Judgement - Round 8: Ost-in-Edhil vs. Guild of Outcasts

[Aulë]

Well it appears that Beth shall not be online for a few days, so I shall start this thread up for the judgement of this debate: http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13367
I have no idea who the judges are, so I hope that Beth has already chosen them. If you are judging, please step forward. :)

[Snaga]

I'm starting to suspect Beth may not have appointed anyone.:( I hope she returns soon.

[Bethelarien]

Oh my goodness.

First off, I would really like to apologize. For one, I have greatly slacked off in my job as a host of this round. I fear Snaga is correct. I kept putting it off and putting it off, and unfortunately never got around to it.

Let me explain a rather unpleasant situation that I have just found myself in. I haven't actually been on TTF for the past few days (with the exception of this morning). The times I have been on in the past week or so, it's been rather limited. I now know that I've actually been sent several PMs reminding me that I'm the host, etc. etc. There's supposed to be a box that pops up to let me know when I have new messages. Well, apparently, somehow someone has been logging in under my name, checking/deleting messages (possibly even replying to them), maybe even posting. I don't know.

I have no idea who is doing this. My best guess is that it's a member of my family (possibly Galadwen--maybe she didn't realize it?). Most likely, though, my mother has found out that I'm on message boards I'm 'not supposed to be on', and has been being nosy. I don't know.

I feel terrible. No matter what legitimate excuses I have, I could have been more responsible, and I very sincerely apologize to all those involved, especially Aule and the debators. I will remedy this situation as quickly as I can.

[Nóm]

Maybe another member of GoE/D can find some judges for us?

Is that okay?

[Snaga]

Beth has PMed me at least to ask me to judge, and I have accepted. I've read the debate, and I am now considering my verdict!;)

[Snaga]

OK... here is my vote. I am giving this to the Outcasts... here's how I saw it.

Ravenna's first post unfortunately did more harm than good by drawing a lot of attention to Feanor's bad motivation for his actions. She proves that Feanor found it hard to contemplate the Valar's request, but that is beside the point. Second, she made a point about fate, without really drawing out why this made his choice good.

Nom's first post makes some good points, her sudden change of heart not withstanding. She contests the Fate point very well, essentially killing this line of argument to my mind, by placing a fundamental doubt over whether there is only one way in which a prophesy can work itself out. She also nails the motivation point.

Nom's second post continues to debate who would unlock/break the Silmarils. She also questions whether all three would be needed. Valid points although not hugely relevant to me.

Nom's third post contains a really crucial point. She states that "The silmarils were of much more use lighting the trees than they were hidden away in an iron chamber. Because of this some could say Feanor was wrong."

Ravenna's second post returns to the theme of fate, but doesnt convince me that an ambiguous statement about fate proves Feanor right. She engages on the question of who and how the Silmarils light would be removed. Then she introduces the question of the making of the Sun and the Moon, which becomes a focal point for the debate.

Gothmog makes two posts expanding on this theme, essentially saying that by denying the Valar the means to relight the trees, they created much needed light for Middle Earth.

Yay amused me with his analogy, but it didnt really seem close enough to be of more than rhetorical use. This was subsequently argued over, and while entertaining none of this really made too much of a difference to my opinion.

Nom refutes very effectively the idea that the lighting of Middle Earth could only happen without the Silmarils.

Arvedui makes an argument that the loss of the Silmarils would be tantamount to suicide to Feanor. But this is less than convincing, as it is really Feanor's excessive love for them that makes him feel this way. Ravenna has already drawn attention to the influence of evil in this, right at the start.

Ravenna introduces some discussion on whether the debate is really about whether Feanor's reasons were right, or whether the outcome proves his action right.

Nom replies that although there were positives in the outcome, there could have been positives in other scenarios too. So the debate shifts to whether, if he had complied things would have been better or worse. She argues that the Valar would have gone immediately to defeat Morgoth.

Gothmog replies that Morgoth would have nihilistically destroyed much of ME.

Nom disagrees... suggesting he wasnt strong enough... Gothmog disagrees.... and time ran out.

This was a close run debate, and I felt there was more to be said. The final posts, about the scenario of the Valar chasing down Morgoth did not get a full airing. For this reason, I think either side could have, with time, developed a more convincing case. In the final analysis, I am going to award my vote to GOO, as they did more to cast doubt upon their opponents arguments. Ost-in-Edhil were in the position of having conceded on Feanor's motivation early, and having to advance theories based on fate, which did not convince, and later having to argue the merits of hypothetical scenarios. Nom on the other hand was able to sustain a position based on it being wrong to want to lock away the light of the trees, which was really the nub of the issue, and was never really disturbed.

Good posts from a number of people... its a shame more progress wasnt made.:)

[Bethelarien]

First off, I would like to apologize for my lack of organization/motivation. Due to my recent overreaction, I was of the opinion that I would no longer participate in any way. However, I realized how stupid that was. And so here I am.

My vote as well goes to the Guild of Outcasts. I think Nom debated beautifully, even though mostly alone. Incredible.

I agree with snaga, in that Ravenna's first post was actually more harmful than helpful. Although, certainly, it could have been worse. Arvedui made some good points, as did Gothmog...

But, overall, Guild of Outcasts was better.

Well done.

[Idril]

Beth has asked me to be another judge in this debate. If I can have a day to read it and give my judgement (I'm off to bed in a mo. and I have a school trip tomorrow morning), I would really appreciate your continued patience. Thanks:)

[baragund]

Hi Guys...

Beth just asked me to help judge. Please bear with me for a day or so while I digest the debate and post my opinion.

I'm glad to see Beth back in the neighborhood!:)

[Eriol]

A very interesting debate.

O-i-E opened with Ravenna's post that said that

Although many important events followed, few, if any seem directly attributable to the refusal itself, and therefore are largely irrelevant

And proceeded to justify Fëanor's actions within this framework. By disregarding the results, the debate apparently would turn out to be an analysis of Fëanor's motives and about the ethic of the decision itself; I was looking forward for that :), I find it more interesting than the "what if" scenarios that blossom in many debates.

Anyway, within that framework the debate would turn around the properties of the Silmarilli, and about the rights of Fëanor and the Valar; property rights, and even a kind of "copyright" debate (who owns the light of the Silmarilli?).

The subject matter is complex enough that I can say I have no idea of which side I would take if I had to debate it myself under this framework… but it quickly left that path.

GoO quickly pointed out that

That the silmarilli had a very strong hold of greed on Feanor is a reason he did not give them up. BUT, this does not make it right for him to have kept them. In fact that it was greed makes it all the more wrong.

This is correct; but I don't think it negates the "rights" approach. The psychological reasons for Fëanor’s actions are just part of that approach. And GoO proved that it is a weak part. However, this observation resulted in a shifting of the approach, and I’m not sure why; while the O-i-E opening post was openly non-utilitarian, both teams adopted the utilitarian approach after this. Sure, "copyright" questions appeared here and there – mostly through YayGollum’s contribution. But the debate from now on would focus mainly on the results of Fëanor’s refusal.

What I found odd on both teams' stance was also that they accepted prophetic information as retroactive in scope… for instance, "since Yavanna would break the Silmarilli (according to prophecy), then she could have done it at that moment". I think this weakened the stance of both teams, in that it focused on questions of "could" rather than on questions of "ought" – clearly, the subject of the debate was a question of "ought". It was therefore a distraction.

But under the new utilitarian approach, as exemplified by a later post by Ravenna (compare it with the first quote of Ravenna to realize the significant switch in the approach):

Nobody said he was a particularly nice person at the time, and certainly his reasoning was not laudable, but taking events as a whole, and looking at the end result of that decision, it was the correct one to make.

I think GoO had the worse of the deal. They had a good case when disputing Fëanor's property rights and motivations and the rights of the Valar and of everybody else; but by accepting the utilitarian approach and trying to show that the later results were worse due to Fëanor's refusal, they lost ground. Nóm herself pointed out the difficulty of that:

The problem with arguing GoO's side here is that throughout the histroy of Arda there is a series of events which seem to have been doomed, and are all at the heart of the fullfillment of the 'fate' of Arda. The unchainging of Melkor,Feanor making the Silmarils, the dakrening of Valinor, Feanor refusing the silmarils... War of the Jewels... Voyage of Earendil... all of those things... are at the heart of it.

And by linking the debate of "whether Fëanor ought to have done it" with the matter of Fate; or rather, by accepting O-i-E's linking of the two matters; GoO found itself in a precarious position. I think Gothmog’s quote of Myths Transformed pretty much clinched the matter – from an utilitarian standpoint.

So, as I see it, there were two or three ways to argue this issue; one of them (the most favorable to GoO) was explored at the beginning, but not fully; and then the debate switched to the second way, the utilitarian approach, which, being beset by "what if" scenarios, is very hard to argue. Whenever a team tries to argue against what really happened in recorded history it finds itself in a bind. GoO was quite good in that attempt, but really did not convince me. The results of Fëanor's refusal were, overall, good for Middle-Earth.

And so my vote goes to Ost-in-Edhil.

Congratulations to both teams, and especially to Nóm and YayGollum… they are running a great show with little support there. I thought they could pull it off at mid-debate. And it was a very good debate.

[Idril]

Sorry guys & gals for the delay (I've been battling a cold :().

Well I must admit to not being a very big Sil fan - so it was good to read the debate about a topic I'd not thought too much about previously. I've had to read the debate 4 times as I've vacillated between both sides. On one reading - I felt GoO did the better job but on re-reading I thought perhaps OiE had got the edge. I had to read it two more time to come to my decision that Nom (rather reluctantly;)) did indeed convince me that Feanor was wrong in witholding the Silmarils from the Valar.

[baragund]

Hi Guys,

Sorry for dragging this out so long. It was a REALLY pretty weekend in my neck of the woods so I wasn't online much. I only finished reading the debate tonight.:o

Anyway, it was a great topic and both sides gave convincing arguments with interesting insights. I sure gained a better understanding of what must have been the motivations behind Feanor as well as the various Vala at the time of the destruction of the two trees and the theft of the Silmarils.

O-in-E got off to a bit of a slow start with their opening post. It sounded to me that they were rationalizing or making excuses for Feanor's decision more than defending the 'rightness' of it. GoO effectively countered this by highlighting Feanor's selfishness, greed and excessive pride as the motivators behind making the wrong choice.

GoO set the tone of the debate by focusing on the consequences of Feanor's decision, and by giving reasonable speculations on what might have happened if he had agreed to hand the Silmarils to Yavanna. The discussion on whether or not to give one, two or all three Silmarils struck me as 'hair-splitting' and the statements on either side did not do a lot for me one way or the other. But Nom made good points about the ability of the Silmarils to restore the trees and heal the hurts of Melkor.

To their credit, O-in-E came roaring back by changing their tactics with Ravenna's and Gothmog's posts about the darkening of Valinor forcing the Valar to get off their collective butts and addressing the needs of Middle Earth by creating the sun and the moon. Their arguments along these lines were so persuasive that I went from thinking GoO has a slam dunk to being equally drawn by both sides.

What finally made me decide in GoO's favor was Nom's post of Oct. 17 where she gives a very reasonable speculation that the Valar would have been bound to provide some kind of light to Middle Earth, even if the two trees had been restored. Yay also contributed by convincing me that the light of the trees was a quantifiable, limited and valuable commodity, that it was much more than the light from, say, a flashlight, and that Feanor had a duty to return the remaining supply of that commodity to it's original "owner" for the sake of all Arda.

All this rambling boils down to declaring the Guild of Outcasts as the winner of this debate.

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

All that being said, there is one more point that I felt GoO could have exploited. There was the question of whether Feanor should give up the Silmarils when the trees were first killed or at the Final Battle. O-in-E was indicating that it was intended for the Silmarils to be unlocked at the time of the Final Battle while GoO did not really address it one way or the other. But Yavanna clearly had a degree of urgency when she requested the Silmarils from Feanor so she "could recall life to the Trees, ere their roots decay".

This tells me that it was clearly preferable to have the Silmarils right away rather than waiting who knows how many ages before the Final Battle.

What do you guys think? Is that an important point or is it just another one of those little inconsistencies between the published Silmarillion and the HOME series?