolin account that exists, still has "serpents; and of these dragons of many and dire shapes were now devised for that taking of the city". This seems to indicate that we must be doing something wrong. For if the text was written without the intention that these dragons were mechanical, then we are wrong in thinking that ordinary dragons could not be specially devised for the attack on Gondolin; but if the text was written with the intention that they were mechanical, then we are wrong in thinking that the mechanical dragons were dropped after the Lost Tales.

I'll be honest: I have no idea what to do about this. I find Findegil's proposal very attractive, and at times I feel that it is definitely the way to go. At other times it seems too risky.

08-06-2003, 08:11 AM	#15
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	You make some very good arguments, Findegil, and I must say I am now very much in doubt concerning the whole matter. For me, it was never a question of whether the mechanical monsters were acceptable or retainable - rather it was a question of whether they were in fact retained. I don't see them as incongruous with Tolkien's later writings at all (and you cite some excellent evidence for this). Personally, I would very much like to keep them. But what the decision ought to rest upon is whether Tolkien actually retained them - that is, if he had finished writing the later Tale of Tuor, would it have included mechanical monsters? The fact is that there is no later reference to them, which is a bit odd considering what a striking feature of the old tale they are. I have argued, and I still think, that the absence of any future reference to them is strong evidence that they were discarded. But on the other hand, Q30, the latest Fall of Gondolin account that exists, still has "serpents; and of these dragons of many and dire shapes were now devised for that taking of the city". This seems to indicate that we must be doing something wrong. For if the text was written without the intention that these dragons were mechanical, then we are wrong in thinking that ordinary dragons could not be specially devised for the attack on Gondolin; but if the text was written with the intention that they were mechanical, then we are wrong in thinking that the mechanical dragons were dropped after the Lost Tales. I'll be honest: I have no idea what to do about this. I find Findegil's proposal very attractive, and at times I feel that it is definitely the way to go. At other times it seems too risky.