Middle-earth Journeys

Thanks for the recommendation, Kel and Bruce. I'll read it in the next few days.

I have a question: I certainly do see Tolkien playing with the theme of fate in the story of Turin and in the rest of the Sil, and he seems to play with it in the mode of the classical writers, as you say, bruce. But ultimately, Tolkien is no pagan, but a Catholic Christian, so fate can't be the final answer, right? Ultimately, doesn't he have to think that our own free choices play some role in what happens to us? I've read the Sil only a few times and still find it baffling! But for those of you who know it better: is there anyone in the Sil who is purely a victim of fate, who has not in some way opened the door to the bad things that happen to him/her by some act of free choice?

Or maybe JRRT wrote some parts of the Sil before the full implications of his faith made themselves known in his mythology.

Tolkien always stated that he purged his tales of religious thoughts, because one, for him, most important principals of the catholic church lives in the story itself, the eucastophic elements.

Tolkien lived in a time where it was almost a must o be catholic. I see him rather as a pantheist than as a catholic, for he saw god in everything!

To speak of free will is always dangerous, because at least the paths are already drawn within the music of the Ainur. I cannot explain it better than with one of my poems/lyrics that I did not post yet!



Thoughts about prediction

“The sum of our past, the future of our sum, determines our present,
which changes the former and hence the future.”

Therefore the existence of choice is given as a natural lack of accuracy,
which is the forgetfulness of human beings. Due to this fact life is unique,
predictable only in a simplistic way that uses the real past events to foresee the future;
this results in a blurred picture of what could happen, and that procure the freedom of choice for us.


Ramseyer Fabian 08.06.03

Greetings Kel

It is Turin's hubris not the curse of Morgoth that is at the root of his tragedy. Gwindor states such in the Sil, "The doom lies in yourself not in your name." It is quite clear that Tolkien has always used free will to illustrate how if we are free agents, the tension of good and evil will be present.
We all labor under the context of histories not of our making or choice, but we must make choices that demand that we live authentically, meaning that we are not mere actors playing out a preordained scenario. The sons of Feanor were not only driven by avenging their father, but also of pride and of power. Morwen quite like Lady Macbeth attempts her intrigues for her own purposes, even at the ill tidings of her children. The hapless Turin cannot see that for all of his machinations to keep his identity hidden, it is self delusion that brings him finally face to face with the dragon Glaurung, and then to his unhappy ending.
Tolkien's ethos is indeed seeped in Christian existentialism that has us acting not becasue of obdience but in a faith that it informs us as how to act as authentically while knowing that we may not know the full purpsoe of the context, but we must act, and our actions are genuinely ours.

Kel, I must disagree with you about Tolkien's Catholicism. First, in England and in university at the time, there were very few Catholics, and Tolkien always felt the sting of anti-Catholic bias acutely. This was even an issue between Tolkien and C. S. Lewis that contributed to the waning of the friendship in their later years. (Sorry: I'm a Catholic, and so this aspect of Tolkien has always been a topic of study for me! )

I see what you mean about Tolkien being a pantheist: he does see God in all things, and he loves the earth and the heavens! But make no mistake: he believes that were there no creation at all, God would still exist. This means, ultimately, he is not a pantheist, although he shares certain values and beliefs with them. Just because his faith is not shared explicitly or obviously in his works (as is the case with Lewis) does not mean it is not present in a deep way. And along those lines, I think it's clear in the creation myth that Eru leaves a lot of room for His creatures to continue in the creation freely with Him. The original music does not constrict all.

Bruce, I'm not entirely sure what you mean by existentialism here. Does it mean that, ultimately, we must take responsibility for our freedom by acting in spite of our doubts? I think your examples show this.

Ok, I agree with you guys, because what I wrote lead to what you said besides the catholism.
But I won't rather go into the religion-topic, for I have a principle not to speak about things I do not know enough. I went as far as I can go with thsi topic.


Well see I am not a religous man myself and I do not judge over people who are. So in my point of view I fade out any religion that still is in Tolkiens books and I just take the higher value... I hope you understand what I am trying to say.

I hope you still liked my poem

I don't know, Kel. I'm not a Norsewoman, and I don't believe in Norse mythology, but I have learned more about it and can appreciate its insight and beauty because Tolkien says it has influenced his writings. Since Tolkien wrote in his letters that LOTR is a "fundamentally Catholic work", I don't see why a Tolkien-o-phile would choose to try to ignore it. But that's up to you, of course! (good segue into a discussion about freedom!)

If I understand it correctly, your poem gives rather less importance to free will than I think Tolkien would. I don't think he would say that we are simply sums of our past. Look at Bilbo! (although Tolkien does hint that there is some genetic basis for his surprising courage). Still, of all the people in his family tree, he is the only one to bolt out into the Wild with Dwarves!

When you say 'life is unique' and predictable only in a simplistic way, do you mean that human life isn't reducible to material causes only, because such predictions can't deal adequately with soul or spirit or mind or true love and friendship and courage? If so, then, yes! I think we see all kinds of examples of this in LOTR.

But perhaps I am not understanding your poem correctly. I'd be glad to be enlightened.

Could we discuss other examples than Bilbo of people who acted with surprising freedom in Tolkien's works?

Gald to see a good round of thought and writing.
Kel, I would have to ask you ponder Kant's position on duty and obligation. In this we find man as an autonomous agent who comes to face his responsibilities not as pre-wired set of commands such as soft-ware, but free to choose. Thus radical evil isn't found as a pressence but the will to have unlimited power. We see this in Sauron and in Melkor. Their will to dominate blinds them to serious flaws that would prove to be their undoing.
Another result of one seeing their existence as a predestined set of fixed events is that it excuses personal responsiblity for not only flaws but in successes. This is where I stress the concept of an authentic life. Yes the laws of physics and biology are deterministic, but only in the given probabilities, the rest is up to us. One might have the misfortune of having flawed genes that have led to a fatal disease, but it is up to the individual to do what he or she strives to do before the inevitable.
And most importantly what of love? If all is fate or kismet, then how genuine is the love we declare for one another? If I come to understand how unique you are and what you have struggled with and laughed over, would I not have also plumbed the depth of my soul? Humanity and co-passion is far more complex than reductions of sociology or biology.
What I find in Tolkien's writing is the majesty of such complex philosophies and mythologies illustraed in a tale that resonates on so many levels. Our lives are in the telling of our own tale, and that is a very encouraging!

bruce I thank you from the bottom of my heart for these indeed good points to think about.. unfortunatly I am off to bed, but I give you guys a preview

I will explain my poem to you, because we are not so far from each other as you might think. SO I guess you will really like my explanation.

Greeting hear you soon..

Kel

This is really getting philosophical--right up my alley! I look forward to hearing how your explanations are not that far apart.

Thanks Merry and Kel. One misconception of philosophy is that is a rareified form of study, one that takes place in universities or is seminars. It is THE question and one that is constantly being played out every moment of our lives.
Merry, come to think of it I do not recall this forum discussing Beren and Luthien. This is a really good piece to illuminate the topics of freedom, duty, and how the context of one's historic times does not necessarily have absolute rule over one's life.
Anyone else up for the reading?

Ok, I try

In my poem I tried to point out that the past vows our present and vice versa because every time when we recall something it is in danger to be changed or erased depending on our momental mood (neuroscience). This leads to a blurred predictability of the future.
I really hope my level of english is enough to explain it might be that we need more than one post

Ok, if there would be a existance of a god-like being and IT understood and knew everything without forgetting anything, IT would be able to tell what will happen in the future and hence narrow our freedom. BUT because IT does either not exist or not talk with us about these thing, we have a free will, which can't be taken from us for we are ever changing beings in a microscopic way. And in the end everything exists or does not when we believe. So free will exists as long we believe in it and this is the only thing that matters!

hope I could make my self a bit more clear now.

Kel

bruce rerek wrote: Anyone else up for the reading?

Jup I am with you

I think that Beren and Luthien will make a very interesting discussion in this context, Bruce. It's a while since I read the story though!

I'd like the B&L discussion, too, Bruce.

Kel: the only place I'm having trouble with your English is when you say 'the past vows our present'. It sounds like you're trying to make a strong statement, like 'the past determines our present absolutely.' Is that what you mean?

It means that the past forms our character and the way we think about things and so it plays a big part in concidering what we are doin in the present, but because our mood and our memory is ever changing, our present is not determined absolutely from our real pass.