Comments

The Silmarillion Writers' Guild is more than just an archive--we are a community! If you enjoy a fanwork or enjoy a creator's work, please consider letting them know in a comment.

I will have to re-visit this! Which will not be a chore at all. It is highly informative and entertaining--a formidable piece of work. I have some questions or differences that I will probably raise at some point. I am not in a great hurry to throw them out there, since I don't expect that either of us can resolve the question of what Tolkien actually intended.

I do very much like many of the examples you use to suggest what is unlikely about a lot of casually accepted bits and pieces of fanon. I am not even dissing fanon though when it serves a ripping good story, but there is annoying fanon and you have dismissed some of it which has annoyed me over the years as well.

Lovely work. It's an impressive essay and a useful one. Whether or not in the end I decide it is THE definitive one (actually, I scoff at the idea that there could be such a thing!), I am very happy you did the work and shared it.

Thank you! Glad you find it entertaining as well as informative. And I'm looking forward to any further questions or different readings you may have. I know this isn't comprehensive, and it certainly isn't the definitive say on the matter. (I'm not Tolkien! I can't even read his mind! XD) But I hope it helps to dismantle some of the "annoying" fanons. Like you, I actually think that all fanon is valid as long as it's well-written. But it remains fanon, and people can't expect others to adhere to the fanon they're familiar with because "it's canon". It isnt! LaCE seems particularly prone to this; first it gets misunderstood, and then the misunderstanding is presented as Word of God.

But I'm preaching to the choir! Anyway, I'm glad if you find this useful, and if you want to discuss things further, you know where to find me. :)

I found this a very informative and detailed essay. Fascinating and contentious topic. I feel you addressed the pertinent issues very well. I know I'm going to refer back to this and your bibliography in the future. 

You also clarified some facts about LACE that I had overlooked or that fanon had influenced me in a certain direction. 

Thanks for posting! Very relevant!

Thank you! Clarifying some of the facts presented in (and about) LaCE was what I was hoping to do, so I'm glad to hear that you found it helpful and informative. It's a contentious topic indeed, and if this gives people something to refer to when the usual issues arise, that makes me very happy!

I feel that the answer to "Is LaCE necessarily universal?" depends on what aspects of LaCE you're talking about. Things like "most elves marry young" are, indeed, laws and/or customs, and might well differ from one Quendi subgroup to the next. On the other hand, "married elves get permanantly soul-bonded and not even death does us part" sounds to me like an inherent part of elven... well, biology probably isn't the word. Metaphysiology, maybe. Not the sort of thing you can decide to do differently, any more than you can decide to have twenty four pair of chromosomes.

(Though I'm a bit biased on LaCE; I hate shipping, so I embrace anything that cuts down on the possible amount of pairings. As far as I'm concerned, elves are monogamous, period).

Well, as we're talking about a fictional document, everybody can decide for themselves what aspects (if any) of LaCE to apply universally! It's fair to assume, as you do, that Elves are indeed inherently monogamous as a part of their genetic make-up - but it's also fair to assume that, if they feel the need to argue the matter with Mandos, there's quite a bit of nurture in that nature. (Or Finwë is just a mutant. That's also an option, I suppose. ;)) The important point is that the canonicity of LaCE is questionable, and even within canon, it's an unreliable document - so ignoring LaCE isn't inherently less faithful than adhering to it. :)

This is very useful (and thank you for the references!).

It's good to have pointed out that even in LaCE, statements very much have to be read in their particular context, because the more they get quoted, the more the original context tends to get overlooked or forgotten. I found myself needing the reminder, in a couple of cases!

Also, it's easy to jump to the conclusion that we know what Tolkien meant by things, because we know he was a Catholic. But I think we often know less than we think about what English Catholics of his generation believed, let alone about what Tolkien himself thought, at various times, particularly when he was wearing his subcreator's hat.

With regard to no. 6, although she's a less clear example than Finwe, one could also think of Finduilas. Her betrothal to Gwindor doesn't stop her from falling for Turin, as you've mentioned under no. 8. 

Thank you! I'm glad you find it useful!

You're right that part of the confusion may stem from our assumptions about what a Catholic of Tolkien's generation (or Catholics in general!) believe, sometimes based on what American Evangelicals (a whole different denomination!) of the early 21st century believe. Moreover, when he was wearing his subcreator's hat, he was deliberately going for a pre-Christian (and pre-Abrahamic, albeit close enough to make for a relatively seamless transition) world. Which again makes sense from a world-building point of view.

