Turin the Hopeless?

[tumhalad2]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Form, that's sort of what I've been trying to say, though you put it more clearly and elegantly than I could.

What I've been specifically arguing against is the claim that this particular tale is so radically different from the rest of Tolkien's work that it can only be properly understood out of context... even that it is somehow "wrong" to keep the rest in mind while reading it.

They all have their own unique tone and atmosphere. I'd guess this story seems so aberrant to you only because you're reading it out of context, and then thinking about how the rest of Legendarium looks without it. Er... does that make sense?

I do not conted CoH can only be read out of context, or that it is 'wrong' to do so. Of course all the works have their own unique tones, and no, I don't believe the story seems aberrant merely because I'm not reading it in context; I am, but even within the context of the larger 'legendarium', I find that it contrasts quite markedly, for the reasons I have outlined.

Please demonstrate to me, in some textual way, how exactly you think the metaphysics of CoH and LOTR are similar? Or are they similar only in terms of the "larger context"? I don't understand your point. How does the "larger context" make CoH consistent with LOTR, and why should it even be expected to do so? Is it because there really is suffering in both, but in the end good comes of it? Perhaps that is true of LOTR, but it is manifestly not of the story of Turin. No 'good' comes of it at all.

So, I want to be clear.

-CoH is part of a larger story arc.
-It can be read as part of this larger story arc. Of course
-How does this diminish the metaphysical, aesthetic, tonal, and qualitative difference between it and LOTR, whether it is read as part of the Silmarillion or not? Specifically?