What are the true appearances of the Valar in Tolkien's world?

Elthir said:

Well, here you're making an assertion that Tulkas "would" have done something, which, I'd
say, does not mean alternate scenarios (including the one I raised), are unreasonable in themselves.

In other words, they might be unreasonable to you, yes, because you think (your opinion) Tulkas "would have" killed Morgoth. I, however, do not think Tulkas need have killed him, and the honor was given to Turambar.



Well, Tolkien himself characterized it as a mannish myth. Do you disagree with Christopher Tolkien's commentary concerning this?

Click to expand...

No. I don't agree.

Teleporno Celeborn said:

No. I don't agree.

Click to expand...

And why not

What is your opinion concerning Tolkien's statement in Author's note 7, Author's Notes on the "Commentary", Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth, Morgoth's Ring, and editor's note 19 (Christopher Tolkien)?

Gentlemen, ladies, or otherwise....
Ent would like to SUGGEST it's ok to 'agree to disagree'.
Perhaps a discontinuation of the differences here are in order.

The very matter/question itself is off-thread first, and secondarily just a matter of "IF things are not as they ARE written, but MIGHT have been otherwise, then what do you think they MIGHT have looked like?"

Such a speculative question by its very nature excludes anything and everything written about the matter.
The one sets up an entirely 'other' scenario. The other tries to argue from 'extended reality'.
The twain can never meet.

Ent begs a cessation of the back and forth trying to 'reach agreement' where clearly there is a difference of foundation, perspective, and purpose.

May this 'discussion' continue in PM please, if it is going to continue at all?
Ent encourages each side clearly define what the 'foundation and parameters' of the opinions are as a start. Not the opinions themselves.
Many light bulbs may turn on thereby....

Duke it out in PM and come back when bruises have gone, bandages are removed, and healing to such an extent as may be possible given the nature and extent of the wounds and scars has occurred.

This has been, in my opinion, a cordial debate, and given that I've had plenty of debates over this matter, I would indeed like to see what Teleporno Celeborn disagrees with here specifically, given Tolkien's own statement and Christopher Tolkien's commentary about that statement.

And I see no reason why the debate can't continue in a public thread. No one has to respond to any direct question of course, but in any case, we are talking about a specific piece of evidence here, and so far, I see no reason to disagree with it.

So yes, I'm still wondering. And cordial debate does not have to end up in agreement to be fruitful, or even fun . . .

. . . not that anyone said otherwise

"Your objection is noted." (The Judge, at the trial when Col. Jessup is on the stand, in A Few Good Men.)

I would also refer folks to the old Uruks versus Uruk-hai debate (in these halls), which went on for over 100 pages if memory serves.

Elthir said:

the old

Click to expand...

At times, the operative word or phrase. What was need not, and often should not, necessarily be what is, nor what was or is desired, nor what should or will be.

Allow me to cite the example of the din over RoP season 1.

But philosophizing aside (if that's what that was) my concern is given a couple of the latest responses, heels may well have been dug in. When this occurs, statistically speaking, a fracture is about to occur.

Often it isn't the fact something is cooking bringing concern. It is the amount of heat being used.

That said, once again, "your objection is noted."

Ent said:

It is the amount of heat being used.

Click to expand...

Sir Ent, I'm not sure what this refers to, but I've not been heated at all! Nor am heated now.

I'll agree to disagree that this thread necessarily needed a warning [just kidding!] but my question to Teleporno still stands.

We were discussing Tolkien; and again, cordially (to my mind).

I will respond to this one in a PM, just so my perspective is clear.
Then you can plaster me all over the wall, and we'll get back down to normal business. 😁

Elthir said:

And why not

What is your opinion concerning Tolkien's statement in Author's note 7, Author's Notes on the "Commentary", Athrabeth Finrod Ah Andreth, Morgoth's Ring, and editor's note 19 (Christopher Tolkien)?

Click to expand...

there is only one reason. Tolkien did not verbally say that dagor dagorath is not canon or he did not say he take it out of the canon throughout his life, even on his deathbed in bed. Same time he did not express this in his own words in the books. But christopher tolkien made such an inference by looking at some of his father's stories, prophecies and writings. I don't have to and do not want to agree with this thought of christopher tolkien. because in the prophecy of dagor dagorath all the elves, men, dwarves and valar re-create the arda and the world, and then they sing the second music of the ainur together. and they live happily together in this new world free from evil. I think this ending is a more beautiful, unique and priceless ending than any ending in all fictional universes.