![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Some musings on The Silmarillion
Sep. 4th, 2011 11:36 amReading The Silmarillion is such a totally different experience from reading LotR. While it's still a narrative, it takes so much more of my concentration to understand, and it triggers all of these grad schooly close-reading thought processes. The edition I have includes a letter Tolkien wrote that explains his reasons behind creating and writing this mythology, his opinions on Art and the human desire to create and what constitutes folklore and fairy tales. Reading it reminded me of reading articles for my grad classes, where I'd have to go over paragraphs several times before I understood them.
The actual text of the Ainulindale (*fails at umlauts*) and the Valaquenta and the Quenta Silmarillion are easier for me to follow than the introductory letter, but only if I pay very close attention. Everything has so many names. You wouldn't believe how long it took me to figure out that Val(i)mar is the city of the Valar in the country of Valinor on the continent of Aman. I remember back when I tried to read this the first time being like ZOMG! to find out that Middle-earth is the name of the continent the action in LotR takes place on, not the world. There's a glossary of names in the back for your convenience, but of course I didn't realize that for a few chapters e_e At least I'm starting to pick up on the linguistic roots, so for example if they talk about Amon Something I at least know it's probably a hill, and Ered Something is probably a mountain range.
But the thinkythoughts reading this is giving me are much more philosophically complicated than anything LotR made me think (although they are related). The Silmarillion is supposed to be mythology, and along with "how we got here" and "why natural phenomenon are the way they are", one point of myths is to teach people how they're supposed to act, right? And The Silmarillion's basic moral confuses me. I think this is because I don't belong to a spiritual belief system that looks to a higher power for rules to live by.
( More on this subject, on the nature of good and evil, and some LotR tie-ins )
The actual text of the Ainulindale (*fails at umlauts*) and the Valaquenta and the Quenta Silmarillion are easier for me to follow than the introductory letter, but only if I pay very close attention. Everything has so many names. You wouldn't believe how long it took me to figure out that Val(i)mar is the city of the Valar in the country of Valinor on the continent of Aman. I remember back when I tried to read this the first time being like ZOMG! to find out that Middle-earth is the name of the continent the action in LotR takes place on, not the world. There's a glossary of names in the back for your convenience, but of course I didn't realize that for a few chapters e_e At least I'm starting to pick up on the linguistic roots, so for example if they talk about Amon Something I at least know it's probably a hill, and Ered Something is probably a mountain range.
But the thinkythoughts reading this is giving me are much more philosophically complicated than anything LotR made me think (although they are related). The Silmarillion is supposed to be mythology, and along with "how we got here" and "why natural phenomenon are the way they are", one point of myths is to teach people how they're supposed to act, right? And The Silmarillion's basic moral confuses me. I think this is because I don't belong to a spiritual belief system that looks to a higher power for rules to live by.
( More on this subject, on the nature of good and evil, and some LotR tie-ins )
