[ Daily Tolkien / Lord Of The Rings ] A Tolkien Virgin: Pre-amble and The Silmarillion: Ainulindalë

Tolkien Online ^ | July 01, 13, 19, 1999 | Mark-Edmond

[JameRetief]

A Tolkien Virgin: Pre-amble and The Ainulindalë
 

The first in a series

I haven’t read Tolkien. Well, okay, I think I started the Hobbit at one point, but didn’t get very far. And then I saw some animated TV or movie version of the Hobbit. But, that was all at least 10 years ago, I’m thinking, and a vague picture of an animated Bilbo taking a ring (that turns the bearer invisible) from the hideous Golem whose pet-name for the ring is "Precious," is all that I can remember.

At any rate, some friends of mine-avid Tolkien fans-have created Tolkien Online for other Tolkien aficionados. On the one hand it’s the home of the "Countdown to the Lord of the Rings movies." On the other (much larger hand) it’s the beginning of a dynamic community; a place for people to come and share and discuss anything Tolkien-not just the upcoming movies.

These two friends of mine, Ted and Jonathan, have such respect and such high esteem for Tolkien as a person, a writer, and a creator, I began to think, "maybe I should give this Tolkien fellow a try." Besides, I’ve been a fan of fantasy since before I was a teenager, and as a recent graduate with a degree in history, I’m interested in going to the roots of the modern fantasy genre. That would be Tolkien-arguably the "father of the modern fantasy genre," as Jonathan calls him.

I’ve decided to read The Lord of the Rings trilogy. But, not yet. I’m going to start with the Silmarillion and the Hobbit. Doing so isn’t absolutely necessary, I’m told; The Lord of the Rings is supposedly very good on its own. But, I’ve heard such good things about The Silmarillion, and how it really gives the reader a much greater understanding of the "big picture," of what’s going on behind the events in The Lord of the Rings, that I’m anxious to digest it before starting with The Lord of the Rings, itself. The Hobbit, which is perhaps more of a kids book, is referred to on occasion in The Lord of the Rings, so I thought I should be familiar with it, as well. So, I’m being sure to "cover all the bases," before I begin on my quest through the trilogy.

Now, Ted has had The Silmarillion, read in its entirety by Martin Shaw, on CD for a while now, and he and Jonathan both listened to it. From what they’ve said, The Silmarillion really is fantastic-if perhaps a bit tedious at times. I’m a terribly slow reader and the Silmarillion is quite long and can be a very slow read (not the perfect combination). So, I’m looking forward to being able to listen to it, instead.

As I listen to The Silmarillion and read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, I’ll be submitting a brief (and I do mean brief) play-by-play (chapter-by-chapter) of my reactions, thoughts, and overall impressions of Tolkien’s work. I am, after all, pretty much a Tolkien virgin, and I welcome you all to follow me as I’m "de-virginized," if you will.

If you haven’t read (or listened to) The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, or The Lord of the Rings, you probably don’t want to read my columns--I’ll most definitely spoil it for you. Instead, why not get The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, and The Lord of the Rings trilogy today and follow along? Then, you can compare your reactions with mine.As we journey through these books, chances are you’ll find yourself disagreeing with me, or catching something I may have missed.

Or, if you have read The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit, but it’s been a while, why not read (or listen to) The Silmarillion and read them again? Chances are you’ll see something new-especially if you haven’t yet experienced The Silmarillion.

I’ll be honest. I’m a bit of a skeptic, so if Tolkien comes close to deserving the praise some of you hardcore fans give him, I’ll definitely be surprised. I’m certainly not expecting The Silmarillion, The Hobbit, and The Lord of the Rings to be bad. But, come on! Can anyone, really be that good?

We’ll just have to see, now, won’t we?

The Journey Begins

Before I begin with my review of the specific sections of the Silmarillion, allow me to pose a question: Is the Silmarillion a history or a cosmology?

