The Quenta Silmarillion Eucatastrophe-less

[Imladris]

The Valar are not unforgiving - that's the point. It is precisely the mercy of the Valar that defeats Morgoth.

Actually, I'm not sure I do.

Because Feanor was a spoiled brat, the entire family was doomed. I don't know...but that sounds a wee bit unforgiving to me.

And it is said that in that time Ulmo came to Valinor out of the deep waters, and spoke there to the Valar of the need of the Elves; and he called on them to forgive them, and rescue them from the overmastering might of Morgoth...But Manwe moved not; and of the counsels of his heart what tale shall tell? The wise have said that hour was not yet come, and that only one speaking in person for the cause of both Elves and Men, pleading for pardon on their misdeeds and pity on their woes, might move the counsels of the Powers

.

Even through all the bloodshed, the sorrow of Maedhros and his brother Maglor, the death of all the brave and noble men of Middle Earth because of the stupidity of Feanor, Manwe couldn't be bothered to forgive them. "The hour not yet come" -- why? No free will...horrid. On top of all that, they put a stipulation that one must come pleading for both elves and men -- and even then it was only a might.

Two purposes grew in his [Earendil's] heart, blended as one in longing for the wide Sea: he sought to sail thereon, seeking after Tuor and Idril who returned not; and he thought to find perhaps the last shore, and bring here he died the message of Elves and Men to the Valar in the West, that should move their hearts to pity for the sorrows of Middle Earth.

After everything they're not full of pity...

Erendil found not Tuor no Idril, nor came he ever on that journey to the shores of Valinor, defeated by shadows and enchantment, driven by repelling winds

Emphasis mine of course. Earendil who wanted to plead his case wasn't even allowed to come near the Valinor -- it's almost as if the Valar didn't even want to be moved to pity unles that one had a Silmaril.

and the wise have said that it was by reason of the power of that holy jewel that they came in time to waters that no vessels save those of the Teleri had known; and they came to the Enchaned Isles and escaped their enchantment...and at last they cast anchor in the Bay of Eldamar...

The Valar say they won't forgive them until one comes to plea, yet the one can't get to the Shores without a Silmaril.

When I was reading the Voyage of Earendil and the War of Wrath, I was twitching with joy. Finally the Valar had gotten their act together and were going to finish Morgoth once and for all. They had decided to forgive the Noldor for the foolishness of one man six hundred years ago. And Morgoth was defeated....and then we hear the dialogue of Maedhros and Maglor -- they are bound by their oath, and they don't know who can release them.

It's not even said here that the sons of Feanor were forgiven. They were merely told to give up the Silmarils and to wait for judgement. That does not sound like forgiveness, and they were both sorrowful for their oath. They did not want the Silmarils for their beauty, they wanted the Silmarils to fulfill their oath.

The end of the Silmarillion is victorious. However, it is tainted with sorrow, with the foolishness of the Valar, with the folly of Feanor, and the sorrow of the unforgiven sons Maedhros and Maglor. It is not a Eucatastrophe. It is a victory that should have happened long ago (one Vala can outsmart nine?) -- I can hear the choruses of "then there would be no story" and that is what I myself would have done a long time ago. But that isn't good enough for me. A story is made up of characters, and if the characters are incompetent, childish Vala who wait for "the hour" because there is no free will...that does not add up into a Eucatastrophe.

[Kuruharan]

Because Feanor was a spoiled brat, the entire family was doomed. I don't know...but that sounds a wee bit unforgiving to me.

No. The entire family was “doomed” because they followed him of their own free will (except for Finarfin who turned back).

the sorrow of Maedhros and his brother Maglor

I’m not certain that the suffering of those two children of their father really counts for much. Actions matter.

On top of all that, they put a stipulation that one must come pleading for both elves and men -- and even then it was only a might.

Literary convention.

Even through all the bloodshed…the death of all the brave and noble men of Middle Earth

Here is a part of your argument that I don’t understand. There was plenty of slaughter in the War of the Ring, but you seem to feel that it was more eucatastrophic.

