XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien, alt.fan.tolkien
From: Troels@ThisIsFake.invalid
In message
Paul S. Person spoke these staves:
>
> On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 21:56:14 -0400, Stan Brown
> wrote:
>>
>> Prompted by Troels' original comments, I've started rereading
>> BoLT for the first time in several years.
What more could I hope for ;-) I found that it was a fascinating read
in many ways, and now I'm curious if it feels different as a reread?
>> I'm now at "The Coming pf the Valar and the Building of Valinor".
>> I was fascinated to see how much of the Ainulindalė seems every
>> familiar from the version published in /Silm/ -- as CRT says, the
>> Ainulindalė is unlike most of JRRT's writings in that there is a
>> clear textual continuity from the original version to the latest.
I think it is unique in one more way -- or at least stands out in it's
structural stability and the stability of its elements. The only major
change to the main part of the tale (that which is in the
'Ainulindalė' section of the published _Silmarillion_) was to introduce
the vision and the explicit creative moment ('Eä!'). Apart from this,
the changes are, IMO, very minor (in the BoLT Eru explicitly sang the
Ainur into existence just as Eä was created directly by the Music
rather than being foresung -- overall I think there is a much more
explicit focus on the sub-creative power of music in BoLT).
Even the notorious 'Round-world version' from the fourties doesn't
touch this part of the Ainulindalė -- the differences being to the part
dealing with the Valar and the Maiar in Eä.
>> On the other hand, I was surprised to see Makar and his sister,
>> who had seemed set to play a Loki-like role: not exactly of the
>> Valar, but not exactly in opposition to them either. I wonder
>> how they wold have developed if Tolkien had not eliminated them in
>> later versions of the tales.
>
> I've always thought of Makar and Makasse (I can only hope I
> spelled it correctly) as versions of Ares and Athena.
I also found Makar and Meįssė a strange element. As it is, they don't
get much action and are, frankly, easily dispensable.
For one who is familiar with the later version of the mythology they
appear oddly out of place -- strangers in the same way as Tevildo, but
while I think Tevildo wasn't necessarily a narrative dead end and could
have been developed, I don't get the same impression about Makar and
Meįssė -- they didn't lead anywhere (not that Tolkien was always averse
to unecessary narrative embellishments).
> I suspect that JRRT decided that Morgoth was quite enough along
> those lines.
I think a more clearly Loki-type trickster figure could have been an
advantage to the mythology -- one who could have contributed to the
breaches in the defences of Valinor but with rather more ignoble
motives than Ulmo. Makar and Meįssė with their focus on weapons and
battle seem less able to provide the plot with twists or momentum
(perhaps if there had been the same kind of rivalry between them as
between Ares and Athena Tolkien could have created a plot twist with
one backing the Orcs and one backing the Gnomes).
>> I had forgotten how much Ambarkanta-type material there was in
>> BoLT: different airs and waters. Frankly, I find that stuff
>> boring.
I was fascinated with Tolkien's use of light as a substance. For one
thing I was taken back to my history of physics where 'light-
substance,' or 'lśmiere,' was once on the list of elements (I have a
1799 textbook on science -- one of the first in Danish -- that lists
light-substance and heat-substance among the elements). It may be that
this connection influences me, but I do find the idea of light as a
substance floating in the air and being collected in vats to hold a
certain poetic beauty.
--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Taking fun
as simply fun
and earnestness
in earnest
shows how thoroughly
thou none
of the two
discernest.
- Piet Hein, /The Eternal Twins/
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
