# Silmarillion Thoughts?



## Findekano_Astaldo (Oct 19, 2022)

A friend recently read The Silmarillion and we had a short conversation over text, they said they thought the premise was basic-follow the Valar and you’ll be fine (basically. It wasn’t just that, we went on to discussing the world-building and wonderful backstories). But…thoughts? (Either on the book or those stories) 

*I just want to say I respect their thoughts on this and everyone has different opinions on books I was just wondering what other people think about The Silmarillion*


----------



## ZehnWaters (Oct 19, 2022)

It's my favourite book. I've read it 11 times. I mean...there's at least one Valar you shouldn't follow. It's more about following the natural order and Eru set the natural order (and lives by it) and the Valar serve him (as best they can (see Aulë for times they fail)).


----------



## Findekano_Astaldo (Oct 19, 2022)

that's a cool way of putting it! and it's pretty rad you've read it 11 times


----------



## ZehnWaters (Oct 19, 2022)

Findekano_Astaldo said:


> that's a cool way of putting it! and it's pretty rad you've read it 11 times


The prose is engaging for me. I love world building.


----------



## 🍀Yavanna Kementári🍀 (Oct 20, 2022)

I love The Silmarillion, but I've read it only once up till now.


----------



## Radaghast (Oct 20, 2022)

_The Silmarillion_ is great but there seems to be some controversy over whether it's the best book that Christopher Tolkien could have produced from his father's writings. Even C. Tolkien himself seems to have expressed some regret over how he presented it to the world. In any case, The Silmarillion is really just the tip of the iceberg. There is a whole book series, _The History of Middle-earth,_ that contains other versions of the stories, as well as essays, letters, etc, (though _The Silmarillion_ is basically considered to contain the canonical versions). I myself have barely started on that.


----------



## Ent (Oct 20, 2022)

Findekano_Astaldo said:


> they thought the premise was basic-follow the Valar and you’ll be fine (basically.



Findekano_Astaldo - in large part your friend has the premise quite correct.
Like much Fantasy (and most Religion) the premise is that there is one Creator, and he created with a view to what is best for those he created. And that best is contained "within himself". 

(It's called 'intrinsic goodness'. Intrinsic means "contained entirely within the thing - not able to be generated from without.")

On that line, NOTHING outside of the One creator has 'intrinsic' goodness. It cannot have. It can only have what is IMPARTED to it.

So 'goodness' is seen in following and adhering to the "laws of the universe" established by that Intrinsic Goodness.

But along comes 'choice'. You choose to live according to the rules, or you choose not to. This inbred 'reality' extends to all of a civilization both in fantasy, and in reality. you choose to 'obey the law' or 'you end up in prison'. (unless you happen to be a politician or a REAL crook... then you're liable to be allowed freedom in spite of yourself.) 

Problem with those to whom "goodness" is "Imparted" is that they are fickle. (among other things.)

The One who is "intrinsically good' cannot do 'bad' because it is no part of that One. It is simply not possible. 

Tolkien's works are largely about all that has been set before us, the many 'choices' we have, and how we handle those 'choices' - often whether we know the results of the 'wrong' choice or not. (Unlike the 'BIG bad guys' in Tolkien's works, who know the result of choosing the bad but do so anyway.)

Of course, we too, even though we know a choice is going to be 'bad' often pursue it anyway... so there's the 'knowing' bad choice, and there's the 'unknowing' bad choice... yet both have their ramifications because they are contrary to the 'intrinsic goodness' that has imparted the CAPABILITY of the 'good choice' even if we do not take it.

Anyway if this all sounds familiar, it is.. very familiar. It's just wrapped up in 'different trappings' for the reader to enjoy and think upon.


----------



## Eljorahir (Nov 5, 2022)

Some of my various Silmarillion thoughts:

The cover title is wrong. It should be "The Early History of The World, (Starting at the Beginning of Beginnings)". (Just joking)

In The Lord of The Rings all the elves we meet are all wonderful people...wise, strong, heroic, or fun-loving. (Can anyone think of a single elf with any negative characteristic in The Lord of The Rings?) In The Silmarillion we also meet elves who have these wonderful characteristics. However, we also meet elves who kidnap, murder, and get overly attached to their jewelry. Wow!

The first chapter describing the world being sung into existence is some of the most awesome writing I've ever encountered.

Why oh why did Christopher leave the battle between Ecthelion and The Balrog out??? I read The Silmarillion for many years until finally getting "The Fall of Gondolin" and learning about the elf who killed a balrog with his hat and the "fiery battle in cool waters". What an awesome phrase!

The Silmarillion is great.


----------



## Elthir (Nov 5, 2022)

Eljorahir said:


> Why oh why did Christopher leave the battle between Ecthelion and The Balrog out???



I'd say Christopher Tolkien is following his father here. Basically, we have two different traditions, and JRRT meant for the detailed battle to appear in *The Fall of Gondolin*, not in _Quenta Silmarillion_.

*" . . . much is told in The Fall of Gondolin: of the battle of Ecthelion of the fountain with Gothmog Lord of Balrogs in the very square of the King, where each slew the other, and of the defence of the tower of Turgon . . .*" Quenta Silmarillion, _The_ _Silmarillion -- _Christopher Tolkien's constructed version, 1977

This text is basically as Tolkien himself wrote it, from his own version, then called _Qenta Noldorinwa_, [1930]. So, we have something like this:

Silmarillion chapter (_Of Tuor and_ _The Fall of Gondolin_) -- brief mention of Ecthelion and the Balrog, something like I quoted here. And *The Fall of Gondolin* -- long prose version, one of the Great Tales. 

there could also be poetic versions of some of the Great Tales too, generally speaking



Eljorahir said:


> I read The Silmarillion for many years until finally getting "The Fall of Gondolin" and learning about the elf who killed a balrog with his hat and the "fiery battle in cool waters". What an awesome phrase!



And what we have here [very briefly stated] is the "early acorn" for the long prose version of one of the _Great Tales. _Tolkien revised _The Fall of Gondolin_ in the early 1950s, but never finished it. In this revision we get nice detail about the gates of Gondolin for example; but in any case, sadly Tolkien never finished it.



Eljorahir said:


> The Silmarillion is great.



Agreed!


----------



## Eljorahir (Nov 5, 2022)

Elthir said:


> I'd say Christopher Tolkien is following his father here. Basically, we have two different traditions, and JRRT meant for the detailed battle to appear in *The Fall of Gondolin*, not in _Quenta Silmarillion_.
> 
> *" . . . much is told in The Fall of Gondolin: of the battle of Ecthelion of the fountain with Gothmog Lord of Balrogs in the very square of the King, where each slew the other, and of the defence of the tower of Turgon . . .*" Quenta Silmarillion, _The_ _Silmarillion -- _Christopher Tolkien's constructed version, 1977
> 
> ...


Thanks for the explanation. I see what you're saying. The tale of Tuor and Gondolin presented in The Silmarillion was not intended to be the complete story. So much was left out. I guess it's kind of like the encyclopedia article about Gondolin versus having a whole book about the subject.


----------



## Elthir (Nov 5, 2022)

Right! It's like the Silmarillion chapter about Túrin versus Christopher Tolkien's _The Children of Húrin _[edited together from Tolkien's long prose attempts]

We Tolkien fans often lament that JRRT never finished his Quenta Silmarillion, but I wonder how many
of us would trade that completion (well, if we "had to" for some reason) for Tolkien-finished versions of the long prose tales of _Beren and Lúthien, Fall of Gondolin, _and_ The Children of Húrin._

Hmm.

paws 🐾 to reflect


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 5, 2022)

I believe that JRRT simply spent too long a time writing about his "Silmarillion" material. If one goes back to the "Book of Lost Tales" phase (of which much wording survived into later iterations) it was over half a century!
I think what led to one of JRRT's last published works during his lifetime, "Smith of Wootton Major" (1967) gives a hint.
JRRT had been asked to write a preface to a new edition of George MacDonald's famous fairy story _The Golden Key_. The new edition had to do without JRRT's preface, instead he published "Smith". He found that his youthful admiration of MacDonald had changed for the worse.
And MacDonald wasn't the only writer that had dropped in his esteem over the decades. My hypothesis is that the "young Tolkien" belonged to that group for the "old Tolkien". That (to me in-) famous quote about "one can't write like that anymore", that he never explained.
So how would those three "Great Tales" have looked had JRRT been able to finish them (with revisions, no doubt)? Or the two poems about CoH or B&L?
We'll never know, but I believe a safe bet is: quite different.


----------



## Eljorahir (Nov 5, 2022)

Elthir said:


> fans often lament that JRRT never finished


Do you know if JRRT ever wanted Christopher to actually continue and complete the stories?


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 5, 2022)

Eljorahir said:


> Do you know if JRRT ever wanted Christopher to actually continue and complete the stories?


In the 2022 book of essays honoring Cristopher Tolkien, "The Great Tales Never End", edited by Richard Ovenden and Catherine McIlwaine, the latter, also author of the introductory essay, states on page 16:

"In 1967 Tolkien named Christopher as his literary executor and co-author of 'The Silmarillion', thereby acknowledging that he was unlikely to complete the work and giving his son the authority to finish and publish it."


----------



## Elthir (Nov 5, 2022)

Eljorahir said:


> Do you know if JRRT ever wanted Christopher to actually continue and complete the stories?



I'm not aware of anything wherein Tolkien states this specifically. As far as I'm aware, in general, it was up to Christopher Tolkien to decide what to do with the material -- I remember reading part of JRRT's will (posted by someone online) which, at least included the option of destroying it!

Yikes.

Now maybe my memory is off there, or the post with the wording of the will wasn't correct -- but in any case, see below regarding Christopher Tolkien's "threefold" choice.

In Christopher Tolkien's own words, "On my father's death it fell to me to try to bring the work into publishable form."_ Foreword, _The Silmarillion

Also, see the wording in the Foreword to _The Book of Lost Tales I:_ "When after his death the question arose of publishing "The Silmarillion" in some form, I attached . . ."

But publishable form does not _necessarily_ mean finish the tale, or become its co-author -- at least in the sense of taking up the mantle of "writer" as opposed to editor -- and if indeed Tolkien himself had wanted CJRT to finish the book as a writer or editor, _specifically,_ it seems it was not, in any case, what Christopher Tolkien first intended to do. Another choice is explained in brief in the Silmarillion Foreword . . .

. . . and in a bit more detail, in the BOLT Foreword: "The choice before me, in respect to "The Silmarillion", was threefold. I could withhold it indefinitely from publication, on the ground that the work was incomplete and incoherent between its parts. I could accept the nature of the work as it stood, and, to quote my Foreword to the book "attempt to present the diversity of the materials -- to show "The Silmarillion" as in truth a continuing and evolving creation extending over more than half a century"; and that, as I have said in Unfinished Tales (p. 1) would have entailed 'a complex of divergent texts interlinked by commentary' -- a far larger undertaking than those words suggest. In the event, I chose the third course . . ."

. . . the third course being the 1977 constructed Silmarillion, edited with help from Guy Kay.

But as I say, as far as I know, Christopher Tolkien first intended to attempt a "History of Middle-Earth type" presentation -- which is my fumbling way to describe what he refers to above as his second choice (in orange).

That said, if there's anything more specific, I'd love to know!

I don't yet have the book *Gando* refers to.


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 6, 2022)

Elthir said:


> I don't yet have the book *Gando* refers to.


Well, on the dust jacket of it (published by Bodleian Library Publishing) it's stated:
"Catherine McIlwaine is the Tolkien Archivist at the Bodleian Library, University of Oxford."



_[Does a ridiculous - and *very* careful, while seated - little victory jig for being ahead of *That Cat* on the book learning curve for a short while - __I also don't want to wake my wife with such silliness__ ...]_


----------



## Elthir (Nov 6, 2022)

Indeed, you beat me to it *Gando*, but Christmas is arriving soon 

Anyway, after I wrote -- "as far as I know, Christopher Tolkien _first intended_ to attempt a "History of Middle-Earth type" presentation -- I wondered where I got this from. I couldn't recall. So, after searching me on the web, it seems that I got it from . . . these guys?

Back in 2012 I quoted:



> "The fundamental problems, I believe, with the published Silmarillion lie in the fact that a 'literary' version was decided on in the first place. Apparently the idea of Guy Gavriel Kay, it was accepted, and the finished version was accordingly produced. In his speech at the 1987 World Science Fiction Convention, Kay said that the initial idea had been to produce a large, scholarly tome, in which the latest version of any particular chapter would have been given, together with extensive appendices and editorial apparatus showing how it had evolved from earlier versions.





> This would have resulted in a massive volume, some 1300 printed pages long, say (about the size of the Scull and Hammond Reader's Guide to Tolkien), and two chapters in this style had already been produced when Kay arrived. However, Kay felt strongly that what was needed was a straightforward narrative, shorn of academic apparatus, which advice was eventually adopted by Christopher Tolkien.





> This approach was tried with 'The Coming of the Elves' where it was felt to work so well that Kay's approach was thereafter adopted. ('A Tower in Beleriand', Charles E. Noad, Amon Hen 91, May 1988, pp.16-18.) It may indeed have worked well, but such a procedure served to give a finished appearance to what was very often disparate and unfinished material.
> 
> Charles Noad, from his review of Arda Reconstructed



🐾


----------