I believe you feel this way because the LOTR focused more personally on specific characters. If you read the account of the exact same thing in “Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age,” you probably don’t get that same feeling of eucatastrophe that you do from reading LOTR. This is because the style is different.

After everything they're not full of pity...

They’d been grossly offended, something the defenders of Feanor tend to gloss over.

Emphasis mine of course. Earendil who wanted to plead his case wasn't even allowed to come near the Valinor -- it's almost as if the Valar didn't even want to be moved to pity unles that one had a Silmaril.

That is what makes it eucatastrophic. Earendil overcame greater odds than Frodo because Earendil was contending with a greater force.

they are bound by their oath, and they don't know who can release them.

It's not even said here that the sons of Feanor were forgiven. They were merely told to give up the Silmarils and to wait for judgement. That does not sound like forgiveness, and they were both sorrowful for their oath. They did not want the Silmarils for their beauty, they wanted the Silmarils to fulfill their oath.

Their oath was wrong. They should have chosen to accept their disgrace. If they really were past the point of saving themselves, they could have worked to help others and have caused less damage.

The end of the Silmarillion is victorious. However, it is tainted with sorrow, with the foolishness of the Valar, with the folly of Feanor, and the sorrow of the unforgiven sons Maedhros and Maglor. It is not a Eucatastrophe.

The end of The Lord of the Rings is also victorious and tainted with sorrow, with the failing of the elves and dwarves, the inability of Frodo to be healed, and the continued diminishing of the Dunedain since Elessar was their last great flowering. Why is this a eucatastrophe and the Sil not?

Again, I think the answer lies in the style of the respective works.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Here is a part of your argument that I don’t understand. There was plenty of slaughter in the War of the Ring, but you seem to feel that it was more eucatastrophic.

This to me seems to me to be the essence of this question. It is not the "facts" themselves, but the manner in which they are recorded that inspires eucatastrophe in the reader.

[Son of Númenor]

If Imladris in her reading did not feel something that she can (honestly, based on her knowledge of Tolkien's intended meaning of the word) describe as eucatastrophe, then the Quenta Silmarillion was 'eucatastrophe-less' for her.

But...

I, on the other hand, had a profound emotional experience during my first reading of the Silm - I was overwhelmed by the depth of the tragedy and beauty in the tale of Arda's Marring and the War of the Jewels. I experienced in the completion of my reading, right down to and summed up in the last sentence, what I can only describe as eucatastrophe.

Reading a work of fiction is inherently a very subjective thing, and one cannot simply say in universal terms that something is or isn't eucatastrophic.

[mark12_30]

Aye.

And in repeated readings, who knows what will happen?

My first time through the Sil, seemed to me little better than reading sections of the encyclopedia; informative, but little more. My second time through was quite different.

And I've read the LOTR numerous times, at least a dozen; and I am not sure i can pinpoint one single area that is eucatastrophic for me every time through.

[turgon]

I have to agree with mark 12_30 and son of numenor.
yet if your perspective is that the Sil is "eucatastrophic-less" would that not add to the realism of the tale? Isn't life after all full of tragedy and ecstasy; with no clear idea of what may come next except the glimmer of hope?

[Kransha]

Eucatastrophe...eucatatastrophe...An interesting word, that.

I believe that the Silm is riddled with events that are somewhat glossed with a eucatastrophic hue of "paint" shall we say, but bears the true, deep-rooted bittersweetness of a Shakespearean tragedy. Myths do not require eucatastrophe, so the inevitable search for one may be flawed. Yes, I'll admit, many myths do have an overall morale, or an extra that is earned in the end. The Egyptian, Nordic, and Greek pre-polytheistic pantheons, those with the most well-recorded myths, besides the Hindu and Mesopatamian pantheonic faiths, ooze eucatastrophe, though not always on a grand scale. All myth generally has eucatastrophe in it, but sometimes it is a complete misdirection of the actual story. The Silm bears a similar trend, though the -eu- part of the catastrophe is somewhat lacking in vigor, or happiness.