Good point about Finduilas, too! LaCE explicitly suggests that betrothals weren't necessarily final, and there was a protocol in place for when one or both of the betrothed changed their mind - the returning and subsequent destruction of the silver rings - so while rare (?), falling out of love while still at the betrothal stage was expected to happen sometimes. Finduilas is a good illustration of such a case.

Lyra, this was great! I particularly appreciated the emphasis on context, context, context: both of sentences within paragraphs/passages/subsections (since Tolkien fandom has been good at yoinking a sentence out of context to prove a point ... although this may be a broader tendency of people generally! :D) and within the pseudohistorical framework that Tolkien used to present the story. Because one of the things that has always bugged me about L&C--and more specifically, how it is used in the fandom--is the [sometimes willful] ignorance around that, like 1) representatives of a people are ever entirely honest with a foreign chronicler and 2) thousands and thousands of years have passed with the exact same practices and values in place. AND the fact, of course, that many modern human cultures would identify similar values (monogamy, for instance) that is far from universal and perhaps not even the predominant practice when one looks at actual behavior.

Anyway. Preaching to the converted, I know, and rehashing points that you made so well in the essay itself, but in short, I loved it and thank you for adding it here (and hope maybe you'll consider sending it in to References too, but that is a can of worms for another time, perhaps. ^_^)

I must be one of the few heretics who absolutely loves LaCE - precisely because of the wealth of context, both internally and external, that shows that it was written to be questioned! Now that you're praising my essay, of course I realise that I should've pointed out the prevalence of LaCE-compatible values even in our modern societies. (Nor did I point out that, for all Tolkien may have condemned divorce and second marriage, he had to accept that his own son Christopher divorced his first wife and eventually married again... so much for ideal and reality!) Clearly, I'll have to find a way of working that in before sending it in for peer review...

Thank you very much for your enthusiastic comment! So glad that you enjoyed it.

So much of this agrees with my own conclusions re LaCE and day to day reality amongst the Eldar, making it a very satisfying read. I do like and appreciate how you've underlined the true facts relating to assumed canon --- 'But among all these evils there is no record of any among the Elves that took another's spouse by force' is a case in point: I've read this several times and somehow my brain always 'saw' the accepted version (minus 'spouse'). I also hadn't considered that hinting Maeglin might not be legitimate would be political stupidity - very true. Though I do think Aredhel and Eol had a very complicated relationship and that Maeglin's behaviour reflects this. He would make an interesting candidate for a proper psychological study.

So interesting and informative, Lyra - thank you.

To be fair, I think it is a really weird concept. I can't wrap my mind around how it's supposedly worse to violate someone who is married than someone who is not? How does that add up? So that may well be part of the common assumption that this applies to any Elf, not just married ones. From a modern perspective, the actual idea is just too weird. Still, it's what the text says!

I definitely agree that Aredhel's and Eöl's relationship is complicated, and the fictional truth is pretty much impossible to discern. Maeglin would make a great psychological study (as would some other "troubled" characters!), and I do hope that someone with the necessary knowledge of psychology is going to write it at some point!

Meanwhile, thank you for your kind words!

This is such an interesting and well-researched essay, thanks!

"Elven parents can influence whether or not they have a baby" - I assumed this, having read Tyellas' essay, so thanks for pointing out that this doesn't have a strong textual basis.

I especially like points 8 and 9 on the reliability and applicability of LACE. As you hint, what society has ever lived strictly in accordance with its avowed customs? I really can't think of one.

Also, the idea that all Elves would behave in the same way regarding something as important as sex and marriage would make them very boring indeed, and doesn't fit with what we know about how different elves could be. LACE also makes no distinction between different groups of Elves i.e. Sindar, Noldor, Avari...surely these groups would have had different cultural norms, rather than following some centrally planned, biologically predetermined behavioural pattern.

Glad you enjoyed it! Yes, it's really funny how much people rely on LaCE - or even misunderstandings based on LaCE! I think it's so important to remember that expectations and reality can often be far apart, no matter how natural or universal the avowed customs supposedly are. LaCE does explicitly state that it is about Eldar only (i.e., the Elves that decided to go to Valinor, whether or not they actually arrived there!), so it absolutely makes a distinction between Avari and the Eldarin peoples - but it's still hard to believe that such fundamentally different groups as (say) the Sindarin subgroup of the Telerin culture and the Vanyar would have absolutely identical cultural norms. Aelfwine only really talks to the Noldor of Tol Eressea, anyway!

Thank you for your comment!