biotrom
Member
Hey, Corey. Thank you so much for this livestream. It's a bright spot in my week! I wanted to make this small observation during class last night, but I wasn't in a convenient place to type then.
You've often argued that the action of the Valar and the action of Iluvatar probably cannot be differentiated from the perspective of a resident of Middle Earth. Last night it was said to be a distinction without a difference. The very presence of the Istari is a case in point. And as such, in some sense every action of Gandalf could also be considered an action of Iluvatar.
I'm not disputing your argument, but I think you could paint a fuller picture if you would account for why we keep asking the question. What is it that leads readers to keep asking whether an event is attributable to the Valar or to Iluvatar?
I would suggest that it's our observation of the means of an action that leads us to inquire about the agent. Specifically, if we can observe the means we automatically attribute it to the Valar. If eagles swoop in, Manwe. If a river or a dream is involved, Ulmo. If stars give hope, Varda. But if we can't observe the means, then we jump to Iluvatar because we have no other explanation. Bilbo placing his hand upon the ring in the dark, for instance.
What should we do with this habit? Do we have justification for connecting a Vala or Iluvatar to an event, or should we work against this habit and correct ourselves every time we make an assumption?
You've often argued that the action of the Valar and the action of Iluvatar probably cannot be differentiated from the perspective of a resident of Middle Earth. Last night it was said to be a distinction without a difference. The very presence of the Istari is a case in point. And as such, in some sense every action of Gandalf could also be considered an action of Iluvatar.
I'm not disputing your argument, but I think you could paint a fuller picture if you would account for why we keep asking the question. What is it that leads readers to keep asking whether an event is attributable to the Valar or to Iluvatar?
I would suggest that it's our observation of the means of an action that leads us to inquire about the agent. Specifically, if we can observe the means we automatically attribute it to the Valar. If eagles swoop in, Manwe. If a river or a dream is involved, Ulmo. If stars give hope, Varda. But if we can't observe the means, then we jump to Iluvatar because we have no other explanation. Bilbo placing his hand upon the ring in the dark, for instance.
What should we do with this habit? Do we have justification for connecting a Vala or Iluvatar to an event, or should we work against this habit and correct ourselves every time we make an assumption?