The Quenta Silmarillion always intrigued me - almost always. I'm very much in the same boat as mark12_30, though I try not to admit the fact publicly. But, upon rereading and rereading, as a Tolkien lover simply must attempt, I've learned more. I was fascinated by the story of Túrin Turambar, the Master of Doom, Blacksword, Mormegil, Gorthol, Glaurung's Bane, and whatever his other names may be. I have not memorized, nor have I studied the tale in profuse detail. Túrin fascinated me because he bore the role of a tragic hero, and his tale lacked eucatastrophe in almost every regard. There is no silver lining for Húrin, Túrin, and Nienor Níniel. Túrin and his sister/accidental-wife end up doing something that no one else (of great importance or note) does. They simply kill themselves, albiet for understandable reasons. One could say that Maedhros and Denethor, from LotR did the same thing, but they were merely trying to alleviate a cumbersome and agonizing pain, mentally and physically. Túrin was cursed to a greater doom, one which he could not escape. Similarly, the Kinslaying at Alqualondë does not seem to have much of an upside. Feanor and his kin betrayed their brethren and massacred the Teleri. Then, they leave, and swear an oath that dooms him as well, along with his sons. Upside? No. Eucatastrophic? Apparently not.

But, what about OVERALL eucatastrophe? That's pretty evident. The Quenta Silmarillion does end on a heavy note, which is a no-no in orchestral organization, but not necessarily in storytelling. The Silmarillion is the life and lives that were lived before the happenstances we are familiar with, and bear both a darker and lighter side. It is creation, birth, and the first prosperings of Eldar and Edain. It has many moments where shadows loom, but what story does not? The grandiose Nordic acopalypse myth: that of Ragnarok, the World's Ending (ending pending...hey, that rhymes!), holds eucatastrophe, but one that is not exactly evident. At the end, everyone's dead, except two people. They're job is start the world anew. Will the world go on a be happy? Well, yes, but everyone's still dead, good guys and bad. The Silmarillion is much less drab than that, not that I would accuse the Nordic mythos of drabness. There are still people alive and not flooded with Gothic angst. That's basically one up on a lot of other legends, myths, and old spouses' tales.

So, one must consider what is eucatastrophic.
~The Trees (Laurelin and Telperion): Semi-eucatastrophic. Trees down, Silmarils still around. ~Thingol and Melian: Semi-eucatastrophic: Thingol's dead, but he got to hang with a Maia. ~The Flight of the Noldor:.....well, at least they got to Middle-Earth, right? ~Sons of Fëanor: Non-eucatastrophic. All dead. ~Beren and Lúthien: Definately eucatastrophic. Bad things happen, people die, but the two lovers end up together in the end, even if Lúthien Tinúviel lost her voice serenading Mandos and probably dislocated her hip after all that dancing. ~Túrin: Non-eucatastrophic. All dead. ~The Fall of Gondolin: Semi-eucatastrophic, solely because people are still alive. ~The Voyage of Eärendil: The finale of the Silmarillion, and the most eucatastrophic part in it. There is plenty of preternatural beauty to be had in this tale of love and of triumph, overall, which is followed by a war that functions pretty much as a deus ex machina, which Tolkien used aptly in this case. The final words, epilogueish, though they are not composed as such, basically state that the non-eucatastrophe of the Quenta Silmarillion should be taken at face value, as stated above.

My 2 kopeks, take 'em or leave 'em.

[Kuruharan]

I think that we are approaching this from two different perspectives.

Son of Númenor
If Imladris in her reading did not feel something that she can (honestly, based on her knowledge of Tolkien's intended meaning of the word) describe as eucatastrophe, then the Quenta Silmarillion was 'eucatastrophe-less' for her.

Reading a work of fiction is inherently a very subjective thing, and one cannot simply say in universal terms that something is or isn't eucatastrophic.

mark12_30
And I've read the LOTR numerous times, at least a dozen; and I am not sure i can pinpoint one single area that is eucatastrophic for me every time through.

Yes, perhaps, but that is not what I was driving at. My point was to defend that within the context of the story itself something eucatastrophic happened. I don’t believe that it is necessary for the eucatastrophe to be experienced in the feelings of the reader, it can be present in the context of the story itself.

Does that make more sense now?