Why is this important? Well, it's a matter of approach. Should I approach it as a cosmology that is full of myths, exaggerations, and representative characters? Or should I approach it as a history that tells of actual events in which real people took a part. Don't get me wrong; I know that the Silmarillion is fiction. Naturally, though, Tolkien treats his fictional realm as a real one. So, the question isn't whether Middle Earth is real, but whether the events really took place and persons acted, thought, felt, and even existed the way the Silmarillion describes.

In the end, the Silmarillion is a cosmology that pretends to be a history. I don't care what Tolkien intended, the Silmarillion makes for terrible history. I have a degree in history, but not my masters. I'm familiar with a certain amount of history and historiography, but there's a good chance some of you have more substantial knowledge in these areas. So, feel free to counter this argument. But, approaching it as a history, I found myself making mental lists of things that were wrong with the Silmarillion--things as far ranging as unbelievable character development and the ridiculousness of the "Grand Narrative" approach to history that Tolkien--writing earlier this century--was clearly aping.

If you disagree with me, that's fine. If you think I'm being nitpicky, that's fine too. Because all of that is preface for me to say, don't read the Silmarillion as a history. Don't let character inconsistencies, stereotypes and inadequate physical descriptions, unbelievable turns of events, the passing of hundreds of years in a single sentence, and Tolkien's failure to describe the possibly rich and varied cultures of the peoples who are the primary actors in this story ruin it for you.

Chances are, I'm going to point out a few of these as we go, but rest assured, whatever I write I'm not mudslinging. I'm not determined for Tolkien to be bad just to shove it in your faces (Lord knows I'd be outnumbered). I'm not determined for Tolkien to be bad at all. In fact--brace yourselves--I'm actually enjoying the Silmarillion. It's really quite good, and I would even recommend it.

Enough with the pre-amble, let's get started.

Ainulindalë

I'm amazed by the thoroughness of certain aspects of the Silmarillion. The fact that he starts at "the beginning" is impressive, and the amount of time involved is simply incomprehensible. Over all, the creation process is pretty impressive. It’s also very beautiful. Something I really like about this section is that the Ainur can’t actually see at first.

The one thing I’d like to talk about in this section is the whole situation surrounding Melkor and the nature of evil. Every good fantasy (and a lot of bad ones) has a foe, of course, and in this one it is Melkor. Tolkien creates the ultimate foe for his realm. And, when you think about it, the story really begins when things go wrong (Only a few paragraphs into it)—that is, when, ""it came into the heart of Melkor to interweave matters of his own imagining that were not in accord with the theme of Ilúvatar; for he sought therein to increase the power and glory of the part assigned to himself."

It's interesting that this evil is spontaneous—it merely "came into the heart of Melkor." We should also keep in mind that he is the "mightiest," the most greatly endowed with "power and knowledge." What do you think of how Tolkien puts a determinist spin on 'evil' when Ilúvatar proclaims, "And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined." So we end up with the sense that nothing is truly evil, since even when Melkor is at his worst, he's merely the instrument of Ilúvatar. And I’m pretty sure Tolkien doesn’t even use the word evil in this section. Peculiar—no?

Before we go on, let's note that the first sin—if we can call it that—in Tolkien's universe is a lust for power and glory—that is, a dissatisfaction with the lot that Ilúvatar had given Melkor, and he was already the greatest among the Ainur. It makes me wonder what role megalomania, selfish pride, and lust for power will play as the story unfolds—and what consequences they will have.

Author: Mark-Edmond
Published on: July 01, 13, 19, 1999

[JameRetief]

Join us again on Friday. For those who choose to read along, the next Tolkien Virgin article will continue with the next part of the book The Silmarillion: Valaquenta.

Happy reading!

[JameRetief]

Your Tolkien Virgin Ping!

Read along with a Tolkien Virgin as he discovers and comments on the history of Middle Earth as he reads it for the first time.  These articles start with The Silmarillion, they journey through The Hobbit and finish with Lord Of The Rings: The Return Of The King.  At the pace of 2 articles per week (Mondays and Fridays) the articles will wrap up about the same time that the final movie of the Lord Of The Rings story is released. 

If anyone would like for me to ping them directly when I post the Tolkien Virgin articles or my Daily Tolkien articles let me know. I hope that you enjoy them!

[JameRetief]

The Tolkien Virgin articles:

1) Pre-amble and The Ainulindalë

You can find the latest Daily Tolkien article (along with links to the previous articles) here:

The men who would be Steward by Michael Martinez

[ecurbh]

Ring Ping!!

[Mudboy Slim]

Ah yes...after finally seeing The Two Towers on FRiday, I feel like I can actually contribute to these wonderful threads!!

Thanks fer the ping...MUD

[The Iguana]

Whether The Silmarillion is good or bad history, one must keep in mind that it is not Tolkien's Silmarillion.

Tolkien never came close to finishing it. What he had at his death was a vast body of writings on various pieces of Middle Earth history, philology, mythology and geography. Being written at different points in time from 1917 up to 1973, much of it was contradictory at various points.

It was published posthumously by his son, Christopher, who had the unenviable task of trying to weave a coherent narrative out of the most publishable and less inconsistent texts. That's not to knock what Christopher Tolkien did. I doubt anyone else could have done half as well in compiling the uncompilable.

The result was not what Tolkien had in mind for the work in published form. For one thing, his envisioned work would have been about four times as long.

As published, The Silmarillion is probably closest to a mythology.

I think that the best approach to Tolkien is to take it in the order his works were in fact published. To read The Hobbit first, especially as a child. And then to go to The Lord of the Rings. These are Tolkien's most accessible works. The history underlying each which Tolkien gives us glimpses of what makes for a richer experience.

For those who crave more there are the appendices at the end of ROTK. That gives a good deal of historical overview of the background of Middle Earth. Once you've finished that you're at the end of published works as Tolkien authorized them.

The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, and the twelve volumes of the history of Middle Earth edited by Christopher Tolkien represent in turn the next steps for the Tolkien acolyte. Each step represents less accessible and more incomplete, fragmentary or inconsistent work.

I'd never recommend The Silmarillion to someone seeking their first introduction to Tolkien. Neither would (were he alive) Tolkien himself.

[Mudboy Slim]

I'll be the first to admit that I'm a SilmarillionAddict and enjoy Tolkien's work here more than even "The Lord of the Rings", which I believe blows away "The Hobbit"!! So it'll be interesting to see how a Tolkien neophyte--BTW, how can someone claim "I’ve been a fan of fantasy since before I was a teenager..." and heve never read Tolkien?--perceives this work of genius.

"It's interesting that this evil is spontaneous—it merely "came into the heart of Melkor." We should also keep in mind that he is the "mightiest," the most greatly endowed with "power and knowledge." What do you think of how Tolkien puts a determinist spin on 'evil' when Ilúvatar proclaims, "And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined." So we end up with the sense that nothing is truly evil, since even when Melkor is at his worst, he's merely the instrument of Ilúvatar. And I’m pretty sure Tolkien doesn’t even use the word evil in this section. Peculiar—no?"

Interesting, but far from unique, IMHO. "Evil" is a direct decendant of FReeWill, and a conscious choice on the part of the evil-doer. The fact that Iluvatar proclaims that "...no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful..." is no different than the StarWars saga wherein Anakin Skywalker is created--divinely, apparently--by the need to bring "Balance to the Force", IMHO. For if there is no EVIL to be Vanquished, what need is there for Righteous Heroes?!

That said...let's bring this dichotomy back to the present day. How and why could such an inarguably EVIL Man such as Osama bil Clinton exist and rise to the highest echelons of World Power?! IMHO, it is so Clinton can be VANQUISHED by the Righteous!! Can there be any other reason for Der SchleekMeister's existence other than to see him DRAMATICALLY felled by the Goodness that is the essence of the Great American Experiment?!

I think not...MUD

BTW...RE-IMPEACH. CONVICT. DETHRONE.
DISBAR. DE-PENSION. DE-LEGITIMIZE.
INDICT. CONVICT. IMPRISON. DISCARD KEY.

[SkyPilot]

Thanks for the Ping.....

I just finished the part in The Return of the King where the ring is destroyed on Mount Doom! I guess Gollum really did have a part to play!

[dixierose]

I agree with you. The Silmarillion is a very hard read. I loved the LOTR series as well as the Hobbit, but I was left totally confused when I tried to decipher The Silmarillion. I may just grab it again and give it another try now that this "Tolkien Virgin" thread is going.

[Pippin]

MUDDY, I didn't know you read Tolkien's books.

[Mudboy Slim]

Oh yeah...as often as time allows...MUD

[poet]

Very impressive analysis, Mud.

FReegards

[Mudboy Slim]

"I was left totally confused when I tried to decipher The Silmarillion."

The massive number of names and seemingly unrelated adventures can appear cumbersome, but the beauty of the Silmarillion, IMHO, is that you can pick up the book and read one chapter at a sitting and not feel obliged to continue on to the next chapter.

FReegards...MUD

[Mudboy Slim]

Thank you, my FRiend...Tolkien went outta his way to distance his writings from religious analogies, but it is impossible for me to read him without thinking in such terms as "Good vs. Evil" (aka Right vs. Left). Americans have become spoiled by our Right to FReeSpeech in that we do not appreciate the danger writers have historically placed themselves in when they FightAgainstThePOWERSthatBe with their words. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, Orwell...the words these folks wrote could have resulted in the deaths of these writers were the BadGuys to have won WWII or the Cold War, so I believe it is almost our duty to see the underlying themes in these works that even the writers themselves may have denied at the time.

FReegards...MUD

[ksen]

Thanks for the article Jame.

I don't know if I agree with Mr. Edmonds differentiating between Cosmology and History in the case of The Silmairillion. After all, the things described in The Silmarillion really happened in Middle-Earth. I don't think it matters that everything is not told in exquisite detail or that there may be some apparent inconsistencies.

Someone reading through The Silmarillion doesn't realize it, but Iguana hit on it, but The Silmarillion was not completed by Tolkien. I am sure if he had had the chance to finish and publish it himself that many of the kinks would have been worked out.

If The Silmarillion had some application towards the way of Salvation in Middle-Earth than I probably would have classified it as a Theology.

[poet]

Once again, a most excellent analysis. BTW, "The Lib'rals Fate" was also excellent. I especially liked the rhyme and metre of that song.

FReegards FRiend

Gotta leave for work. Have an excellent day

[Maigret]

Thanks for starting this, I really look forward to following the articles/comments - though for the moment I can't start the Silmarillion since I'm reading the trilogy and just finished Two Towers last night - what a stinker that Tolkien was for cliffhangers though! I'm dying here having to do so much today before I can start The Return of the King!

I'm also very glad I hadn't read these till now, I think I wouldn't have appreciated them as much.

[FreeTheHostages]

How and why could such an inarguably EVIL Man such as Osama bil Clinton exist and rise to the highest echelons of World Power?! IMHO, it is so Clinton can be VANQUISHED by the Righteous!! Can there be any other reason for Der SchleekMeister's existence other than to see him DRAMATICALLY felled by the Goodness that is the essence of the Great American Experiment?!

I think not...MUD

Interesting. But we do not know the will of God. There can be reasons completely unknown to us.

[Mudboy Slim]

"...we do not know the will of God."

Technically, you are correct, but my Faith leads me to believe God Is Good...MUD

[Mudboy Slim]

"IMHO, it is so Clinton can be VANQUISHED by the Righteous!! Can there be any other reason for Der SchleekMeister's existence other than to see him DRAMATICALLY felled by the Goodness that is the essence of the Great American Experiment?! I think not...MUD"

"Interesting. But we do not know the will of God. There can be reasons completely unknown to us."

Just outta curiosity, if God is indeed Good, wouldn't he be 100% behind bringing a LawlessTyrant like Clinton to Justice?! What other "...reasons completely unknown to us" could there be for allowing Slick Willie to go unpunished and thereby setting a precedent that American Presidents are above and beyond the Laws of this Country?

FReegards...MUD