Debate Tournament - Round 4: Tolkienology vs. OiE [Archive]

Eriol

07-02-2003, 11:07 PM

The question is:
Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason?

First of all, I'd like to thank Maedhros for Hosting this debate, the judges for judging it, my teammates for their support, and especially the Guild of Ost-in-Edhil for debating with us.

I'd also like to thank the Host about the topic – for I am a lifelong fan of the story of Beren and Lúthien...

I was instructed to make a succint opening post, because we do not want to break the post barrier as we did in the debate against Scholar’s Hall...

So let us begin.

The Tolkienologists will defend that it was ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest.

Our argument follows three main lines of reasoning.

LINE 1: The Utilitarian argument

The wording of the question is vague enough that we don't have to consider questions of ethics and morality only. "Was it ok" is a question that can be answered in several levels, and therefore we must not neglect the utilitarian side of the question – the argument that it was ok because it had good results.

This is the line of reasoning that can be most easily shown by quotes. (All quotes will be grouped at the end of the post). It is common knowledge that the Quest of the Silmaril is an event of the greatest importance in the story of Arda, and I do not intend to fill this post with the many quotes from many sources that show the success of the Quest, and the importance of that success for Elves and Men and for the defeat of Morgoth. Also, a result of the Quest was the marriage of Beren and Lúthien, which would ultimately result in the birth of Elwing, wife of Eärendil, from whom came the Kings of Númenor and Elrond the Loremaster. So that the results of the Quest permeate all of Tolkien’s writings.

To claim that "it was not ok" to do whatever was necessary for the success of the Quest must necessarily imply that the success of the Quest and the lineage of Beren and Lúthien is not important or relevant for Arda. This is the unenviable position of Ost-in-Edhil, and I am sure that they will amaze us in their attempts to do it. I am looking forward to it.

LINE 2: The argument from predestination

The very quote provided by Maedhros in his opening post shows the important aspect that the Quest of the Silmaril was an event foreseen by many of the Wise, and that there were greater – much greater – powers involved in the matter. For "it seemed to Beren that words were put into his mouth". Who put words into Beren’s mouth? How was he "inspired" at that particular moment? And why was he being inspired? There are only three possibilities: Morgoth or one of his servants; the Valar or one of their servants; or Eru himself. But the first can be discarded outright, since the Quest of the Silmaril was the greatest shame for Morgoth in the First Age – it is hardly likely that he was the instigator behind it. And the other two options show that the Quest was one step at the great unfolding of the battle between the Valar and Morgoth. Whether we think that it was Eru or the Valar, the conclusion must be the same: the speech that Beren made, which would move Thingol to name the Silmaril as the brideprice of Lúthien, and so spur the Quest, was most definitely "ok", for it was part of a foreordained plan by Eru.

LINE 3: The argument from free-will

The question being asked regards the "involvement" of other people in the Quest, but the persons being judged are Beren and Lúthien. In other words, we must find blame in either Beren or Lúthien (or both) before we declare that it was not ok. But they did not force anyone to help them! Who were the people "involved" in the Quest? Thingol, Finrod, Celegorm, Curufin, Huan, Mablung, Beleg, Sauron, Morgoth, Carcharoth. I leave the last three for the sake of completeness, and hope that I am not forgetting anyone (we don't need to mention minor characters such as the guards at the foot of Hírilorn). Let us focus on the others – I doubt that the point of the question is to prove that it was "unfair" or "not ok" to involve Sauron in the matter :D.

Every one was involved in a free choice, without any constraints. The only doubtful case is Finrod, who was constrained by an oath – but an oath of his own making, and even so Beren did not force him to help – he did it out of his own volition. So how can we blame Beren or Lúthien? When they simply accept voluntary help, or are the unwitting beneficiaries of voluntary ill actions (such as Celegorm and Curufin's actions, which resulted in the meeting of Lúthien and Huan), how can they be blamed?

How can one point an accusing finger at them and say "it is not ok for you to have involved so-and-so" if so-and-so did it out of his own free will?

Summing up: we believe that "it was ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest" because:

1) It led to a good (in fact, outstandingly good and important) result;
2) It was foreordained by the higher powers
3) They did not "involve" anyone against his will, and therefore they can’t be blamed for any consequences of that involvement.

QUOTES (All quotes are from the Published Silmarillion):

Supporting Line 1:

Chapter 19

Among the tales of sorrow and of ruin that come down to us from the darkness of those days there are yet some in which amid weeping there is joy and under the shadow of death light that endures. And of these histories most fair still under the ears of the Elves is the tale of Beren and Lúthien

Chapter 20

In those days Maedhros son of Fëanor lifted up his heart, perceiving that Morgoth was not unassailable; for the deeds of Beren and Lúthien were sung in many songs throughout Beleriand.

Chapter 24

...and the Silmaril was bound upon his[Eärendil] brow; and ever its light grew greater as they drew into the West. And the wise have Said that it was by reason of the power of that holy jewel that they came in time to waters that no vessels save those of the Teleri had known;

...

but even as he took the shoreward road one stood upon the Hill and called to him in a great voice, crying:

'Hail Eärendil, of mariners most renowned, the looked for that cometh at unawares, the longed for that cometh beyond hope! Hail Eärendil, bearer of light before the Sun and Moon! Splendour of the Children of Earth, star in the darkness, jewel in the sunset, radiant in the morning!'

...

and Eärendil stood before their faces, and delivered the errand of the Two Kindreds. Pardon he asked for the Noldor and pity for their great sorrows, and mercy upon Men and Elves and succour in their need. And his prayer was granted.

...

Thus an end was made of the power of Angband in the North, and the evil realm was brought to naught;

I will not add quotes about the Kings of Númenor and Elrond, since you probably know about them :D.

Supporting Line 2:

Chapter 17

Melian said nothing to him [Thingol] at that time, but afterwards she said to Galadriel: ‘Now the world runs on swiftly to great tidings. And one of Men, even of Beör's house, shall indeed come, and the Girdle of Melian shall not restrain him, for doom greater than my power shall send him; and the songs that shall endure from that coming shall endure when all Middle-Earth is changed.

Chapter 21

(GWINDOR TO FINDUILAS)

'It is not fitting that the Elder Children of Ilúvatar should wed with the Younger; nor is it wise, for they are brief, and soon pass, to leave us in widowhood while the world lasts. Neither will fate suffer it, unless it be once or twice only, for some high cause of doom that we do not perceive. But this Man [Túrin] is not Beren!

And of course Maedhros quote:

Then Beren looking up beheld the eyes of Lúthien, and his glance went also to the face of Melian and it seemed to him that words were put into his mouth. Fear left him, and the pride of the eldest house of Men returned to him; and he said: 'My fate, O King, led me hither, through perils such as few even of the Elves would dare. And here I have found what I sought not indeed, but finding I would possess for ever. For it is above all gold and silver, and beyond all jewels. Neither rock, nor steel, nor the fires of Morgoth, nor all the powers of the Elf-kingdoms, shall keep from me the treasure that I desire. For Lúthien your daughter is the fairest of all the Children of the World.'

Supporting Line 3 (all from Chapter 19, showing how the characters got involved on their own):

Then at last Melian spoke, and she said to Thingol: 'O King, you have devised cunning counsel.'

Then King Felagund spoke before his people, recalling the deeds of Barahir, and his vow; and he declared that it was laid upon him to aid the son of Barahir in his need, and he sought the help of his cheiftains.

For now, [Celegorm and Curufin] believing that Beren and Felagund were prisoners beyond hope of aid, they purposed to let the King perish, and to keep Lúthien...

Now Huan devised a plan for the aid of Lúthien; and coming at a time of night he brought her cloak, and for the first time he spoke, giving her counsel.

...they prepared the Hunting of the Wolf; of all pursuits of beasts whereof tales tell the most perilous. To that chase went Huan the Hound of Valinor, and Mablung of the Heavy Hand, and Beleg Strongbow, and Beren Erchamion, and Thingol King of Doriath.

Arvedui

07-03-2003, 06:50 AM

It was not.

Their quest was not about the Silmarils, but about love and the desire to live with one another forever.

Have you noticed how Beren and Lúthien are probably the only two persons in Arda that does not desire the Silmarils....?

Now let us take a look at the question at hand:
Was it OK for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people
The question asked is whether or not it is OK for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people, not if it is OK for other people to involve themselves in their quest.

Therefore, we can immediately dismiss quite a few of those that the Tolkienologists listed. In fact, if it were not for the involvement of others, then the quest would not have come about at all:
Beyond his hope she returned to him where he sat in darkness, and long ago in the Hidden Kingdom she laid her hand in his. Thereafter often she came to him, and they went in secret through the woods together from spring to summer; and no others of the Children of Ilúvatar have had joy so great, though the time was brief.
They did not want anyone to get involved in their affairs. If it were not for a jealous Elf named Daeron, they could have lived in peace for a long time.

So which persons are we left with, if we stay with the topic:
1) Thingol and Melian. But those only arguably, as Thingol sent his servants to lay hand on Beren. But we can give him the benefit of doubt, as Lúthien was faster, and brought Beren to Menegroth.
2) Felagund, as Beren went to him for help.
3) Morgoth, of course

The rest of the people got involved with Beren and/or Lúthien because of their own free will, not that of Beren and Lúthien.

What does this have to say for the rest of the arguments that the Tolkienologists have come up with?
The utilitarian argument: To Thingol and Melian, this led in the end to the destruction of Doriath. Was that OK to them? I don't think so.
Felagund: even worse! His ten most loyal soldiers were eaten by werewolves, and he himself got killed after long torment. Not OK either.
Morgoth: In fact, he was the only one to benefit from this. When one Silamril was brought to Doriath, it caused the downfall of that stronghold! And later, it caused Dior's slaying.

So no! The results from involving other people in their quest was not a positive one.

"But from their love came Elwing!"

Yes, and her sons Elros and Elrond. But the important factor in that matter is Eärendil, and he came not from the love of Beren and Luthien. It was Eärendil that sailed to Valinor, not Elwing, Elrond or Elros. And Númenor was given as a gift to Men of the Three Houses as a gift for their loyalty, and for the deed of Eärendil. And look what came of that later.
The Kings of Númenor? Númenor vanished into the sea because of the last of the Kings of Númenor.
And Elrond the Loremaster is now in the utmost West.

Which brings us to the last of the three main lines posted by the Tolkienologists: Predestination.

If you argue that this was a part of a plan devised by Eru, then what is there to argue about at all. If it is predestined, then of course everything is OK, using the reasoning that ' the end justifies the means.'
According to this argument, it was OK for Eru that Doriath was destroyed. It was OK that Felagund died.

The Good people that Beren and Lúthien ivolved in their quest, received nothing but death and ruin as a reward for their effort. The bad guys benefited from it. Morgoth may have lost one of his Silmarils yes, but that didn't cause HIS downfall. No, Beren and Lúthien were only thinking about their own best. They had both Sauron and Morgoth at their mercy, yet the two most evil characters on Arda were allowed to live, to the ruin and grief of lots and lots of people. And don't tell me that this was preordained by Eru

Beleg

07-03-2003, 02:36 PM

I think my fellow mate Eriol has introduced our side of arguement quite succiantly, I'll just like explain some of the points he made in brief, and counter some of the arguements presented by our respectable opponents.

Posted by Arvedui
Their quest was not about the Silmarils, but about love and the desire to live with one another forever.

The reason of Beren's Quest was to regain the Silmaril(s) and offer it to Thingol as brideprice of Luthien.

Posted by Arvedui
Have you noticed how Beren and Lúthien are probably the only two persons in Arda that does not desire the Silmarils....?

It is not fair to say that they are the only two people who didn't want to take the Silmaril. We don't know about the motives and intentions of other's, specially regarding Silmaril's.
Other's were there also, like Finrod and Melian for example.

Posted by Arvedui

. In fact, if it were not for the involvement of others, then the quest would not have come about at all:

Agreed, but I can't see how It has something to do with Beren's and Luthien's asking other people for involvement.

They did not want anyone to get involved in their affairs. If it were not for a jealous Elf named Daeron, they could have lived in peace for a long time.

If they didn't want anyone to get involve in their affairs then why did Beren went to Finrod?
And they would still haven't lived happily because they would still have to find the Silmaril If Beren wanted to marry Luthien.

Posted by Arvedui
The utilitarian argument: To Thingol and Melian, this led in the end to the destruction of Doriath. Was that OK to them? I don't think so.

The cause of destrcution of Doriath was not Beren and Luthien, but Thingol's wish of wanting the Silmaril, which triggered the doom of Mandos.
And as far as I can see, Beren never asked for any help from Thingol and Melian in the Quest of the Silmaril.

That crosses of Melian and Thingol from the list of yours.

Posted by Arvedui
Felagund: even worse! His ten most loyal soldiers were eaten by werewolves, and he himself got killed after long torment. Not OK either.

Beren couldn't be held responsible for the actions of Felagund, besides Felagund died saving Beren and the results that were forthcoming from this lifesaving were great and helpfull.
1. Beren was rescued and thence Silmaril was retrieved.
2. Minas Tirith broken down and released from the power of Sauron, a considerable dent on the repute and power of Morgoth and Sauron alike.
3. The action of Beren and Luthien was a revival of hope on part of Elves of Beleriand.

Felagund's involvement saved the life of Beren and instigated the retrival of the Silmaril.

My dear friend Arvedui says that B&L asked Morgoth's help in the Quest of Silmaril!!!

Yes, and her sons Elros and Elrond. But the important factor in that matter is Eärendil, and he came not from the love of Beren and Luthien.

No Elwing, no refuge of Sirion, No Silmaril, no successful quest to Aman!!!

The Kings of Númenor? Númenor vanished into the sea because of the last of the Kings of Númenor.

And apparantly from these Kings of Numenor also came Aragon Elessar and Elendil the Great.
Kings of Numenor and Numenorean Island were great achievements of the Men and In Numenor the Manish society reached the height of it's greatness.

Posted by Arvedui
The bad guys benefited from it. Morgoth may have lost one of his Silmarils yes, but that didn't cause HIS downfall.

WRONG! It was only with the help of Silmaril that Beren reached Aman and thence called the Powers that Be for help.

The fact is that you haven't been able to provide any suitble reason for B&L not asking for anyone else' help in there Quest.

Their quest was a great one, and If achieved It would have been a great disgrace for Morgoth and a cause for utter humilation. It would have lifted the hearts and hopes of the dwellers of Beleriand and would have been regarded as a partial victory against Morgoth, since one of the objectives of the fight against Morgoth was to regain the Silmaril.

Eriol

07-03-2003, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by Arvedui
The question asked is whether or not it is OK for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people, not if it is OK for other people to involve themselves in their quest.

This is the beginning of the Ost-in-Edhil argument.

So no! The results from involving other people in their quest was not a positive one.

And this is the conclusion.

So it can be seen that in the development of that argument, the quest became important. And rightly so. For if we check the question itself (without taking away the last part of it :) ):

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason?

we see that the quest is an integral part of the debate.

Also, examining the question, we see that it is asked whether it was ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people. I interpret this as meaning "whether Beren and Lúthien made a mistake or not in involving other people". And as I said in my first post, a "mistake" must be judged from several levels.

Ost-in-Edhil dismissed the utilitarian argument saying that the Quest is not involved in the question. So we see that they are mistaken in that, and the utilitarian argument still stands -- to claim that "it was not ok" they have to dismiss the results of the Quest.

Then they proceed to the argument from free-will, and make a curious distinction:

Posted by Arvedui

So which persons are we left with, if we stay with the topic:
1) Thingol and Melian. But those only arguably, as Thingol sent his servants to lay hand on Beren. But we can give him the benefit of doubt, as Lúthien was faster, and brought Beren to Menegroth.
2) Felagund, as Beren went to him for help.
3) Morgoth, of course

The rest of the people got involved with Beren and/or Lúthien because of their own free will, not that of Beren and Lúthien.

Am I mistaken in reading this last sentence as if it meant that Thingol and Melian and Finrod were not involved because of their free will?

(we dismiss Morgoth because it was definitely not ok for him to be involved in the Quest, hehe)

Did someone force Thingol to "devise a cunning counsel"?

Did someone force Finrod to swear his oath? Or to leave Nargothrond to help Beren?

The Tolkienologist's quotes still stand. They did what they did out of their own free-will. Neither Beren nor Lúthien can be blamed for the consequences of free actions by very wise elven kings.

The Tolkienologists' point about this side of the question is that when Ost-in-Edhil says that:

The Good people that Beren and Lúthien involved in their quest, received nothing but death and ruin as a reward for their effort.

Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone; the people who got involved, got involved out of their own free will; if they got death and ruin as a reward, they should blame themselves. (Quite certainly Finrod, at least, did not see his actions as wrong, whatever their result was; he is right now in Valinor and quite obviously he would do everything as he did. He does not think of it as a mistake).

Melian foresaw quite clearly that Thingol's (note, Thingol's) actions would bring about the ruin of Doriath, and she at least never blamed Beren or Lúthien for it. (I'll post a quote to that effect in the end of the post). Thingol, in effect, started off the Quest; as Ost-in-Edhil stated correctly, Beren and Lúthien did NOT want a Silmaril. So if anyone is to be blamed for "death and ruin" that came out of the Quest, it is surely Thingol. But since no one forced anyone to get involved, not even Thingol, it can be safely said that no one is to be blamed for any death and ruin, except the dead and the ruined, and the killers and "ruiners". Beren and Lúthien fit in none of these categories.

Ost-in-Edhil will have to show that these three people, Thingol, Melian, and Finrod, are an exception to the principle that actions taken freely can not be blamed on other persons.

Finally, our opponents claimed a variant of the "in the long run we're all dead" arguments. By stating that "if Eru predestined the Quest, then it does not matter whether it is ok or not". Certainly, if we abandon the study of history while claiming predestination, it can be said that "everthing was ok" or that "everything was not ok", interchangeably. But this assumes that the Quest of the Silmaril is just one old event in a commonplace history. Our quotes show that the Quest is a special event; that the foreseeing of that Quest is a special foreseeing.

It is not as if we should stop debating Tolkien altogether because Eru is all-mighty and all-knowing; rather, we must acknowledge that the Quest of the Silmaril is a very special episode, and the argument from predestination has a special force in this case.

I am straining my memory to remember any other episode in the history of Arda which was so consistently foreseen by so many different people. From Melian's claiming that a man would come, to Finrod's saying that he would swear an oath some time, to Huan's feelings about Beren and Lúthien... it seems as if everybody knew that these two were important, even before they (or Beren at least) were born!

This argument merely reinforces the utilitarian argument, of course.

So far this post of mine has been merely defensive, refuting the arguments of our opponents that claimed to deny our own arguments. But let's take a look at:

Morgoth: In fact, he was the only one to benefit from this. When one Silamril was brought to Doriath, it caused the downfall of that stronghold! And later, it caused Dior's slaying.

And Númenor was given as a gift to Men of the Three Houses as a gift for their loyalty, and for the deed of Eärendil. And look what came of that later.
The Kings of Númenor? Númenor vanished into the sea because of the last of the Kings of Númenor.
And Elrond the Loremaster is now in the utmost West.

As we see, Ost-in-Edhil has an uphill task. They are defending that Morgoth benefitted from the Quest of the Silmaril; that Númenor was ultimately bad; that Elrond is not important. Tough job.

Of course, Morgoth benefitted from the Silmaril, if we stop reading the book at Dior's slaying. Just two chapters later we see that this same Silmaril brought him ruin and defeat.

By the same token, Númenor was bad if we stop reading at the end of the Second Age; if we advance a little bit we see that the realms of Arnor and Gondor are the offspring of Númenor, and that the Land of Gift was, indeed, a Gift, and therefore positive for men, and not only for Númenóreans. For one thing, without Númenor Sauron would still be around -- Númenoreans were decisive in defeating Sauron both times, and in stopping his invasion of Eriador the first time.

The "Elrond is in the West now" is the reverse trick, and is countered by the reverse method. For if we read back a few chapters, we see that Elrond was a major force for Good throughout the Second and Third Ages. The fact that he is in the West now does not touch that.

And now the quote I promised, from Melian (Chapter 19, Published Silmarillion):

'O King, you have devised cunning counsel. But if my eyes have not lost their sight, it is ill for you, whether Beren fail in his errand, or achieve it. For you have doomed either your daughter, or yourself. And now is Doriath drawn within the fate of a mightier realm.

Ancalagon

07-03-2003, 08:02 PM

In the absence of another Ost-in-Edhil ghost, I will don a white sheet and make spooky sounds for a few days on the Guilds behalf!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?

No.

No, because their love was that denied by a selfish King and it should not convict our heroes for seeking to find union. No, because our lovers did not actively seek to involve any in their desperate plight and only found willing and voluntary participants along the way. No, because although the question leaves one asking him/herself, 'what on Eru's green and good earth does this question logically mean?' we are still left with the resounding knowledge that love is intensely personal and no reason or motive can ever be called selfish in its pursuit.

Eriol has blinded us with every possible option in order to leave nothing to the imagination, he has cleverly used his search facility in his electronic books to attempt to smother us with quotes, though they be dull and pointless in their multiplicity! The only real failure in all of his statements is the fact that the actual motivation of love as an emotional force to be reckoned with is completely omitted from his remarks. Either this is because both the question setter and the Tolkienologists do not know or understand love in any shape or form, or because they fully understand it and know full well the potency of love itself!

At no point in the quest for the Silmaril did Beren or Luthien ever seek or directly ask for help. If they discussed their fears and concerns it is from the heart, not to seek assistance from any other because love distingusihes itself from infatuation, whereby the motive of an infatuated person is to seek any means necessary to acheive its goal and purpose. Love does not, love is the epitomie of selflessness, it raises the individuals who are in love above the petty desires of the ignorant and provides them with the motiviation to work alone in finding a path to their beloved. So, who among the Tolkienologists can speak with such conviction of love and fathom the depth of union between two who truly love as Beren and Luthien did. In the heart of these lovers lay a goal and singular purpose, to be together, even though unimaginable distance and obstacles lie between them and their union. Love is independent, it seeks no profit from others for it knows no impediment and will never be denied unless death itself plays a cruel fate...even then, did this deny our lovers their union?

You talk of preordainment, free-will, consequence, voluntary involvement and any other amount of deceptions in order to detract from the very fact that the strength of their love meant they did not actively seek to involve any in their goal.
Only by understanding the motivation, self-sacrifice and independence that encapsulates love itself can you realise this question is either incredibly inept or incredibly shrewd, though it seems increasingly apparent both have been lost on the Tolkienologists!

Eriol

07-03-2003, 08:34 PM

And that is to be expected...

Eriol has blinded us with every possible option in order to leave nothing to the imagination, he has cleverly used his search facility in his electronic books to attempt to smother us with quotes, though they be dull and pointless in their multiplicity!

Oh, I wish I had electronic books :). I have only a pocket Sil that I smuggle into the office, and refer to in my lunch break.

Other than that, I find no factual mistake in Ancalagon's post. And I am glad that all of what he said points to a resounding yes to the opening question. For he has made it quite clear that Beren and Lúthien involved no one in their Quest:

At no point in the quest for the Silmaril did Beren or Luthien ever seek or directly ask for help. (...)Love does not, love is the epitome of selflessness, it raises the individuals who are in love above the petty desires of the ignorant and provides them with the motiviation to work alone in finding a path to their beloved.

You talk of preordainment, free-will, consequence, voluntary involvement and any other amount of deceptions in order to detract from the very fact that the strength of their love meant they did not actively seek to involve any in their goal.

But this is the Tolkienolgists' argument! As shown:

Originally posted by Eriol

Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone; the people who got involved, got involved out of their own free will;

The only reason I can see for such a compelling argument by Ancalagon supporting the Tolkienologists is that he is attacking the word "seemingly" in the question at hand. He is saying, in fact, that their motives were NOT selfish, but rather selfless.

This, of course, has no bearing on the question "is it ok". The motives behind Beren and Lúthien were selfless; both sides agree on that. If they seem selfish, it is because the person who is looking at them does not understand or fathom love. Both sides also agree with that.

This is the bulk of Ancalagon's post -- what he failed to do is to provide the link between his reasoning and the "no" to the opening question:

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason?

If this "seemingly selfish" reason is in fact selfless, why does it mean that we have to answer "no" to the question of whether it was ok or not to involve other people?

:confused:

Our poorly chosen quotes aimed only at establishing three things:

1) The Quest had good results
2) It was foreordained by Eru (or at least by the Valar)
3) Beren and Lúthien did not involve other people; these other people involved themselves.

I am sure that people more learned and better equipped with electronic books could find more suitable quotes. But Ost-in-Edhil failed, in my opinion, to refute any of our three points so far; Ancalagon's latest post opened a new avenue, criticizing the word "seemingly" in the opening question, but it left the three points untouched. He criticized the question itself, but that's what we have to work with, after all...

But in any way I commend Ancalagon for a very touching post (though it did not touch the matter at hand; only my heart). I agree with almost everything he said there -- among the few exceptions, we can find the "no" in answer to the question proposed by Maedhros and his skewed estimate of my electronic resources.

:D

Ancalagon

07-04-2003, 01:28 AM

The Tolkienologists will defend that it was ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest.

Was it ok for people to involve themselves in the quest of Beren and Lúthien? Yes!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest if it were for selfish reasons? No!

Did Beren and Lúthien involve other people in their quest for selfish reasons? No!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien then to have people involved in their quest if it were for selfless reasons? Yes!

I guess it all seems pretty logical when one manipulates the question to suit their answers as you have clearly done in your opening arguement, which I have quoted above, even though it is not the actual question that has been asked!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason? No! If the reasons were selfish, then the answer would definately be no! It is simple enough and does not take reams of quotes to support. Our case supports the fact that if the reasons had been selfish, then they would be wrong to seek to involve others in their quest.

1) The Quest had good results
2) It was foreordained by Eru (or at least by the Valar)
3) Beren and Lúthien did not involve other people; these other people involved themselves.
1. The outcome of the quest is completely meaningless in this debate as it has nothing to do with the question.

2. It was fore-ordained by who? Considering Mandos could not influence the fates of the Children of Iluvatar, who then fore-ordained this quest? Once again, Tolkienologists flippantly cast free-will conveniently out the window and unrequited love is but a vessel for acts of completion in a pre-ordained world. Once again, Beren and Luthien are nothing but pawns in a bigger game, with no freedom of choice in either how they live their lives and more importantly who they are allowed to love! The doom upon him guided him, but the choices he made were his own...in that lies the huge difference in trying to portray all his life as entirely mapped without choice and that is folly.

3. Beren and Luthien did not involve other people, other people involved themselves! Of course, for if the reasons were not driven by a self-gratification, then whosoever chooses to join them is doing so of their own free-will! Of course, by your logic they are incapable of choosing to involve themselves as this was all fore-ordained? Dooms work themselves into the very fabric of these tales because many are bound to fate through choice. Finrod was bound to the Silmaril but not to Beren. Even as Beren sought only counsel, never did he ask for help or the involvement of others, for he plainly knew his death would await him and any who joined him. Even Finrod knew this and chose his path alongside him. If this be the case, still Beren had not involved one for a selfish motive, if he had, then this would have proved a poor choice on his part.

I see no error in my judgement of this question, it is plain and simple. Selfishness is a dependent motive and not one that Beren or Luthien were ever driven by. The seemingly selfish motive would not make it right for them to involve others and that is the the crux of our position.

Arvedui

07-05-2003, 10:39 PM

In any such debates, it is quite natural to try and pick apart the reasoning of your opponent. As far as I am concerned, it is even the funny part of debating.

But: when you are doing that, then at least try to pick apart what is written, and don't argue thing that isn't written:

Posted by Beleg-strongbow:
And they would still haven't lived happily because they would still have to find the Silmaril If Beren wanted to marry Luthien.
This was a reply to what I said in my opening post:'
If it were not for a jealous Elf named Daeron, they could have lived in peace for a long time.
For a long time, not indefinately!
Again by Beleg-Strongbow: My dear friend Arvedui says that B&L asked Morgoth's help in the Quest of Silmaril!!!
Let us take a look at what I really said:
So which persons are we left with, if we stay with the topic:
1) Thingol and Melian. But those only arguably, as Thingol sent his servants to lay hand on Beren. But we can give him the benefit of doubt, as Lúthien was faster, and brought Beren to Menegroth.
2) Felagund, as Beren went to him for help.
3) Morgoth, of course

These are the persons that B&L contacted before they where contacted by them. Notice the difference.
I can't find one word there that says that B&L asked Morgoth for help, even if Beleg wants other people to see such a thing.
And trying to dismiss one of my first points:'
It is not fair to say that they are the only two people who didn't want to take the Silmaril. We don't know about the motives and intentions of other's, specially regarding Silmaril's. I never said they were the only ones. I said they were probably the only ones. A slight but important difference.

Now, let us switch to what Eriol said as an attempt at countering my arguments:
First of all, he gives the impression that the OiE through my first post tried to 'forget' the last part of the topic:

This is the beginning of the Ost-in-Edhil argument.
andSo it can be seen that in the development of that argument, the quest became important. And rightly so. For if we check the question itself (without taking away the last part of it ):
Saying that in my initial argument, I skipped the second part; the Quest. Take a close look at the quote Eriol said was the beginning of the Ost-in-Edhil argument:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Arvedui
The question asked is whether or not it is OK for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people, not if it is OK for other people to involve themselves in their quest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is copied directly from Eriol's second post. You can all find it at the top. Notice the three last words.
So Eriol is trying to make a point out of something that isn't even there! Which he repeated a few lines below:Ost-in-Edhil dismissed the utilitarian argument saying that the Quest is not involved in the question. So we see that they are mistaken in that, and the utilitarian argument still stands -- to claim that "it was not ok" they have to dismiss the results of the Quest.
And then he is trying to separate one detail from a whole:
Am I mistaken in reading this last sentence as if it meant that Thingol and Melian and Finrod were not involved because of their free will?
This is the sentence he don't understand:
The rest of the people got involved with Beren and/or Lúthien because of their own free will, not that of Beren and Lúthien.
What 'rest of the people' was I talking about?
The answer is: The list of names the Tolkienologists provided as an example of how many were involved in the quest.

Now, for some of the statements from the Tolkienologists:
This was given as a support for their own views, that the Quest resulted in good:
In those days Maedhros son of Fëanor lifted up his heart, perceiving that Morgoth was not unassailable; for the deeds of Beren and Lúthien were sung in many songs throughout Beleriand.
And the result of Meadhros lifting up his head, was: Nirnaeth Arnoediad. A splendid result, wasn't it?

The cause of destrcution of Doriath was not Beren and Luthien, but Thingol's wish of wanting the Silmaril, which triggered the doom of Mandos. And as far as I can see, Beren never asked for any help from Thingol and Melian in the Quest of the Silmaril.
Two notes on this:
1) The cause of destruction: It was the Tolkienologists that stated that 1) It led to a good (in fact, outstandingly good and important) result; not the OiE!
2) Again, Thingol & Melian was initially mentioned by the GoT. The OiE stated that we could accept those, through benefit of doubt.
From Beleg-strongbow: Their quest was a great one, and If achieved It would have been a great disgrace for Morgoth and a cause for utter humilation. It would have lifted the hearts and hopes of the dwellers of Beleriand and would have been regarded as a partial victory against Morgoth, since one of the objectives of the fight against Morgoth was to regain the Silmaril.
From The Silmarillion: [Morgoth] recking little of the sons of Fëanor, and of their oath, which had harmed him never and turned always to his mightiest aid; and in his black thought he laughed, regretting not the one Silmaril that he had lost, for by it as he deemed the last shred of the people of the Eldar should vanish from Middle-earth and trouble it no more.
One can believe the Tolkieneologists, or one can believe Tolkien.
From Eriol:
Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone
From The Silmarillion: Upon all that plain the Elves of Nargothrond kept unceasing watch; and every hill upon its borders was crowned with hidden towers, and through all its woods and fields archers ranged secretly and with great craft. Their arrows were sure and deadly, and nothing crept there against their will. Therefore, ere Beren had come far upon his road, they were aware of him, and his death was nigh. But knowing his danger he held ever aloft the ring of Felagund; and though he saw no living thing, because of the stealth of the hunters, he felt that he was watched, and cried often aloud: 'I am Beren son of Barahir, friend of Felagund. Take me to the King!'
From that quote I see clearly that it was Beren that sought for Finrod, not vice versa.
And I uphold my claim that Morgoth was drawn into the quest by B&L, and not the other way around. Of course it is so, it had to, or else there would have been no quest.

But the Tolkienologists didn't finish at that:
Finally, our opponents claimed a variant of the "in the long run we're all dead" arguments. By stating that "if Eru predestined the Quest, then it does not matter whether it is ok or not". Certainly, if we abandon the study of history while claiming predestination, it can be said that "everthing was ok" or that "everything was not ok", interchangeably. But this assumes that the Quest of the Silmaril is just one old event in a commonplace history. Our quotes show that the Quest is a special event; that the foreseeing of that Quest is a special foreseeing.
and:
Of course, Morgoth benefitted from the Silmaril, if we stop reading the book at Dior's slaying. Just two chapters later we see that this same Silmaril brought him ruin and defeat.
Either we can accept the 'in the long run we are all dead'-argument, as the Tolkienologists put it so nicely, or we do not accept it. Where do they want to draw the line? Where it suits them, of course

By using the reasons:
1) It led to a good (in fact, outstandingly good and important) result;
2) It was foreordained by the higher powers and adapting their arguments to suit their own case, The Tolkienologists are trying to span everything from the Music of the Ainur, and until whenever it might suit themselves...
So according to the Tolkienologists, it is a good result that the Elves left Middle-earth! Now, that is an interesting spin on things!

So, the Ost-in-Edhil still claim that Beren and Lúthien was wrong in involving other people in their quest.
Because of their quest, Nargothrond was weakened, Finrod was killed, Fingon and his host were destroyed, Doriath was laid waste, Melian departed from Middle-earth and Thingol was killed. In that event also, the feud between Elves and Dwarves was brought beyond repair, unless the Tolkienologists are now bringing forth Gimli and Legolas. Dior was slain by the sons of Fëanor, and finally what the Silmarillion describes as the last and cruellest of the slayings of Elf by Elf:
From the Silmarillion: For the sons of Fëanor that yet lived came down suddenly upon the exiles of Gondolin and the remnant of Doriath, and destroyed them. In that battle some of their people stood aside, and some few rebelled and were slain upon the other part aiding Elwing against their own lords (for such was the sorrow and confusion in the hearts of the Eldar in those days); but Maedhros and Maglor won the day, though they alone remained thereafter of the sons of Fëanor, for both Amrod and Amras were slain. Too late the ships of Círdan and Gil-galad the High King came hasting to the aid of the Elves of Sirion; and Elwing was gone, and her sons. Then such few of that people as did not perish in the assault joined themselves to Gil-galad, and went with him to Balar; and they told that Elros and Elrond were taken captive, but Elwing with the Silmaril upon her breast had cast herself into the sea.

So, Beren and Lúthien was not right to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason!

Eriol

07-06-2003, 12:24 AM

Let's take a look at Ancalagon's reasoning. It may be because I am dense (and we will see that this can be taken as a fact when I examine Arvedui's last post), but I see a lot of exclamation marks (!), and even some insinuations of deception on the part of th Tolkienologists. I am confident that we can, in fact, find Ancalagon's argument buried within these, very deeply buried. But it is of course false to believe that we were trying to deceive so great a dragon, which appears to be as skilled in the arts of fogging the issue as his sire, Glaurung. Perhaps he means we were trying to deceive the judges? Well then, we can thank his observation -- I hope that the judges look clearly at all posts in this thread and check the arguments, and not only the figures of speech; otherwise we'd have no chance against Ancalagon!

It seems to me (but I may be mistaken -- digging is not that easy for a mariner) that Ancalagon's argument is seen in his final paragraph:

I see no error in my judgement of this question, it is plain and simple. Selfishness is a dependent motive and not one that Beren or Luthien were ever driven by. The seemingly selfish motive would not make it right for them to involve others and that is the the crux of our position.

In other words: B & L did not act out of selfish reasons; If they had acted out of selfish reasons, they would be wrong. I really find it hard to conclude from these two sentences that they are wrong. After all, "selfishness is a dependent motive and not one that Beren or Lúthien were ever driven by" (Correct!); and the seemingly selfish reason (and I take this sentence to mean that it was not truly selfish) would not make it right for them to involve others. Well, if they were never selfish; and if they would be wrong if they had been selfish; why is it that Ost-in-Edhil concludes that they were wrong?

:confused:

I can't see much more in Ancalagon's post (my fault, no doubt). I will address a concern that he raised, though, implying that the Tolkienologists believe that fore-ordainment excludes free-will; not so. Free-will is inherent in the Children of Ilúvatar; but that does not exclude foreordainment. I don't want to increase the scope of the debate to a much bigger discussion, the role of foreordainment in Tolkien's world, but I'm sure we are all aware of the many instances in which prophecies were fulfilled, and in which Ilúvatar apparently "gave a hand" to destiny -- all without excluding free will. The ring was MEANT to be found by Bilbo; The Witch-King would not fall by the hand of man; The sword would be reforged when Isildur's bane was found; and these are just instances off the top of my head. The Quest of the Silmaril is an outstanding example of that phenomenon, being predicted by many different people independently, as I said in my last post.

Foreordainment and free-will are not excludent; and Ost-in-Edhil will have to prove that if they want to base their argument upon it. I just thought I had to point this out before they got away with that unwarranted premise.

And now, Arvedui. He accuses me of a bit of "sleight-of-hand" in my caracterization of his opening post. It is just my native incompetence, Arvedui, not any evil design. I just assumed that the sentence in bold typeface in the beginning of the post was the question as you saw it. It seems I was wrong. Another example of that incompetence was when I assumed that you meant that Melian, Thingol, and Finrod were not involved because of their free will. Again, I'm sorry.

Luckily, the Tolkienologists' argument does not rest on my ability to understand the posts of our opponents -- we'd be in bad shape if it did! (Digging is very hard for a mariner...).

Posted by Ancalagon

1. The outcome of the quest is completely meaningless in this debate as it has nothing to do with the question.

It seems that Arvedui, at least (if not Ost-in-Edhil), accepts that the results of the Quest are an important factor in the analysis of the question. (Ancalagon flatly denied this in his post -- no wonder it is hard for me to understand what our opponents are saying). For Arvedui spent a good many words defending the theory that the Quest had bad results; and I don't see why he'd do that if he agreed with Ancalagon that the results of the Quest are irrelevant.

In this matter I don't have much to add to what I already said. The Tolkienologists believe that the Quest had good (in fact, extremely good) results; Ost-in-Edhil believes that the Quest had bad results. We both have substantiated our arguments with quotes; the judges must judge on that side of the question (which is only one of your three main lines of reasoning). It is clear that woe came after the Quest; less clear that this woe was caused by the Quest (and not, say, Morgoth, or Thingol's greed, or the Oath of Fëanor & Sons); it is even less clear that the end result of the Quest was bad. But this is for the judges to decide.

Then Arvedui said that since Beren sought Finrod, he involved Finrod; but it is clear that Finrod involved himself. We never denied that Beren sought Finrod; but we claim that Finrod knew what he was doing. He is considered by some as somewhat wise :D. He swore an oath knowing that it would result in his death; and he left with Beren freely, knowing it would result in his death.

I suggest Arvedui take up this question with Finrod, himself. Would Finrod consider that Beren should be blamed for "involving him" in the Quest? I think not. If any one is to be blamed, it is Finrod himself; and I don't think he is to be "blamed", blame is a useless concept here, for his death served a purpose, and he fulfilled his oath, and he lives happily in Valinor now. I don't think he would change anything in his actions.

Then Arvedui accuses the Tolkienologists of "drawing the line where it suits us" when we judge the results of the Quest (again, I find it funny that Arvedui concentrates his attack on the argument that Ancalagon considers irrelevant). But the ones "drawing the lines" were our opponents, not us. We simply claimed that the Quest was good; and we provided quotes supporting it. Ost-in-Edhil claimed that the Quest was bad, and provided quotes supporting that. Both sides agree that "in the long run we are all dead". So who is drawing lines here? We simply believe that a person in full knowledge of the facts would see the Quest as a good thing. Certainly the elves themselves did so -- as shown in that quote about B&L being sung in Beleriand, and in the respect given to Lúthien by the people in Rivendell. The opening of the chapter -- my very first quote in my first post shows that the story of Beren and Lúthien is a story of joy.

Arvedui's post ends with the assertion that it was not right for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people for a seemingly selfish reason; I'm sure it is still my fault, but I can't see any dent in any of our (the Tolkienologists') three arguments. They did not "involve" anyone; it was prophecied that they should do so; and the end result was good.

Arvedui

07-06-2003, 01:29 AM

Originally posted by Eriol
We simply believe that a person in full knowledge of the facts would see the Quest as a good thing. Certainly the elves themselves did so -- as shown in that quote about B&L being sung in Beleriand, and in the respect given to Lúthien by the people in Rivendell. The opening of the chapter -- my very first quote in my first post shows that the story of Beren and Lúthien is a story of joy.

I really do not like taking details out of its full context, as some others I could mention, who even ventures to tease the judges in their posts......

But on this occation, I feel that it is justified:
From The Silmarillion: Among the tales of sorrow and of ruin that come down to us from the darkness of those days there are yet some in which amid weeping there is joy and under the shadow of death light that endures. And of these histories most fair still in the ears of the Elves is the tale of Beren and Lúthien. Of their lives was made the Lay of Leithian, Release from Bondage, which is the longest save one of the songs concerning the world of old; but here is told in fewer words and without song.
Oh yes Eriol, it might be that digging is not that easy for a mariner
The Tolkienologists are now trying to use the fact that the Elves made the Lay of Leithian as a justification for their rather peculiar views.
Why was the tale of Beren and Lúthien 'most fair still in the ears of Elves'?
Because it is a tale of love. Not because it is a tale of Heroism.
I am not at all certain of the wedding-rituals of other countries, but I will bring a direct translation from the wedding-ritual used in Norway:
And there they stand: Faith, Hope, and Love. But Greatest among them is Love!
It seems that Arvedui, at least (if not Ost-in-Edhil), accepts that the results of the Quest are an important factor in the analysis of the question.
Now, is it really! When everything I have written about it is a question on how far that particular argument will be used. Of course, if you are cornered, it is very tempting to look for a wedge in the posts of our Glorious Guild. Again, I wonder if your post is directed more at the judges, than at the debate.
For Arvedui spent a good many words defending the theory that the Quest had bad results; and I don't see why he'd do that if he agreed with Ancalagon that the results of the Quest are irrelevant.
Well, let me divert your eyes to this sentence that I wrote:Where do they want to draw the line?
The way I see it, the Tolkienologists are still drawing the line where it suits them. That is one of the reasons their claim is a non-starter.

First, they claimed that an evidence of the good that was brought about, was that In those days Maedhros son of Fëanor lifted up his heart, perceiving that Morgoth was not unassailable; for the deeds of Beren and Lúthien were sung in many songs throughout Beleriand. When that was shot down, they tried to criticise the Glorious OiE for not going far enough. Remember this one, Eriol?Of course, Morgoth benefitted from the Silmaril, if we stop reading the book at Dior's slaying. Just two chapters later we see that this same Silmaril brought him ruin and defeat.
Then, all of a sudden the line in the sand has been moved. Now, I ask of the Tolkienologists where they will finally settle on the limits of their arguments, before they post this as evidence of what they believe is right:And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined.'
Now, they have already assigned Elessar to this debate, and Eru knows how much further into the Fourth, Fifth, or even Sixth Age they are willing to push the limits.
So who is drawing lines here?
Again, if the Tolkienologists still claim that
A): It was pre-ordained, tracing their arguments all the way back to the Music of the Ainur,
and
B): It ended in good, pointing to Elessar

then they are ruling out all possibilities of free will, therefore ruling out one of the central themes of all of Tolkien's works.
Again I ask you whom to believe: the Tolkienologists, or Tolkien.
But the ones "drawing the lines" were our opponents, not us.
Yeah, right!:rolleyes:

Eriol

07-06-2003, 02:25 AM

It seems my inability extends to writing as well as reading. How did I tease the judges? Ost-in-Edhil, perhaps, can think that I was teasing them -- but all I did was to acknowledge The Glorious Guild (not my words). But the sad fact remains that despite their brilliancy they have made no dent in our arguments. I'm sorry to point that out; but it is my duty.

They still cling to the line that foreordainment rules out free will. Can they present an argument to that effect? Not that I have seen. The Tolkienologists merely accept that foreordainment is seen in Tolkien's world; do Ost-in-Edhil deny it? All of the obfuscation being made on that point has to come to this clear question. Is there or is there not foreordainment in Tolkien's works, Ost-in-Edhil?

The Tolkienologists claim that there is. And they also claim that there is free will. Ost-in-Edhil urges you to believe "in Tolkien, rather than in the Tolkienologists". It is a common discussion in many of the threads in which I take part -- the opponents have a private phoneline to Tolkien, it seems. I, who am merely a Tolkienologist and was never a member of The Glorious Guild, have to rely on my reading of the books. Does Ost-in-Edhil provide any quote to the effect that there is no such thing as foreordainment? Do they provide any reasoning as to why foreordainment rules out free will? Not that I have seen.

The Tolkienologists' "rather peculiar views" on the subject have not been countered yet, remember. They are simply that there is foreordainment in Tolkien's works; that there is also free will; and that the Quest had a good effect. Rather peculiar.

Our mighty opponents have provided a quote from the Bible to support the idea that the Quest was based on love. I really must be very incompetent in relaying our views -- where did the Tolkienologists say that the Quest was not based on love, pray tell? Our opponents delight in proving points that were never argued in the first place, and that are clearly agreed upon by us. Of course the quest is based on love, St. Paul need not be claimed as a witnessed to that. And what is the relationship between that and any of our arguments?

They claim to "shoot down" our quotes (how does one "shoot down" a quote, by the way?). I think I see the reasoning behind that claim -- they assume that we were "drawing the line"when we provided a quote from the time of the Nirnaeth. Well, it seems I must receive the blame for that as well -- should I have made it clear that we were drawing no lines at that moment? That we were providing examples of how the Elves viewed the Quest as having good results? Should I have posted a quote from The Lord of the Rings to establish that we were claiming all of posterity as our domain, and did I rule out any consideration of later events by quoting from the Nirnaeth? I thought I did not; I thought that the sentence "the Quest had good effects" extended to all of the effects of the Quest, and not just the first ones.

And I think Ost-in-Edhil are allowed to all of posterity in their claim that the Quest had ill effects; no one should draw any line. If they believe that the Quest had ill effects, let them show it; we never claimed that any of their quotes were inappropriate, quite the contrary. If we were to attack their quotes, it would not be due to any "shifting of the lines"; it would rather be because the woes that happened after the Quest can be more properly ascribed to other agents (The Oath of Fëanor, Morgoth, Thingol's greed, etc.) than to the Quest itself.

(Also, I thought I had made that clear in the opening post, by mentioning the Kings of Númenor and Elrond. Therefore I can't really understand our opponents' claim that we were "shifting the lines in the sand" in mid-debate).

Now, they have already assigned Elessar to this debate, and Eru knows how much further into the Fourth, Fifth, or even Sixth Age they are willing to push the limits.

We had already claimed Elrond and the Kings of Númenor in our opening post. And I really am not aware of the rule that says that all of our arguments should be given in the opening post itself... not that we breached it, anyway. But our opponents seem especially bitter about that; and that grieves me. But it does not counter our arguments, which are (if I may name them again):

1) The results of the Quest were good (and we did not "draw the line" at immediate effects only; quite the contrary);
2) It was foreordained;
3) All involvement was a result of free will of the people involved, and can't be blamed on Beren or Lúthien.

I post all three reasonings here because the third argument was never countered, in fact it was reinforced by our opponents, even while they claimed that they were refuting it; they think (2) and (3) are contradictory, without giving any reason for doing so; and they attempt (and fail) to refute (1), and think that they have refuted all of the Tolkienologists' arguments.

Remember the question at hand: "Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason?" Ost-in-Edhil's arguments never even touched on the matter of the responsibility of Beren and Lúthien in the so-called "involvement". They are aimed solely at claiming that the Quest of the Silmaril had ill results, and that the reasons of Beren and Lúthien were not selfish; they also claim that (2) and (3) is contradictory, I'm not too sure why.

Surely it should not be so hard to prove a contradiction.

I do not end this post asking the judges who should they believe; for it is not a matter of trust, at least not for me. I believe every word of my opponents; but I have not seen how they lead to the conclusion that it was NOT ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason. I am sure they will show me in their next posts; and then, perhaps, we can begin the debate; for so far I have not been able to counter any argument from them, I have only defended ours -- successfully, in my opinion. But that is for the judges to decide (DISCLAIMER -- this is not to be considered as "teasing the judges"; it is just my personal opinion).

Beleg

07-06-2003, 08:17 AM

Using Humor and Irony to mock posts has often been used as a cover in picking unfair arguments.

Arvedui posts,

For a long time, not indefinately!

If it were not for a jealous Elf named Daeron, they could have lived in peace for a long time.

A long time? In peace? Where would have they gone? Lived the life of Outlawry then? To Nargothrond? Where to go, If not recieve the permission of Thingol. They couldn't really get married without the blessings of her father due to the task Beren had undertaken. Nit-picking It might seem, but the truth is you're assertment is wrong here.
They wouldn't have been able to live happily, because Beren being come from such a proud race, his oath would have gnawed at his to fullfill his Quest and this feeling would have nagged him allthe time.

Arvedui again posts,
Again by Beleg-Strongbow:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My dear friend Arvedui says that B&L asked Morgoth's help in the Quest of Silmaril!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let us take a look at what I really said:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So which persons are we left with, if we stay with the topic:
1) Thingol and Melian. But those only arguably, as Thingol sent his servants to lay hand on Beren. But we can give him the benefit of doubt, as Lúthien was faster, and brought Beren to Menegroth.
2) Felagund, as Beren went to him for help.
3) Morgoth, of course

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These are the persons that B&L contacted before they where contacted by them. Notice the difference.

So Beren&Luthien contacted Morgoth?
I don't know how B&L contacted Morgoth?
Do you say that an attempt to virtually steal the Silmaril from Morgoth's crown without him being aware was a form of Contact on B&L's part with Morgoth?

Originally posted by Arvedui

And the result of Meadhros lifting up his head, was: Nirnaeth Arnoediad. A splendid result, wasn't it?
Nirneath atleast was an valiant attempt to dislodge Morgoth. If Nirneath hadn't happened, still the Elves would have lost the day.
Even though the Nirneath had many woeful results, one good that came out of it was the meeting of Tuor and Voronwe.
Or are you trying to say that Nirneath's idea was fruitless?
Certianly the prepartions of Eldar and Edain were adequate and they only lost due to the treachry of Ulfang and Co.

Silmarillion, Nirneath Arnediod
Yet Morgoth would destroy them all, one by one, if they could not again unite, and make new league and common council; and he began those counsels for the raising of the fortunes of the Eldar that are called the Union of Maedhros.

Arvedui posts

Two notes on this:
1) The cause of destruction: It was the Tolkienologists that stated that
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) It led to a good (in fact, outstandingly good and important) result;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My point never negates the point made by my fellow member, he says that ultimate good came from the destruction of Doriath, I say that B&L weren't the cause of the Destruction but the SIlmaril and the doom of Mandos. What, prey tell me, Is the contradiction In it? Infact it sets out quite well.

Arvedui Posts
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their quest was a great one, and If achieved It would have been a great disgrace for Morgoth and a cause for utter humilation. It would have lifted the hearts and hopes of the dwellers of Beleriand and would have been regarded as a partial victory against Morgoth, since one of the objectives of the fight against Morgoth was to regain the Silmaril.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From The Silmarillion:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Morgoth] recking little of the sons of Fëanor, and of their oath, which had harmed him never and turned always to his mightiest aid; and in his black thought he laughed, regretting not the one Silmaril that he had lost, for by it as he deemed the last shred of the people of the Eldar should vanish from Middle-earth and trouble it no more.

Again another futive attempt on Arvedui's part in asserting my post.

My point that "It would have lifted the hearts and hopes of the Dwellers" is backed by the direct Quote indicating that from B&L's quest It was it precieved that Morgoth wasn't unassialble,

Silmarillion, Published.
In those days Maedhros son of Fëanor lifted up his heart, perceiving that Morgoth was not unassailable; for the deeds of Beren and Lúthien were sung in many songs throughout Beleriand.

Posted by Arvedui
One can believe the Tolkieneologists, or one can believe Tolkien.

One can believe Tolkienologists when their views are in accord with Tolkien, a fact The revered Eldar sadly seem unable to understand.

While the Quote provided by Arvedui sings a completely different thing. It talks about the Oath of Sons of Feanor and the woes of this oath.
Well tried Arvedui, but I am afraid you'll have to work harder then this.

Originally Posted by Arvedui

So, the Ost-in-Edhil still claim that Beren and Lúthien was wrong in involving other people in their quest.
Because of their quest, Nargothrond was weakened, Finrod was killed, Fingon and his host were destroyed, Doriath was laid waste, Melian departed from Middle-earth and Thingol was killed. In that event also, the feud between Elves and Dwarves was brought beyond repair, unless the Tolkienologists are now bringing forth Gimli and Legolas. Dior was slain by the sons of Fëanor, and finally what the Silmarillion describes as

What does B&L's quest to do with Fingon's killing? Or else you are preeching the idea that Nirneath was a useless attempt?
I can, in answer to your claim, say that, by this Quest was the SIlmaril recovered, many captives of Minas Tirith saved, ultimately through this SIlmaril, Aman was reached, Pardon and help evoked, brought forth and Morgoth ultimately annihilated.

Posted by Arvedui
So, Beren and Lúthien was not right to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason!

Beren and Luthien were correct in involving other people in their seemingly selfish Quest because great good might come from it and the first marriage betwen Elf/Men, a token of the love and unity between the two children of Eru might take place.
They were also correct, because through this Quest they would recover a Silmaril, which would mean a partial win on the part of Elves and great shame for Morgoth. Thus this seemingly selfish Quest would bring be a sign of victory for all those resisting Morgoth.

The problem is that the phrase 'seemingly selfish' often hinders the effort on reader's part in gaining the real meaning.

Thier quest Seemed Selfish because as a result of this Beren and Luthien would be married, and that was partly their own person matter, but the Ultimate result of this Quest would be the Recovery of a Silmaril, which for the elves would be a partial victory over Morgoth and thus would be a symbol of victory for the resistance against Morgoth.
So for this purpose, any help of from anyone resisting against Morgoth, could have been invoked for the gaining of the Ultimate purpose.

Chymaera

07-06-2003, 10:54 AM

Then Beren looking up beheld the eyes of Lúthien, and his glance went also to the face of Melian and it seemed to him that words were put into his mouth. Fear left him, and the pride of the eldest house of Men returned to him; and he said: 'My fate, O King, led me hither, through perils such as few even of the Elves would dare. And here I have found what I sought not indeed, but finding I would possess for ever. For it is above all gold and silver, and beyond all jewels. Neither rock, nor steel, nor the fires of Morgoth, nor all the powers of the Elf-kingdoms, shall keep from me the treasure that I desire. For Lúthien your daughter is the fairest of all the Children of the World.'
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and Lúthien

The question is:
Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?

First of all the quest was Beren's alone and he asked no person to be involved in his quest.

Bring to me a Silmaril from Morgoth's crown; and then if she will, Lúthien may set her hand in yours.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and Lúthien

and beyond he descried afar the highlands of Taur-en-Faroth that rose above Nargothrond. And being destitute, without hope or counsel, he turned his feet thither.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and Lúthien
Without family Beren turned to the one who could give him counsel; Finrod Felagund, friend of the House of Beör. Beren did not seek to involve Finrod in his quest. He sought advice.
Behind closed doors they sat, and Beren told of the death of Barahir, and of all that had befallen him in Doraith; and he wept, recalling Lúthien and their joy together. But Felagund heard his tale in wonder and disquiet; and he knew that the oath he had sworn was come upon him,
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and LúthienBeren told his tale and no more did he say. He did not beg Finrod for help in his quest or ask for aid.
Now Huan devised a plan for the aid of Lúthien; and coming at a time of night he brought her cloak, and for the first time he spoke, giving her counsel.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and LúthienLúthien did not ask for Huan's aid and did not beg for his involvement.

Now Lúthien gives Beren an ultimatumYou must choose, Beren between these two: to relinquish the quest and your oath and seek a life of wandering upon the face of the earth; or to hold to your word and challenge the power of darkness upon his throne. But on either road I shall go with you, and our doom shall be alike. The Silmarillion: Of Beren and Lúthien
And after their encounter with Celegorm and CurufinThere Beren, being torn between his oath and his love, and knowing Lúthien to be now safe, he arose one morning before the sun, and committed her care to Huan; then in great anguish he departed while she yet slept upon the grass
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and LúthienBeren made his decision to complete the quest alone involving not even Lúthien.
Heed now the words of HuanFrom the shadow of darkness you can no longer save Lúthien, for by her love she is now subject to it. You can turn from your fate and lead her into exile, seeking peace in vain while your life lasts. But if you will not deny your doom, then either Lúthien, being forsaken, must assuredly die alone, or she must challenge the fate that lies before you - hopeless, yet not certain. Further counsel I cannot give, nor may I go further on your road. But my heart forebodes that what you find at the Gate I shall myself see. All else is dark to me; yet it may be that our three paths lead back to Doriath, and we may meet before the end.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and LúthienNow let us take a head count of all the people involved in the quest.
One, Beren
Two, Lúthien
Three, --- sorry no other heads to count nobody else involved :p
They passed through all perils, until they came with the dust of their long and weary road upon them the drear dale that lay before the Gate of Angband. Black chasms opened beside the road, whence forms as of withering serpents issued. On either hand the cliffs stood as embattled walls, and upon them sat carrion fowl crying with fell voices. Before them was the impregnable Gate, an arch wide and dark at the foot of the mountain; above it reared a thousand feet of peripice.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and Lúthien
All ALONE right up to the Throne of Morgoth; pick up the Silmaril and scoot out the front door
Thus the quest of the Silmaril was to have ended in ruin and dispair; but in that hour above the wall of the valley three mighty birds appeared, flying northward with wings swifter then the wind. Among all the birds and beast the wandering and need of Beren had been noised, and Haun himself had bidden all things watch, that they might bring him aid. High above the realm of Morgoth Thorondor and his vassels soared, and seeing now the madness of the wolf and Beren's fall they came swiftly down, eveen as the powers of Angband were released from the toils of sleep. Then they lifted up Lúthien and Beren from the earth and bore them aloft into the clouds.
The Silmarillion: Of Beren and LúthienNow did Beren pray to Manwë and beg for eagles to save him? I think that the answer is NO.

Who called the birds? Maybe Huan YES.

Now from the above quotations and comments, We can see that Beren involved no one in his quest. WHY?

If Beren had involved anyone in his quest, the Silmaril would have turned these 'Helpers' into competitors for the prize. All who see them or even hear of them, desire them.

If Beren had gone to the Kings of Belariand and beg for their aid -- 'Oh please lend me your great armies to storm Angband and help me capture a Silmaril so that I may marry my love. -- Well where is the dignity in that? Not very much I imagine.

No since the Tolkienologist say that this is Okay for others to be involved.
I wonder why Beren did not involve anyone in his quest. When it is obvious that me never did.

My quotes show that without doubt

I will not speak of Fate or curses or freewill. Because I don't need to

But I will ask one question of my esteemed opponents, Who do you think that Beren should have asked to help him and why didn't he?

By the way Beren and Lúthien's reason for the quest for the Silmaril were not just seemengly selfish, they were deeply and intencely selfish reasons. And in the end they had achived there goal

Eriol

07-06-2003, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by Chymaera
By the way Beren and Lúthien's reason for the quest for the Silmaril were not just seemengly selfish, they were deeply and intencely selfish reasons. And in the end they had achived there goal

You will have to argue that out with Ancalagon, Chymaera; he is the one who claimed that the Tolkienologists had no understanding of the pure nature of Love, and how it is selfless to pursue it. If I may quote from the Dragon's post:

Did Beren and Lúthien involve other people in their quest for selfish reasons? No!

In the end, whether the reasons were selfish or not has no bearing on the question "was it ok?". Let's get back to it.

The rest of your post says basically that Beren and Lúthien involved no one in their Quest. This is the ground for one of our lines of argument; and the Tolkienologists think that this fact, acknowledged by you and me (I would not include other members of your team), leads one to conclude that Beren and Lúthien can't be blamed for any woes that occurred during or after the Quest. In other words, it was ok for them to do what they did.

It seems you think that the fact that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone means that their actions were "not ok". Why? I do not understand it. Remember, the Tolkienologists are defending the status quo; they are defending that what actually happened was good, and that "it was ok" for everybody involved to act as they did. When you say that Beren "should not have requested an army, or any kind of help", we both agree; and the Tolkienologists think further that since Beren did not do any of the things that you say he should not have done, his actions were most definitely ok -- according to your estimate of what he should and should not have done. And so were Lúthien's.

Answering your question:

But I will ask one question of my esteemed opponents, Who do you think that Beren should have asked to help him and why didn't he?

I think I can speak for my teammates that we think that Beren should have done exactly what he did -- and that is why we think his actions were ok. The question is not "would it be ok...", it is "was it ok...". We defend no alternate scenarios; we think that Beren and Lúthien's actions were ok.

Chymaera

07-07-2003, 01:22 AM

Originally posted by Eriol
You will have to argue that out with Ancalagon I can understand your reluctance to do it yourself:)
Originally posted by Eriol
The rest of your post says basically that Beren and Lúthien involved no one in their Quest.

...leads one to conclude that Beren and Lúthien can't be blamed for any woes that occurred during or after the Quest. In other words, it was ok for them to do what they did. Yes, no one was involve by Beren and Lúthien.
In other words it was Not Okay for them to ask for anyone's aid. Which I am arguing that they did not.
Originally posted by Eriol
It seems you think that the fact that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone means that their actions were "not ok". Why? I do not understand it. Remember, the Tolkienologists are defending the status quo; they are defending that what actually happened was good, and that "it was ok" for everybody involved to act as they did. When you say that Beren "should not have requested an army, or any kind of help", we both agree; and the Tolkienologists think further that since Beren did not do any of the things that you say he should not have done, his actions were most definitely ok -- according to your estimate of what he should and should not have done. And so were Lúthien's.Then the only thing that we have to argue is that is our interpretation of the question

Beren did not involve anyone and if he had then that would not be okay. And since he did not ask for aid all his actions were correct.
Originally posted by Eriol
I think I can speak for my teammates that we think that Beren should have done exactly what he did -- and that is why we think his actions were ok. The question is not "would it be ok...", it is "was it ok...". We defend no alternate scenarios; we think that Beren and Lúthien's actions were ok. Then you must have read the question differently from me in the beginning.
Because it would be wrong (read not okay)for Beren to desire or involve anyone's aid in his quest for his love.
You may not defend an alternate scenario, but by saying that you think that it is okay to involve others you are approving the alternates if they had happened, or were suggested.

It is not my fault that you seem to have a less than full understanding of what you are defending.

Beren would not belittle his love for Lúthien by having others do for him what he must do for himself.

By saying that it is okay to involve others in his quest you are opening the door to alternate scenarios.

And if you do not choose to defend these phantom scenarios that is just fine with me. But they are still there in my first post undefended by you.

Eriol

07-07-2003, 01:55 AM

How odd... Chymaera again reinstates our arguments. He claims I do not know what I am defending:

It is not my fault that you seem to have a less than full understanding of what you are defending.

Which is really funny. So now I will have to give a lesson in the subjunctive tense of the English language! A tough job for a Brazilian... so I beg everybody's forgiveness (including my teammates') if I say something stupid.

If the question were "Would it be ok..." Chymaera's point of view would be correct. For this form -- would -- is indicative of the subjunctive tense, which deals with what did not happen. So we could interpret the question as Chymaera is doing: the question could be rephrased in this way: "IF Beren and Lúthien had involved anyone, would they be correct?"

All of this, of course, assuming that the question was in that form. But it is not. It is "Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien...". No subjective tense -- the question is directed at what actually happened.

So: when we (the Tolkienologists + Chymaera) claim that all of Beren's (and Lúthien's, of course) actions were correct, we are in fact saying that their actions were ok.

In other words it was Not Okay for them to ask for anyone's aid. Which I am arguing that they did not.

I am claiming the same thing: that it was NOT OK for them to do anything different from what they did. And that surely means that if they did not do anything of the sort, if they did not ask anyone for their aid, then what they did WAS OK.

(I would not phrase it that way when talking about Finrod; but the "meat of our argument" is that Finrod's involvement was voluntary; in other words, that Beren and Lúthien can't be blamed for what happened to him. We (the Tolkienologist and Chymaera) agree on that.)

By saying that it is okay to involve others in his quest you are opening the door to alternate scenarios.

Luckily, I never said that... our argument is that they did not "involve" anyone -- everybody got involved out of their (the people involved) free will.

As for arguing it out with Ancalagon, I see no need; in fact I agree with him that Love is the primary motive behind the Quest, and that Love is not selfish. So why should I argue that with him? Again, luckily this makes no dent in our arguments...

Chymaera's post can, in its bulk, be considered as the post of a Tolkienologist -- to the point of disagreeing with Ancalagon on a minor matter, whom I (personally) agree with. He himself said that what remains is the clarification of the question, the lesson on the subjective mood that I offered. So Chymaera agrees with the Tolkienologists... very odd.

Chymaera

07-07-2003, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by Eriol
How odd... Chymaera again reinstates our arguments. He claims I do not know what I am defending: How odd that you do not defend against my arguements. My claim stands.

Originally posted by Eriol If the question were "Would it be ok..." Chymaera's point of view would be correct. For this form -- would -- is indicative of the subjunctive tense, which deals with what did not happen. So we could interpret the question as Chymaera is doing: the question could be rephrased in this way: "IF Beren and Lúthien had involved anyone, would they be correct?"The Question: Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?

Since I have already shown that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone. (see my first post) My arguement that it was not okay to involve others is correct. Your arguement that it was okay to involve others implys that that other options were available to them whether you state these other options or not.

Originally posted by Eriol All of this, of course, assuming that the question was in that form. But it is not. It is "Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien...". No subjective tense -- the question is directed at what actually happened.The Question again: Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?

The question assumes (wrongly) that Beren and Lúthien did involve other people and you by taking the side defending that it was okay to involve others. Should at least try to defend against my arguements that state that it was not okay to involve others.

Originally posted by Eriol So: when we (the Tolkienologists + Chymaera) claim that all of Beren's (and Lúthien's, of course) actions were correct, we are in fact saying that their actions were ok. Yes we are in agreement here. but that is not what the question asks. We agree here. Their actions were okay but that is not what this debate is about.
Originally posted by Eriol I am claiming the same thing: that it was NOT OK for them to do anything different from what they did. And that surely means that if they did not do anything of the sort, if they did not ask anyone for their aid, then what they did WAS OK. Here is where we differ. I think that you have gotten your okays all mixed up.

Originally posted by Eriol (I would not phrase it that way when talking about Finrod; but the "meat of our argument" is that Finrod's involvement was voluntary; in other words, that Beren and Lúthien can't be blamed for what happened to him. We (the Tolkienologist and Chymaera) agree on that.) That would be a good stand to take if you had choosen that position at the beginning of the debate.
Originally posted by Eriol Luckily, I never said that... our argument is that they did not "involve" anyone -- everybody got involved out of their (the people involved) free will.
Only Beren and Lúthien walked into Angband.

Originally posted by Eriol Chymaera's post can, in its bulk, be considered as the post of a Tolkienologist -- to the point of disagreeing with Ancalagon on a minor matter, whom I (personally) agree with. He himself said that what remains is the clarification of the question, the lesson on the subjective mood that I offered. So Chymaera agrees with the Tolkienologists... very odd. [/B]The Tolkienologists will defend that it was ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest.

This was your stated position at the beginning of the debate. What I get for all my arguements against that position is the claiming of MY quotes and arguments as your own. And then I get and English lesson, which I did not need thank you. You ignore the fact the your postion implies that Beren and Lúthien could have gone to every man, woman, and child begging them for help in their quest. There are no alternate scenarios in my arguements. They are all implyed in yours.

I am disappointed that we did not have a chance to debate the question. As I have to go back to work in the morning and will not see your fantastic response to this post until next week (it will be more of the same I imagine -- claiming my arguments and ignoring the rest.) The rest of my team will have their own outlook in this debate and I hope they do not get sucked into traps that have been place in there paths.

gate7ole

07-07-2003, 02:13 PM

Coming late at this debate, I have to say that I am at a loss about the line of arguments of the opponents. They do not seem to agree with each other, using completely different roads that are contradictory and eventually do not rebut our solid line of arguments.

What is the question in mind and how did the opponents try to argue for their side? That B&L were not ok to involve anyone else in their seemingly selfish mission. They deny all the goods that came out of this mission, (Arvedui¡¯s case), providing an unbelievably long list of the wrongs that came afterwards:
Because of their quest, Nargothrond was weakened, Finrod was killed, Fingon and his host were destroyed, Doriath was laid waste, Melian departed from Middle-earth and Thingol was killed. In that event also, the feud between Elves and Dwarves was brought beyond repair, unless the Tolkienologists are now bringing forth Gimli and Legolas. Dior was slain by the sons of F¦Ëanor
Wow! It seems that every event after this has its roots at the Silmaril! Not to Morgoth¡¯s cunning that would take advantage of every means to spread his malice. Nargothrond, Doriath would be left intact, without the regaining of the Silmaril. You don¡¯t believe that Morgoth was unassailable and that he would eventually destroy all realms one by one. Or that the regaining of the Silmaril was the first step of the downfall of Morgoth (Earendil being the other). I¡¯m sorry that I deeply disagree since this is very clear through all the books from an objective reader.

Chymaera chooses another line, that B&L actually never involved anyone in their quest. The fact that Eriol, my team mate actually mentioned this as the third line of our argument, means that we finally reach to an agreement :D .
The difference is that you suggest that Beren shouldn¡¯t (and didn¡¯t) ask for the help of anyone for the reasons you state. But this is not the question of the debate. The different people that were involved were never forced to act in favour of Beren and L¨²thien. They were ¡°compelled¡± to do so (e.g. because of oath ¨CFinrod, love ¨CHuan). B&L could not refuse their free aid. This is the difference from your statement. They accepted free aid and not asked for it. The first which is the case, is ok. Now if you believe that Beren should not even accept their aid, but continue completely of his own, I would like to hear how you will defend this reasoning.

Eriol

07-07-2003, 03:53 PM

This is the sentence of Chymaera that shows the misunderstanding between us:

Then you must have read the question differently from me in the beginning.
Because it would be wrong (read not okay)for Beren to desire or involve anyone's aid in his quest for his love.

Note the tense of the verb in his phrase: it would be wrong, i.e., it would not be ok. But the question is not "Would it be ok...", it is "was it ok..."

Let's look at a few examples to clear that misunderstanding:

1) Was Chymaera defending the Tolkienologists' argument when he said that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone?

Yes, in my opinion.

2) Was Arvedui defending the Tolkienologists' argument when he said that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone?

A nonsense question. Arvedui never said that. No answer is appropriate.

3) Would Arvedui be defending the Tolkienologists' argument if he said that Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone?

Yes, in my opinion.

Just an example of the subjunctive tense in action. So our question:

"Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemingly selfish reason?"

Can only be interpreted as the first example; as addressing what did happen. Not what could happen. Not what would have happened. But what did happen.

I think (forgive me if I'm wrong) that Chymaera is building upon a mild assertion of Ancalagon, that the question is badly worded:

Posted by Ancalagon

Only by understanding the motivation, self-sacrifice and independence that encapsulates love itself can you realise this question is either incredibly inept or incredibly shrewd, though it seems increasingly apparent both have been lost on the Tolkienologists!

By saying that Maedhros meant to write "would" but actually wrote "was", Chymaera is taking the "incredibly inept" side of the Dragon's dilemma. I don't think it is our function to debate the "ineptness" of the question itself; what is written, is written.

The question is "WAS it ok"; so it refers to what has happened. Chymaera assumes that it is a nonsensical question (see the second example above); the Tolkienologists assume that it is a reasonable question (as example 1). The question Chymaera is answering, a question which was never asked, would make as much sense as if I asked "Was it ok for Aragorn to kill Frodo and get the Ring?". We could answer such a question if it were phrased "Would it be ok for Aragorn to kill Frodo and get the Ring?"; but if we begin with "was it ok", then it makes no sense to follow with a scenario that did not happen.

People got involved in the quest; that is a fact. They got involved as a result of Beren and Lúthien's actions; that is also a fact, Finrod would never have left Nargothrond if Beren did not go there. But Beren and Lúthien were not accountable for anyone's involvement; their actions were the prerequisite for the involvement of, say, Finrod, but these actions did not force Finrod to get involved. And so the question being asked can NEVER be answered in the negative without blaming Beren and Lúthien; and the Tolkienologists think that this (blaming Beren and Lúthien) would be wrong.

Look at the answer that Ost-in-Edhil is offering to us:

"It was not ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for seemingly selfish reasons"

Is this not an indictment? How can one say that "it was not ok" for Beren and Lúthien to do what they did (for the question is pointed at what did happen, remember) without blaming them? But The Glorious Guild wants to say that it was not ok for them to do what they did, while saying that they did not do anything wrong!

(By the way, I think the structure of this answer shows quite clearly Chymaera's misunderstanding; No one says "It was not ok for you to do this" if you did not do anything wrong, as Chymaera is claiming. Chymaera could not agree with the Ost-in-Edhil answer as worded above; he would have to admit that the answer is an indictment of Beren and Lúthien's actions).

Very odd. If I say that "it was not ok for me to do such and such", I necessarily conclude that it was wrong to do it. But Chymaera wants to conclude that "it was not ok for Beren and Lúthien to do such and such" while claiming that they did nothing wrong.

:confused: