Flammifer
Well-Known Member
Yes, That is the one page summary of the First Age that I mentioned, which is a totally incomplete summary of the 221 page history of The First Age in 'The Silmarillion'.
This skim of the tales of the First Age, creates a numinous, vague, and legendary backdrop to TLOTR. Very effective in adding to the sense of the story being set in the vast depths of time. Almost essential to a story that, in part, is contrasting immortal creatures to Men.
They are part of the art of the work of art. The fact that they are vague and incomplete and numinous is part of the art of the work of art. Having more detail about them is, if anything, detracting from, rather than enhancing the work of art. See JRRTs parable in 'Beowulf - the Monsters and the Critics', if you want a more authoritative source than me to explain this!
The work of art references JRRTs mythology, but does not incorporate 'The Silmarillion'. It uses very small, incomplete, and deliberately mysterious, references to JRRTs early versions of The Silmarillion to add luster and mystery and a sense of deep time to itself. That sense of deep time is useful in a story that, in part, is contrasting immortals to Men.
It is similar to scattered references in The Song of Roland to The Matter of Troy, except that much of the audience for The Song of Roland knew of The Matter of Troy, but none of the readers of TLOTR knew of The Silmarillion.
One must also remember that what ever parts of JRRTs First Age that we get brief glimpses of in TLOTR, they are not the same as the story of the First Age that Christopher Tolkien published as 'The Silmarillion'.
We know that Christopher drew mainly from JRRT writings after publication of TLOTR to construct his version of The Silmarillion.
Like I have said before, using 'The Silmarillion' to try to interpret and understand TLOTR is a dubious and problematic practice. JRRT was unable to construct a 'Silmarillion' which he thought worked with TLOTR. Better to read TLOTR as its own work of art, and The Silmarillion and Legendarium as something else.
This skim of the tales of the First Age, creates a numinous, vague, and legendary backdrop to TLOTR. Very effective in adding to the sense of the story being set in the vast depths of time. Almost essential to a story that, in part, is contrasting immortal creatures to Men.
They are part of the art of the work of art. The fact that they are vague and incomplete and numinous is part of the art of the work of art. Having more detail about them is, if anything, detracting from, rather than enhancing the work of art. See JRRTs parable in 'Beowulf - the Monsters and the Critics', if you want a more authoritative source than me to explain this!
The work of art references JRRTs mythology, but does not incorporate 'The Silmarillion'. It uses very small, incomplete, and deliberately mysterious, references to JRRTs early versions of The Silmarillion to add luster and mystery and a sense of deep time to itself. That sense of deep time is useful in a story that, in part, is contrasting immortals to Men.
It is similar to scattered references in The Song of Roland to The Matter of Troy, except that much of the audience for The Song of Roland knew of The Matter of Troy, but none of the readers of TLOTR knew of The Silmarillion.
One must also remember that what ever parts of JRRTs First Age that we get brief glimpses of in TLOTR, they are not the same as the story of the First Age that Christopher Tolkien published as 'The Silmarillion'.
We know that Christopher drew mainly from JRRT writings after publication of TLOTR to construct his version of The Silmarillion.
Like I have said before, using 'The Silmarillion' to try to interpret and understand TLOTR is a dubious and problematic practice. JRRT was unable to construct a 'Silmarillion' which he thought worked with TLOTR. Better to read TLOTR as its own work of art, and The Silmarillion and Legendarium as something else.
Last edited: