Oaths

[Marielle]

So oaths are starting to become a big deal in SilmFilm: we obviously have Feanor's Oath in episode one, and we're not that far away from Finrod's promise to Barahir, and Beren's to Thingol. How ought we to convey that oaths are binding in this world, even above and beyond one's own sense of honor?

This might have to be addressed in the Frame: I have a lot of confidence in actors' abilities to convey torment and doubt, but without establishing firmly that oaths and such words have a force beyond making a person feel guilty or unpopular if broken (like in our world), I'm not sure the average viewer would get it.

I'm hesitant to follow LotRO's model here and invent more oaths to be broken to show the mechanics of oathkeeping, though that might be a subplot we invent for the Easterling men? I don't know... if we do that, it should be sparingly. Love LotRO, but I roll my eyes each time I find a "new" group of Oathbreakers in the game.

The only reason I'm even willing to put the idea out there is because it could give us an opportunity to show the cultural differences between Easterlings and Elves/Edain. I'm thinking of a line from a Chinese historian... can't remember which right now, which is frustrating, but he's discussing the chaos of a period of civil war: "they broke their oaths with blood still wet on their lips" -- a reference to the practice of slaughtering a sacrificial animal, and smearing the blood on their lips before swearing the oath, to bind it. I wouldn't take that practice whole-sale and impose it on our Easterlings, or at least not with their oaths to the Edain and Elves, but maybe when they swear allegiance to Morgoth? Or perhaps they share a chalice of red wine at the celebratory feast, and that stands in for the blood symbolically?

Anyway, tangent aside, how do we plan on conveying to our audience the supernatural force of oaths?

 

[MithLuin]

I agree with you that we need some exposition, and that the Frame is a great opportunity for that.

Elrond is very strongly anti-oath. He essentially forbid the Fellowship from making any oaths when they set out, even though Gimli wanted to. He and Gimli got into a proverb-off over whether swearing oaths was a good thing or a bad thing. Elrond was not born until the very tail end of the First Age, but he was raised by a son of Fëanor who was bound by the Oath. He was around at the end of the War of Wrath when that finally came home to roost for Maedhros and Maglor. So, in his case, I don't think it's a casual dislike or one time only thing. He does *not* like oaths.

I can't think what situation could arise where teen!Estel would want to take an oath, but if we can find a way to bring it up, Elrond could caution him how dangerous it is - how binding, and you don't foresee the consequences when you make it, so it can twist around on you. We can tie it into the idea that words have meaning, and they're powerful, and you can't have honor and be a liar.

We can bring up the Stone of Erech Oathbreakers, if we need to. Just an allusion rather than the full story at this point, I think. Also the line about he should not vow to walk in darkness, who has not seen the night applies to the Noldor of Valinor more than anyone, so now is a good time to use it.

There are a few aspects of Fëanor's Oath that makes it one no one should take. Sure, he swears vengeance on anyone who stands between him and the silmarils, which is a bit extreme. But that's not what gets him into trouble. He names Manwë, Varda, and Taniquetal as witness....and then steps it up a notch and calls on ILUVATAR to hold his oath. Not only that, but he condemns himself to Everlasting Darkness (aka the Void) if he fails to keep his Oath. There is no wiggle room or loop hole there - and that is why his sons keep the Oath no matter how many elves they have to kill, in the end. There is no...maybe we can renegotiate or have the oath nullified or forgiven available. It's not even a matter of 'do this or die' - they don't get to go to the Halls of Mandos if they renounce the Oath. They signed themselves up for the Void.

Essentially, the Oath of Fëanor is the equivalent of selling your soul to the devil. Which, considering who their enemy is...is an interesting choice. We need to convey that somehow, and without the narrator of the Silmarillion around to helpfully clue us in...I think we need to do some work in the Frame.

 

[Fell Critter]

to me, it's the whole notion of invoking a deity, solemnly affirming a connection between the vow itself, and the power of that deity, which can't be denied. evidently we're given the freedom to do this, but personally I don't think it's something that can be done lightly, like signing a contract without reading it

but whether or not they can be falsely sworn (not just abandoned, but made with the intention of breaking), I couldn't say... would be interesting to know

 

[Fell Critter]

the connection of the word 'orc' to Orcus/Horkos suggests that this is one of the powers that Morgoth holds over them, the way contracts are used today to screw people out of their own rights, and probably has as much to do with Elrond's aversion to them as the downfall of the house of Feanor...

in the New Testament, disciples are cautioned against the swearing of oaths (Matthew 5:33-37); in the OT, Judges 11, Jephthah sacrifices his daughter because of a reckless oath, which has another parallel I can't seem to recall just now...

at the Temple of Apollo in Delphi there's an inscription, which is essentially this:

know thyself
all things in moderation
trouble follows an oath

 

[MithLuin]

Yeah, oaths have played a significant role in the stories of many cultures, and they do tend to revolve around how...sacrosanct...someone's word is. Like, what are you allowed to weasel out of, and what are you expected to fulfill no matter what the cost, and...what does it cost if you fail? Your honor? Your life? Your place in society? Your family? Some stories focus on the technicalities, others on the rashness of making an oath while drunk/boasting that will haunt you later.

I think we need to establish a culture for our elves where your word *matters*. What you say holds weight, and you go back on it at some cost. A real cost, not just losing face. Maybe not 'fall on your sword' levels of consequence, but something.

We will have positive examples of oaths (or, well, at least promises, which are nearly the same). Fingolfin's words to Fëanor before the seat of Manwë (you will lead and I will follow) drives all of Fingolfin's choices in Season 3. Finrod's words to Barahir (which he gives the Ring as a sign of)...he will hold himself to that to fulfill even though he didn't know what it would be, even though it costs him his kingdom. So, the Silmarillion isn't quite a cautionary tale of 'Don't take Oaths!'

But beyond the sense of honor is the very real sense where this is a world where your words are binding. The Oathbreakers don't just betray Isildur and look like spineless cowards - their spirits are actually trapped in their homes, unable to leave. There is an element of magic to this where words have power. Oaths and prophecies and foresight all work together with the fabric of destiny in Middle Earth. Finrod knows that he will leave nothing for an heir to inherit, though he does not know when he makes that statement that it will be his oath to Barahir that unravels him.

So, yes, that comes back to involving the gods (or in this case the Valar) to make words binding in a way that real world stories can't imply.

 

[amysrevenge]

Yes exactly. My immature reading was "wow Isildur has such power to bind these spirits to eternal unlife" but Isildur had little to do with it - they did it to themselves.

 

[Faelivrin]

I think you can show some of the attitude in the dialogue -- thoughout the story, of honorable Elves and Men and Dwarves, of not giving your word unless you intend to keep it, and then you had better well keep it. People in such a culture will not give their word rashly or frequently unless they're fools, and if they are fools it will show in their behavior outside of oathtaking (as with the Sons of Feanor). People who have given their word will be willing to go to great lengths to keep it. Beren recovers the Silmaril at the cost of his own life, not because he actually expects to wed Luthien after he dies, but because he vowed to do it and will keep his word and accomplish what nobody else ever has, to prove to Thingol that mortals are worthy of respect. Faramir tells Frodo he would not lie even to an Orc (although deception, through disguise, is used without apparent moral failure by Beren and Finrod and Luthien.)

The moral failure of giving one's word, even without a magically binding oath, and then not keeping it are shown (again, of course) in relation to the House of Feanor. Maedhros agrees to treat with Morgoth (of all people), but plans to betray him, and he ends up tortured for 33 years. Curufin persuades the folk of Nargothrond to break their oaths of fealty to the House of Finarfin, and Finrod and his companions get eaten alive by a werewolf. The Folk of Ulfang betray their oaths of fealty to the House of Feanor, and join the Devil, and help bring about the utter destruction of the (false) hopes of the Noldor and Edain.

On the other hand, Fingolfin vows to Manwe that he will follow Feanor, and he keeps his vow, even when he joins the Rebellion and Feanor becomes a Kinslayer. And he proves himself throughout to be a noble and upright kind of person. Finrod, probably one of the kindest elves in Beleriand, swears his oath to Barahir and holds it. He knows when Beren comes to Nargothrond that fulfilling the oath will kill him, and not necessarily actually help Beren gain a Silmaril, but he goes anyway. From his conversation with Galadriel in Doriath, when he foretells that he will swear an oath that will be his death, I think that he knew, or suspected, that his oath to Barahir might be the one to kill him. But his actions prove that oaths don't have to be bad... if you swear to do something generous and self-sacrificing instead of murderous.

The especially terrible nature of the Oath of Feanor can be discussed in tones of horror by the onlookers who aren't crazy, at the time that they swear it. But its power to hold the Oathbound no matter what is shown later, after the Second Kinslaying, when the Sons of Feanor spend several years trying to break the Oath. Maedhros even foreswears it when he learns that Elwing escaped with a Silmaril, but after 15 years of ignoring the Havens, the Oath starts "tormenting" the sons of Feanor... whatever that means. I imagine something a bit like the way the Ring tormented Frodo, but less intense. They actually fight it for another 11 years... but they give in. If they had actually held out a little longer, Earendil might have returned home and just taken the Silmaril to Valinor... but they don't have the moral courage to finally break the Oath. It can't be impossible to break, or that would take away their moral agency and the wrongness of continuing with the Kinslaying, but it is very, very hard to break, and the consequences of breaking it are terrifying.

And what happens to their spirits, after they die? Do they go to the Everlasting Darkness even in trying to keep their Oaths, as Maglor expected?

I agree with MithLuin that Elrond is anti-oathtaking. He saw firsthand what it did to the Sons of Feanor, and if they had not sworn that Oath to begin with, the Third Kinslaying might never have happened at all. If they hadn't kept the Oath to the end, they could have redeemed themselves. Wise people don't walk down a path they cannot unwalk, unless they know where it leads.