![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#11 | ||
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,036
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Yet DA is of course! but if the overarching idea is to change the Elvish myths from being 'flat world' (which Tolkien noted was a pity to Katherine Farrer in about 1948) to Round World, the Elves of Aman should be correct about the world being always round, just as the Eressean teaching to Elfwine about the Music and so on. And what if the reader should think that the author of DA is incorrect on this point? Would this not raise the question of what the Elves 'actually' taught, beneath the confusion? It can hardly be that they really taught that the World was flat -- and in that case, the Men who disbelieved the (mis-reported) teaching would essentially be correct! I find that a bit too convoluted: that early Men (or certain Men) did not believe that the World was round, but the author of DA (a later Man) ultimately knows that the Elves were correct -- all within the idea that the World being round was actually incorrectly reported to begin with!? Again I think it fits the scenario far better for Tolkien to drop in the Elvish point of view as the overarching reality revealed by the Valar (if not in other ways), and that certain Men of early days also disbelieved this teaching. This version of Ainulindale, and DA, appear to have been written in 1946 or thereabouts, and possibly due in part to Katherine Farrer's opinion, Tolkien went back -- with respect to both the Ainulindale and the Numenor legend -- to a flat world becoming round. And thus we have Akallabeth; although interestingly, now the tradition of a changed world is not made so explicit as it was in the earlier Fall of Numenor. Of course Tolkien will again question whether or not he should incorporate a once flat world, and as I say, in my opinion he ultimately resolves the issue: not by writing new text but by bringing back DA as it was, which can then co-exist internally with AK, giving a new perspective to what seemed to be 'true' according to AK -- which itself becomes a 'mixed' tradition, written by a Man yet one of the Faithful. Arguably the lack of a surviving written version of the Elvish tradition of Numenor is better, as the Elvish perspective will be less obvious that way. To me this seems all in accordance with re-characterizing the Silmarillion as largely Mannish, to allow for certain 'questionable' notions within (which can be retained textually), where the learned Elves of Aman, or at least some of them, should know better. And to my mind the Elvish child's tale (mingled with counting lore) can do the same for the legend of the Sun. Last edited by Galin; 10-18-2011 at 10:00 AM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |