SWG Re-Read - Ainulindalë Discussion Post

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Hi, folks! This is our first Discussion post. It includes a short summary, stuff we found interesting, notes on earlier versions and a couple of questions to get you started. The Discussion post for "Valaquenta" will be posted later, as well as the Fanworks post for both chapters. Thank you for your patience!

Important: This is not a spoiler-free zone. It is hard to discuss any chapter in depth without referring to things that happen in later chapters. Proceed at your own risk!

Many thanks to lignota for creating the header banner for this post! More banners and icons will be forthcoming in a later post.

Ainulindalë – The Music of the Ainur




Summary

The "Ainulindalë", although not part of the Silmarillion proper, sets the stage for the story ahead. We are introduced to a creator god, Eru Ilúvatar, and the Ainur, "the offspring of his thought". The creation of the universe is presented as a sort of symphony in three movements. It begins harmonious, but as each theme progresses, a powerful Ainu named Melkor tries to introduce new thoughts into the music, causing discord. Twice, Eru interrupts the discord to impose new themes of his own; when his third theme again has to struggle against the tune introduced by Melkor, Eru stops the music. He then shows the Ainur a vision of their music made real: the world and its history. The Ainur also see things that they did not come up with, most notably the Children of Ilúvatar, i.e. Elves and Mortals. Amazed by the vision and enamoured with the Children, several of the Ainur – including Melkor - wish to go into this world. Eru then makes it real; however, the Ainur who enter it find that none of the history they've seen has actually happened yet. They begin to shape the world, always disturbed by Melkor who wants to shape and rule the world alone.



Observations

Interestingly, the earliest in-universe author of the "Ainulindalë" is Rúmil, a Noldorin elf, who cannot have been present for the events he describes. The text is therefore set up to be a third-hand retelling ("yet did Manwë Súlimo, Lord of Elves and Men, whisper them to the fathers of my father in the deeps of time" (The Book of Lost Tales 1) rather than an eyewitness account (as it could have been if Tolkien had given, say, Vairë as the author). This, along with several remarks by Tolkien in "Myths Transformed", suggests that the "Ainulindalë" has never been meant to be a factual account of "Creation". Even within the fantastical context of the Legendarium, "The Music of the Ainur" is supposed to be a myth, which the characters may or may not believe or even know about.



Our Favourite Quotes

"And he spoke to them, propounding to them themes of music; and they sang beore him, and he was glad.But for a long while they sang only each alone, or but few together, while the rest hearkened; for each comprehended only that part of the mind of Ilúvatar from which he came, and in the understanding of their brethren they grew but slowly. Yet ever as they listened they came to deeper understanding, and increased in unison and harmony."

"In the midst of this strife, whereat the halls of Ilúvatar shook and a tremor ran out into the silences yet unmoved, Ilúvatar arose a third time, and his face was terrible to behold. Then he raised up both his hands, and in one chord, deeper than the Abyss, higher than the Firmament, piercing as the light of the eye of Ilúvatar, the Music ceased."

"And amid all the splendours of the World, its vast halls and spaces, and its wheeling fires, Ilúvatar chose a place for their [Elves and Men's] habitation in the Deeps of Time and in the midst of the innumerable stars."



Earlier Versions

Different versions of Tolkien's creation myth can be found in various volumes of the History of Middle-earth series. Following the nomenclature offered by Christopher Tolkien in Morgoth's Ring, these are:
"Ainulindalë A", woven into the framework of Ælfwine's/ Eriol's "fieldwork" on Tol Eressëa, written between 1918 and 1920 and published in HomE 1: The Book of Lost Tales 1.
"Ainulindalë B", written in 1930; this is the "Flat World Version" sent to Katherine Farrer in 1948. It has been published in HoME 5: The Lost Road and Other Writings.
"Ainulindalë C*", based on B but with some drastic changes which we will discuss later. This is the "Round World Version" that Katherine Farrer read in 1948. It has been published in the "Ainulindalë" section of HoME 10: Morgoth's Ring.
"Ainulindalë C", rewritten from C* after its return, probably influenced by Katherine Farrer's commentary. Tolkien kept most of the changes that he had made to B, but returned to a "flat" view of the world. This can likewise be found in Morgoth's Ring.
"Ainulindalë D", finished before 1951, which appears to be Tolkien's final extant revision of the text; also in Morgoth's Ring.
Christopher Tolkien also mentions an additional manuscript from 1946, of which only one single page has survived. (Morgoth's Ring, Part One: Ainulindalë.)

If one disregards changes of wording and of names as well as other small additions and omissions, the ideas presented in the "Ainulindalë" have changed remarkably little throughout the decades. There are only a few truly noteworthy changes:

In its first appearance, the "Ainulindalë" is told to Eriol/ Ælfwine by Rúmil himself. In later versions, Rúmil continues to be named as the author, but the text is no longer presented as a narration framed by the Eriol story, but as a formal chronicle: "This was written by Rúmil of Tûn (The Lost Road and Other Writings)"; "This was written by Rúmil of Túna and was told to Ælfwine in Eressëa (as he records) by Pengoloð the Sage"(Version C) (who however does not speak to Ælfwine in person; rather, Ælfwine had access to and translated his works) (Morgoth's Ring). No in-universe author is given for the version in The Silmarillion.

Before Version C*, Eru immediately after the Third Theme "gives Being" to the music; the Ainur see the World, rather than a vision of it. Accordingly, the Valar do not find the world "unshaped" as they do in C*, C, D and the final version; neither have they seen its history unfold.
As the name "Round World Version" suggests, Version C* paints the image of a world that is round from the beginning, rather than being made so in the Drowning of Númenor. The sun exists right from the start; the moon comes into being when the Valar expel Morgoth's first stronghold into space. It is said to be "clean, yet utterly barren... a mirror to the greater Earth, catching the light of the Sun, when she is invisible". In this version, the Great Lamps never appear. As Tolkien did not further follow the idea, it is impossible to say what he would have done about the Two Trees.

It is notable that the events that, in the published Silmarillion, form Chapter 1 ("Of the Beginning of Days") are part of the "Ainulindalë" in Versions C*, C and D. These versions will therefore be relevant when we discuss Chapter 1, too.



Food for Thought

In 1948, Katherine Farrer, who had a chance to read both the "Flat World Version" and the "Round World Version" long before publication, expressed that she much preferred the "Flat World Version" to the one that better fits our modern understanding of the world. Do you agree?

Tolkien himself noted: "The Elvish myths are 'Flat World'. A pity really but it is too integral to change it." Why do you think Tolkien would have preferred to give the Elves a 'round' world view, if it had not been too complicated to implement the change? What changes would have to be made to the Legendarium to make a 'Round World' myth work?

How effective do you find the "Ainulindalë" as a creation story? Imagine that you are a young Elf (or Man) of the First, Second or Third Age who, when asking how the World came into being, is presented with the "Ainulindalë" story. Do you think you'd consider your question answered in a satisfying manner?

In- universe, Eru asserts that no part of the music could be played without his consent, and that every theme, even Melkor's, ultimately originates from him. Nonetheless, he appears upset about the discord caused by Melkor. Why do you think that is?

In a similar vein, we are told that the Ainur see the world "unfold its history", including the coming of the Children of Ilúvatar. However, there is no mention of the Dwarves, even though they should surely appear in a vision of the world's history. Likewise, the Valar's continual struggle against Melkor should have been visible - as a warning, so to say. Nonetheless, it all seems to come as a surprise to the Valar. What do you make of that?

Do you think the characters of the Silmarillion are aware of the mythical nature of the "Ainulindalë", or do you think they accept it as true history? In what way would it be significant how they view the traditional text?

Did you know that the "Ainulindalë" was supposed to be purely myth or did you treat it as factual history? Knowing the former, will your treatment of it change?

Can you see any parallels to real-world mythologies or legends that may have influenced Tolkien?



Works Cited

The Silmarillion. "Ainulindalë".

The History of Middle-earth: The Book of Lost Tales 1. "II: The Music of the Ainur".

The History of Middle-earth: The Lost Road and Other Writings. "IV: Ainulindalë".

The History of Middle-earth: Morgoth's Ring. "Part One: Ainulindalë" and "Part Five: Myths Transformed".



Please note: We don't know everything and it's perfectly possible that we missed something. These summaries and questions are by no means supposed to be complete and exhaustive. If you have looked further into this particular topic or would like to discuss something that we've overlooked, please share it!

Comments

[dawn_felagund]

I am going to be back with more in-depth comments on Ainulindalë in a few days (as soon as the madness subsides of getting B2MeM prompt claims ready to open!) but wanted to offer some links in the meantime to some other material about the Ainulindalë:

Professor Corey Olsen has recorded a lecture on each chapter of The Silmarillion as part of his (free) Silmarillion seminar

We have summaries of each Silmarillion chapter on the SWG. Ainulindalë is here.

And finally, an SSP, since I just presented a paper on creation myths and the Ainulindalë ... At the Root of the Tree of Tales: Using Comparative Myth and "On Fairy-Stories" to Analyze Tolkien's Cosmogony. A look at how Ainulindalë compares to other world creation myths and how differences between it and other world myths highlight Tolkien's own views about the fantasy genre.

[ljusastjarnan.livejournal.com]

Oh my goodness all my pronunciations of almost every single one of these words are so utterly wrong. D":

[j-flattermann.livejournal.com]

In- universe, Eru asserts that no part of the music could be played without his consent, and that every theme, even Melkor's, ultimately originates from him. Nonetheless, he appears upset about the discord caused by Melkor. Why do you think that is?

It is written that Melkor was the greatest of the Ainu. Some how I seem to remember, unfortunately I just can't recall where I have read it, that Melkor also was the first Ainu to be created. I that this might be the reason, for as a first create to rebel in such a way hurt maybe most, for the betrayal feels deeper.

In terms of the dwarves, they were not in Eru's original plan and he never thought of them as they were secretly create by Aulë. Now that IMHO could not be absolutely right, if all the Ainu were creating was done with Eru's consent. Just as he said to Mekor "And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, ..."
Then again the dwarves were not created by the music of the Ainur but handcrafted by Aulë.

What fascinates me is that Tolkien obviously merged the concept of mono deism with the poly deism of the Germanic tribes.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

But that was the point -- it can't have been genuine betrayal if Eru created Melkor in that manner. The Valar don't even have the excuse of Free Will; they cannot possibly surprise Eru. However, rawr_balrog suggested below that Eru merely acted betrayed and upset so that the other Ainur would understand that what Melkor is doing is not OK. I really like that idea - Eru himself is not truly upset, because he knew this was going to happen and in fact wanted (needed) it to happen, but he shows the other Valar how they should feel about it.

Then again the dwarves were not created by the music of the Ainur but handcrafted by Aulë.

But probably foresung by Aulë in some way, even if Aulë didn't realise it at the time. (Seems to have worked that way with Yavanna and the Ents!) I can only assume that the Ainur either didn't see all that much of the world's history (we aren't told just how far the vision unfolds, after all), or that they were so overwhelmed by the whole experience that they missed a lot of details. ;)

What fascinates me is that Tolkien obviously merged the concept of mono deism with the poly deism of the Germanic tribes.

Strictly speaking, he very likely has taken some inspiration from the Platonic Timaeus, which features a creator god (the demiurgos) who creates further gods, as well as assembling the soul of the world by means of a musical theme (according to the Pythagorean model, a.k.a. "The Music of the Spheres"). The "Ainulindalë" doesn't match the Timaeus in all details (fortunately - anything else would be boring!), but that part at the least is definitely not entirely original. ;)
However, yes, Tolkien quite cleverly made his myth compatible with his Christian faith by demoting the Valar from proper "gods" to angelic "Powers"!

[rawr-balrog.livejournal.com]

In- universe, Eru asserts that no part of the music could be played without his consent, and that every theme, even Melkor's, ultimately originates from him. Nonetheless, he appears upset about the discord caused by Melkor. Why do you think that is?

In a similar vein, we are told that the Ainur see the world "unfold its history", including the coming of the Children of Ilúvatar. However, there is no mention of the Dwarves, even though they should surely appear in a vision of the world's history. Likewise, the Valar's continual struggle against Melkor should have been visible - as a warning, so to say. Nonetheless, it all seems to come as a surprise to the Valar. What do you make of that?

It's difficult to address one of these questions without addressing the others. For one, it is in my opinion short-sighted to label the in-universe perception of these stories as myth in a modern sense--i.e., a traditional but fictional folk story explaining natural phenomena via the supernatural--across the board. Rather, it seems to me that these stories, while perhaps not literally true, might be viewed instead as sacred allegory. In other words, the actual events shown in the story may not have happened literally, but they act as an understandable depiction of the otherwise indescribable ideas of creation, with some elements taken for granted as truth. Similar to the way that many today view the Judeo-Christian creation myths as technically untrue but inherently true (that God created the world, that we as humans were, are, and shall be the favorites whom he created all else in favor of) I have always personally seen this story to be understood in-universe as true on a larger, cosmological level, if not on a technically factual one. I should probably clarify here that my perspective is informed by my having been raised Catholic, and so I can't help but draw parallels between that and many parts of Tolkien's work.

I think it's also important to speculate on the purpose these stories might have for the ones that told and heard it. Most creation stories in our world serve several purposes. They lay a foundation for a culture's tradition or religious beliefs, provide metaphysical context, and explain the presence of conflict and "evil." It's this last purpose that probably leads to some of the continuity problems you cite above re: Melkor. In order for the world to be inherently good, even those things that are considered evil and which harm them must be preordained by a higher benevolent power who loves Elves and ultimately seeks their good. However, if those harmful things are preordained by Eru and the Valar, doesn't that mean that they sought intentionally to harm the Elves? How is that benevolent?

That, I think, is why even with Melkor's actions existing within Eru's intention, they are greeted with opposition from Eru and the other Valar. I doubt that Eru was truly surprised or abashed by any of it, but for the song to play out, the discord must be met on both sides. Since the other Valar seem to take their cues from Eru even within their own freedom of choice, this conflict must have been demonstrated by him first in order to affirm their rightness of position. It is stated in the story that each Vala only knew his or her own 'part' of Eru's mind [I'll edit in the source once I get my book out of the car], and this seems to imply that, while possessed of great knowledge, the Valar are not themselves all-knowing. All of this together leaves Eru's domain as the mysterious higher purpose for which Evil is intended, and the Valar for the immediate, worldly moral good that is otherwise compromised by the question above, providing an ultimately positive context for suffering while also creating a moral framework upon which to judge one's own actions. This is, of course, all my own speculation.

That all said, one could also just accept all the conflicts within the text as evidence of a story continually handed down and re-purposed to suit the needs and lessons of each telling without ascribing a greater purpose to them all, and that would also be defensible.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds it a puzzling (short-sighted, as you call it) that Tolkien was so troubled by the mythical nature of the Music of the Ainur, Beginning of Days etc. He's the guy who gave us Mythopoeia, after all, proudly declaring that myth didn't have to reflect factual reality in order to be true! Like you, I tend to interpret the "flat world" depictions of the "Ainulindalë" and later chapters as a sort of traditional allegory, not necessarily sacred but certainly honoured. Even if it isn't literaly "true", it must have served as an explanation for the existence of the universe (just like other, real-world creation myths did) and formed the basis of the Eldar's self-identity. As such, even when (as Tolkien says in "Myths Transformed") the Eldar or at least their scholars were told (by the Valar) or learned (by observation) that the world cannot have been flat at any point, or that there are a couple of plot holes that the Ainulindalë cannot explain, it is perfectly possible that they would have stuck to the old story simply because it was part of their cultural heritage...

I really love your idea that Eru has to enact being surprised and upset by Melkor's rebellion in order to show the other Valar (who are indeed described as limited to their specific fields of expertise -- in "Of Fëanor and the Unchaining of Melkor", we're explicitly told that "Manwë was free from evil and could not comprehend it") that what Melkor is doing is not acceptable, even if Eru himself designed Melkor in that way! While I didn't let the apparent contradiction between Eru's "no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me" and his reactions to Melkor's themes bother me too much, it has always been something that didn't make sense to me. Your speculation would explain it perfectly, though -- thank you!

[rawr-balrog.livejournal.com]

Missing citation: Ainulindalë paragraph 1: "... for each comprehended only that part of the mind of Ilúvatar from which he came..."

[dreamflower]

The first thing to strike me when reading this (and which struck me on my first attempt to read it in 1977) is the Biblical tone and style of the language. Of course, that's no accident.

The description of the Music is soaring, and makes me want to listen to choirs and symphonies.

In 1948, Katherine Farrer, who had a chance to read both the "Flat World Version" and the "Round World Version" long before publication, expressed that she much preferred the "Flat World Version" to the one that better fits our modern understanding of the world. Do you agree?

I like the "flat world" idea better, simply because it is NOT how our world works; I'd like it if the various parts of the myth were, in fact, literally true. It's more appealing and fantastical.

I don't see it as being necessary to the history that unfolds (though it adds a lot more drama to the Akallabeth!

Do you think the characters of the Silmarillion are aware of the mythical nature of the "Ainulindalë", or do you think they accept it as true history? In what way would it be significant how they view the traditional text?

I think that depepends entirely on the character in question. On learning the story from the Elves, I do not doubt that Bilbo would certainly accept it at face value. But as in our own world, there will be literalists, as well as well as those who are willing to accept it as metaphor or allegory--and some who will accept neither.

In- universe, Eru asserts that no part of the music could be played without his consent, and that every theme, even Melkor's, ultimately originates from him. Nonetheless, he appears upset about the discord caused by Melkor. Why do you think that is?

I think his upset is more about the motives that he knows are behind Melkor's actions rather than the results. He's grieved by the notion that this particular one of his creations is ready to pridefully put his own wishes ahead of everything, and that Melkor wishes to have all acclaim for himself.


In a similar vein, we are told that the Ainur see the world "unfold its history", including the coming of the Children of Ilúvatar. However, there is no mention of the Dwarves, even though they should surely appear in a vision of the world's history. Likewise, the Valar's continual struggle against Melkor should have been visible - as a warning, so to say. Nonetheless, it all seems to come as a surprise to the Valar. What do you make of that?

There was no view of hobbits either. Did they actually see all they were shown? Or were their attentions caught by many things that caused them to overlook some of those? Or were they simply shown one version of the future?

Did you know that the "Ainulindalë" was supposed to be purely myth or did you treat it as factual history? Knowing the former, will your treatment of it change?

I like to treat it as basically factual in most of my work, even though, yes, I know it's myth--because I like the myth better.

Can you see any parallels to real-world mythologies or legends that may have influenced Tolkien?

Oh, definitely! There's certainly a Biblical parallel, even if only in the language chosen; yet there is also a pagan element, as the Valar are treated in many ways like a pantheon of gods.

The unique thing is Tolkien's fusion of monotheism with pantheism: in his world, there are may gods, but only one God. It makes for a very different feel and dynamic to his world.

Another reason I like the idea of treating his myth as "more factual" than the myths of our world is that it leaves in place characters who have witnessed as history that which others have seen as myth. The Ainur witnessed and participated in the creation of the world--and some of them remain to the world as witnesses to those who came after.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Wow, thank you for taking the time to respond to all our little questions! If I don't in turn comment on all your replies, that's not because I'm disregarding what you said, but only because it would get boring if I said "I agree, ..." repeatedly ;)

The description of the Music is soaring, and makes me want to listen to choirs and symphonies.

Oh, yes. I was actually surprised to read in Carpenter's biography of Tolkien that Tolkien appears to have had no particular love for music (though he certainly didn't dislike it) and that "language took the place in his life that music takes in other people's" (paraphrased, as I'm too lazy to hunt for the exact quote right now). The Ainulindalë convinces me that music must also have had a special place in his life - otherwise, how could he have written about it in such a compelling way? (Well, I find it compelling, anyway! ;))

He's grieved by the notion that this particular one of his creations is ready to pridefully put his own wishes ahead of everything, and that Melkor wishes to have all acclaim for himself.

See, and this explanation doesn't quite work for me - after all, Eru made Melkor in the manner he is, arrogance and all - so either (if Melkor's behaviour really is something that Eru didn't plan on) Eru isn't as almighty as the text wants us to believe, or, well, Eru can't really be all that grieved (and certainly not surprised) by what he himself "programmed"! But In other comments, people have suggested different solutions to this conundrum - that Eru acts grieved and shocked rather than really being so, for the sake of the other Ainur who can thereby learn how they should feel about it, or that Eru intentionally lets Melkor rebel in order to discourage rebellion from others, and show his own supremacy. In that light, I suppose it makes sense!

There was no view of hobbits either. Did they actually see all they were shown? Or were their attentions caught by many things that caused them to overlook some of those? Or were they simply shown one version of the future?

The text suggests both that they only saw the very beginnings of history - they do see the earth (as it is is in the Years of the Trees) and the coming of the Children, but how much further it goes isn't said (IIRC). And whatever they do see, it's also stated that they're all in some way blinkered by their personal fields of expertise, so it's perfectly possible that (say) Manwë was so absorbed by watching the clouds that he completely missed out on everything else, or that Oromë was so busy looking at some patch of forest that he didn't notice what was going on in the North at the same time. Moreover, it's stated (hhimring has posted the quote below) that Eru kept some parts secret. And lastly, maybe they did see only one possible future, which would tumble apart as soon as people with Free Will entered the scene (at the latest). In conclusion, "All of the above", I guess!

Another reason I like the idea of treating his myth as "more factual" than the myths of our world is that it leaves in place characters who have witnessed as history that which others have seen as myth.

That's a "problem" I also see. Not so much because of the Ainur who later interact with Elves (and even the occasional Man), but above all because I'd have to decide where it stops being myth and becomes fact. The Music of the Ainur certainly doesn't look more "mythical", or less likely to be fact, than the existence of the Two Trees: So if I take the Ainulindalë as "pure myth", by what right do I consider the Two Trees and their destruction as any less mythical? But if the Trees are also myth, then what about all those characters - no longer divine or at least angelic, but Elves! - who move on back into Middle-earth and then have adventures that definitely are supposed to be history, not myth? What about Fëanor, for instance, or more dramatically, what about Galadriel? She has interacted with the Valar and seen the Trees and Silmarils and first Rising of the Sun and Moon. Or she hasn't! Thinking about it makes me despair a little, so I've decided that for the sake of my sanity, I'm going to treat it all as fact. Most of the time, anyway! XD

[independence1776]

(Speaking solely as a participant in the discussion, not a co-leader of it.)

Round World versus Flat World: round, definitely (though the version in "Myths Transformed" (MT) rather than this one). Middle-earth is supposed to be our world, so that means no ignoring that our world was always round.

Did you know that the "Ainulindalë" was supposed to be purely myth or did you treat it as factual history? Knowing the former, will your treatment of it change?

I'd generally assumed-- possibly wrongly-- that the reworked myths in MT were mainly about the Two Trees, not the Ainulindalë. I've always accepted that the Ainulindalë was pretty much fact, partly thanks to not looking overly much at HoME for the first few years after I read the Silm and therefore not realizing there were narrators/authors, but also thanks to this line from the Ainulindalë: For what has here been declared is come from the Valar themselves. So I'm still more inclined to treat it as fact rather than pure myth, even knowing the history.

[rawr-balrog.livejournal.com]

See I had always taken that line, "... come from the Valar themselves..." to have come from the Elves in the recounting rather than as to borrow a term from TV Tropes, a Word of God from Tolkien regarding the reliability of the text. I had also largely ignored the histories, and didn't actually know there were named narrators until this post! Which is not to say you were wrong, of course. I just find it interesting that we came to such different conclusions via the same information.

[anna-wing.livejournal.com]

Thoughts:

1 Perhaps if the Music of the Ainur had been in counterpoint rather than harmony there might have been room for Melkor. Of if he had been offered the alternative of going off into the Void with whoever wanted to go with him, and making his own music there. Of course if his specific desire was to have his music and no other's then that would clearly have been incompatible with a reasonable compromise. But otherwise there were better ways for the situation to be resolved.

2 Has anyone suggested that the ultimate purpose of the Marred Song is in fact to bring Melkor back into the fold?

3 And what about those Ainur who preferred silence? I've always thought of Ungoliant as one of those.

4 The One is an artist and therefore cares about the details only insofar as they serve the art as a whole. This would explain the Numenorean genocide, an act otherwise rather incompatible with any notion of a benevolent deity.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

2 Has anyone suggested that the ultimate purpose of the Marred Song is in fact to bring Melkor back into the fold?

I haven't seen that suggested before, no, although I suppose it would work! It would beg the question, why let him mar the song in the first place, but I'm sure one could find an explanation ("narrative necessity" if all else fails! ;)) to that.

3 And what about those Ainur who preferred silence? I've always thought of Ungoliant as one of those.

Oh wow, what an intriguing thought! Have you explored that idea any further? It's completely new to me and so fascinating!

4 an act otherwise rather incompatible with any notion of a benevolent deity.

I've never really thought about Eru as all that benevolent - or rather, as beyond such things as bene- or malevolence. As Númenor shows, he can be quite vengeful; and he DID create Melkor as Melkor is. So I'd agree with you that the artist cares about the details as parts that serve (or harm) the whole, rather than on an individual and personal basis.

[angelica-ramses.livejournal.com]

Do you think the characters of the Silmarillion are aware of the mythical nature of the "Ainulindalë", or do you think they accept it as true history?
I think that for the Elves who went to Aman, met the Valar and received a first-hand retelling of the narrative of creation, it must have been true history though told metaphorically ("harps and lutes, etc"): after all they didn't learn it through faith or revelation but through beings who had been there! And they were willing to share at least part of the story ("For what has here been declared is come from the Valar themselves,with whom the Eldalië spoke in the land of Valinor, and by whom they were instructed...")

My favourite part is
And it is said by the Eldar that in water there lives yet the echo of the Music of the Ainur more than in any substance else that is in this Earth; and many of the Children of Ilúvatar hearken still unsated to the voices of the Sea, and yet know not for what they listen.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

In fact, if we stretch string theory a little ("harps and lutes"...) and interpret that magnificent final chord as a sort of Big Bang, the "Ainulindalë" might even work as a metaphor for Why Stuff Exists today (and would certainly have been more comprehensible to the Eldar than, well, string theory). This idea amuses me waaaay too much...!

Oh, yes! I suspect we'll have to pay a lot of attention to Tolkien and his love of water (and particularly the sea) throughout the book, anyway...

[myaru.livejournal.com]

As a reader, first picking up the Silmarillion, I just assumed it was meant to be factual. I've since changed my mind.

How effective do you find the "Ainulindalë" as a creation story? Imagine that you are a young Elf [...]

To be honest, I like the Ainulindalë much more than most creation stories. :D But as an explanation of the creation of the world, I suspect it would be about as effective - to an adult elf or man - as Genesis, or the account of creation in Greek myth, etc. For instance, I can't say for sure I ever truly believed the Adam and Eve story, even as a child; what I took away from it was the lesson that you shouldn't lie to your parents, and that humans were being punished the way I would be, if I lied to my mother. When I look at it now, I see various things I can't really do justice to explaining: the question of free will and how it is related to evil, and other stuff.

So I would think an elf might go through a similar development of thought. You might have this story straight from the Valar, but their account of it is undergoing some translation, especially when they try to relate what existence was like before they entered time and space. Can you really come up with an accurate way of describing music when such a thing - sound waves, notes, instruments - kind of didn't exist? As a young elf I would consider it apiece with the rest of my bedtime stories. As an adult, depending on my inclinations, I might choose to believe it's as close a parallel to the truth as the Valar could manage, or I might decide it's just a moral lesson.

Or, if I were Feanor...

In- universe, Eru asserts that no part of the music could be played without his consent [...]

... I would say the lesson inherent in this is that the Valar are entirely subservient to their creator, and this story the Valar gave us proves that they don't understand Eru any better than the elves do, but one thing is certain: he (Eru, not Feanor!) is the only authority worth bowing to, since everything the Valar have ever conceived was thought of first by their creator. And I'd probably milk it, and the rest of the canon, for as much politically useful material as I could.

Feanor would be more concise and eloquent, though. He could take a lot from this story that probably wasn't intended, but what I mean is, if I were to write fic about how the elves received the mythology, I'd imagine that opinions on the Ainulindalë would be as diverse and argumentative as any opinion on the likelihood of Genesis being a true story.

Eru's statement in this part of the chapter sounds like something I've read before, either in the Bible, or Milton, or similar. His being irritated with Melkor's vanity isn't necessarily at odds with his profession of supreme creative power. Most of the Book of Exodus involves God "hardening" Pharaoh's heart against the demands of his own prophet precisely so he can use the opportunity to prove his supremacy, and Melkor's disobedience feels like a parallel to this, although I'm sure there's a better example. Evil, for all that it would like to overpower, is supposedly operating within the parameters set by God or Eru, so it can never win. But-- that does bring up thorny questions about what the source of evil really is and why it might exist.

Well. I didn't mean to say this much...

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

And I'd probably milk it, and the rest of the canon, for as much politically useful material as I could.

Hah! That makes perfect sense. Fëanor probably wrote philosophic treatises to that extent, too (or at least worked them out in his mind...) :D

His being irritated with Melkor's vanity isn't necessarily at odds with his profession of supreme creative power. Most of the Book of Exodus involves God "hardening" Pharaoh's heart against the demands of his own prophet precisely so he can use the opportunity to prove his supremacy, and Melkor's disobedience feels like a parallel to this

rawr_balrog suggested something related, that it is all more or less set up so Eru can prove a point (whether general morals, or his own supremacy). I really like the idea; never thought about it like that before, but it makes a lot of sense!

But-- that does bring up thorny questions about what the source of evil really is and why it might exist.

I suppose that the sad answer is, in the end, that evil is necessary (and just a flip side of the coin). You can't have creation without destruction (strictly speaking, creating the universe has ruined a perfectly peaceful Void!), and someone has to be responsible for it. So Eru had to "invent" evil (if it didn't just came into being the moment he decided to invent anything at all) because there simply was no way around it...

Saying much is perfectly OK! We're not on Twitter here, you don't have to be extra-brief. ;)

[zedille.livejournal.com]

When I tried to read the Silmarillion for the first time, the Ainulindalë threw me off, since it was so utterly different from Lord of the Rings, which I was coming off of. It took me a few years before I was able to actually read the whole thing.

I hadn't considered that in-universe the Ainulindalë could be considered a myth, with all the uncertainty that creation stories bear; I'd always assumed that it was a true history, though on rereading, I find I like the mythical explanation more and more. To someone inside Arda, "music" is probably the closest frame of reference that the Valar could manage.

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

It was completely different for me - the Ainulindalë sucked me right in! It was some of the later chapters (lots of names and places and history happening ;)) that made me struggle with the book. But I'd been warned that The Silmarillion was very different in tone from The Lord of the Rings, so at least I wasn't unprepared for the "shock"...

I actually like both readings, the purely mythical and the purely historical. I think it both works fine, depending on one's angle. (And as you say, how would you explain the beginning of existence to someone who has necessarily no experience of not existing, or of the entire universe not existing? "Music" is as good a simile as any other!)

[dawn_felagund]

Since I just wrote a paper on the Ainulindalë, you know I have thoughts on this one! :D

The question of mythology and what the various peoples of Middle-earth would have taken as fact or as myth (or what actually is fact or myth) endlessly fascinates me. In the case of the Ainulindalë, no, I don't think it is literally true, nor do I think the Elves would have believed it as such. I agree very much with angelica_ramses that the Ainulindalë is probably a metaphorical expression of an experience that simply defies the understanding of the Elves; after all, its very expression in words confines it to what is knowable upon Arda and makes expression of some aspects of the myth simply impossible. For example, it is extremely difficult--maybe even impossible?--for beings who have an existence to imagine un-being or a Void, yet this is an integral part of Ainulindalë. This is one of the challenges of creation myths, and the Ainulindalë is no exception: They are called upon to express concepts that stretch the limits of the human imagination. Not surprisingly, they often embody abstractions in very concrete, familiar terms: a cosmic egg, a primal sea, a vast turtle. So, in my mind, the Ainulindalë is an interpretation by the Ainur of the Creation in terms the Elves can understand. After all, that is part of the role of a teacher, to find a means to put difficult concepts into terms the student--in this case, the Eldar--can understand. The Elves first identify themselves in terms of their language (as the Quendi), and music is often mentioned as important to them. It makes sense that the subcreation of Arda by the Ainur would be presented to the Elves in the form of music.

The same goes for the round world/flat world question. I think there was a round world because Arda is meant to represent our world, and our world is round. However, I don't think this is incompatible with a flat-world mythology. I actually don't think he gives the Elves enough credit when, in Myths Transformed, he writes, "The High Eldar living and being tutored by the demiurgic beings must have known, or at least their writers and loremasters must have known, the 'truth' (according to their measure of understanding)." Of course they did, but mythology doesn't have to be factually true to be powerful or even truthful in the sense of the values and lessons it teaches. Knowing more about the origins of the universe and the Earth doesn't diminish the power of the Vedas or Genesis or the hundreds of creation myths that form the backbones of world myth cycles. Likewise, an Elf or Man being told the story of the Ainulindalë doesn't have to actually believe that the Ainur assembled themselves on choral risers and belted out the Creation in order to grasp what that story communicates about what the Eldarin cultures with which the myth originates value.

As for why I think the flat world works best as a myth (with the round world as provable fact) ... In the case of the flat-world myth, you get the increasing dilutions of Light-with-a-capital-L: Light entrusted to Varda by Eru becomes the Lamps, then the Trees, and finally the Silmarils. Each iteration severely restricts who has access to that Light (all of the world, then all of Valinor, and finally the keeper of the Silmarils). Finally, the Sun and Moon are made, and Light--albeit in a much less pure form--is again freely available to all. I think this is one of the major themes of The Silmarillion, and Tolkien's Letters would lead me to believe that he also agreed. Given the perils into which Tolkien's subcreators fall again and again and again--Aulë, Fëanor, Sauron, Saruman, Celebrimbor, Turgon, Finrod, Thingol, Galadriel--I can imagine that the myths concerning Light, a metaphor for the hoarding of that which must be freely available as part of its inherent nature, would contain powerful truths for the Eldar.

(I have more to say on the question of world myths, but that is quite enough for one night. >.<)

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Yes, and I'm so glad you linked to your paper - otherwise, I would've had to do it! ;)

I agree that it's not at all hard to accept the "Ainulindalë" as a myth, and yet believe that it would have been widely shared and used to convey concepts that would otherwise be too complex (or just to disappointingly prosaic ;)) for the Eldarin (or human) mind. As I said to Angelica, I can practically see the conversation between Rúmil (or his forefather ;)) and Manwë: "So, um, why does stuff exist?" - "Blah blah blah String Theory." - "......... what?" - "OK, how do I... you know, like strings? On a harp or something?" - "Ooooh! Music! Now I get it!" XD

Like you, I also think that a myth doesn't have to reflect factual reality in order to be "true", and I'm actually puzzled that Tolkien of all people - he who gave us Mythopoeia to defend the "true" nature of myths! - so agonised over the difficulty of reconciling a world that really was round with a myth that stated it was flat. (Although to be fair, I don't think the shape actually poses a problem - the problem is that one version has the sun from the start, and the moon soon after, they way it really was, whereas the other version covers long stretches of time with no sun and moon at all. As you say, Light (and the absence thereof) are a (if not THE) major theme in The Silmarillion, but if the Eldar have known sun and moon from the start, the Two Trees grow a lot less valuable (if there was any need for them at all), and so do the Silmarils. That, I think, is what Tolkien means by "too integral to change" - not the flat or round shape, which even the Akallabêth can work without, but the issue of light.
[Although looking at human history and the massive impact that cheap, bright, easily-available-at-any-time electric light has made on our world, I think it becomes pretty clear that both Trees and Silmarils - and their respective loss - would have been a huge thing even if the sun and moon existed at the time. Hm!]

I admit that I'm surprised that people prefer the "round world" version on the basis that "Arda is our world, and our world is round". After all, Arda definitely ends up being round after the Downfall of Númenor, so there's really no problem with a flat world that nonetheless turned into the world we know! ;)

(I can imagine! But this post isn't going away, so I hope you'll find the time to talk about world myths some more at some later point. :))

[dawn_felagund]

Okay, part the second, on the connection between Ainulindalë and world creation myths ...

(I'm basically summing of the paper I just wrote and presented but am assuming that people participating in this discussion probably won't have time for that 17-minute video I posted up there ... ;)

There are some connections that I have found, but they are relatively minor and the differences between Ainulindalë and world creation myths are significant and, I think, extremely important.

In researching my paper, the connection I saw people wanting to make most often was between the Ainulindalë and the Bible. There are some similarities, but they are relatively minor, and they are again overwhelmed by the differences. For example, in the Ainulindalë, there is both creation from thought (e.g., the Ainur as the children of Eru's thought) and creation from word (in Eru's utterance of "Eä! Let these things be!"), both of which occur in Biblical stories of creation. However, they are also archetypes that occur in dozens of other world creation myths. (In fact, "creation from thought" and "creation from word" are two of the five creation myth subtypes proposed by religion scholar Charles Long because they are so universal.)

And, as I said above, the differences are significant. To name the three that I think are biggest: 1) The Biblical God has a high level of personal involvement in the world He created (to the extent of even having a son on earth!) whereas Eru is distant and becomes involved only at the behest of Manwë, 2) evil enters the world during the creation itself through Melkor's discord, not through the fall of humankind (so the subsequent falls of both Elves and Men could be said to derive from the Music itself and are not rebellions against God's will), and 3) Eru does very little creation of actual Arda but, rather, delegates this to the Ainur.

(Continued ...)

[hhimring]

A comment from the text itself on the question of the Valar being surprised:

(Ainulindale)

Yet some things there are that they cannot see, neither alone nor taking counsel together; for to none but himself has Iluvatar revealed all that he has in store, and in every age there come forth things that are new and have no foretelling [...]

[Some of these things are revealed immediately afterwards, but the present tense in this sentence seems to imply that by no means all are revealed in the vision.]

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Yes, true. I guess I just always imagined that they'd seen a lot of the First Age at the very least - they did see the coming of the Children - so I'm puzzled that they really seem to have grasped very little. (Or Eru has hidden away more than I would have thought, I guess!) I clearly overestimate the [almost-]divine mind! ;)

[heartofoshun.livejournal.com]

I read it as myth, much like the "Awakening at Cuiviénen"--that counting tale, i.e., Elvish nursery rhyme. My head explodes over the flat earth and I find comfort in the thought that he wanted to change it. Meanwhile, when I write fanfiction I waffle a little, my hyper-realistic style is a bit uncomfortable with some of the circumstances I allow in my stories. So I end adapting some mythological circumstances and then pursuing realism in characterization. It's too late for me to be here typing.

I have now finally linked this so I will get comment notifications for these discussions, I miss the beginning of this one and am just now skimming the comments above.

For the record, I was hoping for a kick in the seat of the pants that would make me more interested in Music of the Ainur and the Valaquenta. And here I am again, a few days late and few dollars short.

I'll come back in a day or two after I have re-read the Ainulindale!

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry if we couldn't provide the kick in the butt you were looking for!

Personally, I love myths (no matter how "unrealistic", just as long as they're consistent in themselves) so I've never had a problem with the flat earth. I think your method of adapting and instead making the characters "real" is a great idea!

[mrowe.livejournal.com]

I'm a bit later to the party on this chapter than I'd hoped, but here's a very short rundown of my thoughts:

First, music as the creative (in more than one sense) is unique afaik, and goes well with Elvish love of music, poetry, language

On the 'round' vs 'flat' creation: I'm well aware of all the cosmological and other problems with the flat version (for starters, what do plants outside Valinor live on before the making of Sun and Moon?), but I have to admit that within-story I prefer it to a round creation. Perhaps if Tolkien had ever finished overhauling the Silmarillion material in a round version, I might have been won over. As it is, I'm a flat-Middle-earther *g*, at least for fics. (Reading tip: Larner's Transformation (http://henneth-annun.net/stories/chapter.cfm?stid=8171))

[oloriel.livejournal.com]

Better late than never! :)

It's not entirely unique (even in Europe) if you think of the Platonic/Pythagoreian world view (in which the sould of the world is assembled through music, music is a mathematical entity, and the planets and stars continue to produce music as they move on their spheres). But Tolkien's version is definitely less mathematical, and more poetic!

I feel like you about the "flat world". Not because I particularly care that it should be different from what we know about our real world, but just because we've got a complete, consistent (in itself) story with that proposition. If Tolkien had managed to complete the overhaul... yes, I'd probably be happy with a round world, too. As it is, I'm happier with flat.
(In earlier versions like the Ainulindalë text in The Book of Lost Tales 1, there is "freelance" light continually flowing in one of the layers of air - definitely before the construction of the Lamps, which took away a lot of that rogue light although some was released back into the air when the Lamps were destroyed). Manwë didn't permit that any of this remaining light was taken away when the Valar removed to Valinor, so that Middle-earth appears to remain under at least twilight, rather than total darkness. So that would explain how plants outside Valinor managed to survive before the making of Sun and Moon. But as so many other details, this didn't make it into the published version...)