Yeah, Angela was something else. I loved her cat and Sapphira the best though. And that thing where Eragon can get into people's heads and see was Sapphira sees is creepy! Creepy but cool. I got about halfway through the second book when I stopped. I didn't like the elves they way they were (I really love LOTR!) and Eragon's love with Arya so I stopped. I thought it was a little, well, I don't know how to describe it.
Did you like the movie version? Because I didn't. I need to do a rant about that. Thanks for giving me the idea!
P.S. Have you read my other things? If not, pleeeaaase!!!!!!
You are exactly right and I'm sorry I thought that way. I'm a writer and don't portray things any differently than him. I will definitely finish reading the books and maybe I'll be able to learn from my mistakes.
It really is one thing to make mistakes and another to admit you've made them, right?
Author's Response: Certainly the two are different: I guess that's the difference between Hitler and Ghandi. I hope I didn't offend you or seem harsh before; I'm used to debating with people who want something to get their teeth into, so I express my opinion quite forcefully sometimes. I still think you should read the books, though: they're fun (didn't you like Angela the witch, if you got that far? She's cool. Not as cool as LotR though.)
Yes, the Atrabeth is in Morgoth's Ring, one of the HoMe series, the whole chapter is set around a conversation between Finrod and Andreth, a mortal woman of middle-age at that point. It is interesting, since Andreth is a lore-keeper or wise-woman among her people and tells him that they believe Man should not die and that they were not meant to. Finrod says that he thought Man's short lifespan and death were simply part of what they were, indivisible from them, just as quasi-immortality simply is the way Elves were created. He says that Men seem to live as it searching for somewhere else, and are not as indissolubly wedded to the Earth as the Elves, but are imbued with restlessness and not content, as if they are supposed to be ' somewhere else. '
Andreth and those like her held to the belief that Melkor had doomed Man from the beginning with an especial malice. It troubled Finrod,
' Then this is a matter of dread, ' said Finrod. ' We know Melkor, the Morgoth, and know him to be mighty. Yea, I have seen him and I have heard his voice; and I have stood blind in the night that is at the heart of his shadow, whereof you,Andreth, know nought save by hearsay and the memory of your people. But never even in the night have we believed that he could prevail against the children of Eru. This one he might cozen, or that one he might corrupt; but to change the doom of a whole people of the children, to rob them of their inheritance: if he could do that in Eru's despite, then greater and more terrible is he by far than we guessed; then all the valor of the Noldor is but presumption and folly - nay, Valinor and thr Mountains of the Pelori are builded on sand. '
It's one of my favorite parts of all the HoMe books, since it also illustrates very clearly the differences between Men and Elves, as well as the love that can be between them for all that. Part of the ' debate ' reveals that Andreth loved Aegnor, Finrod's brother and he loved her, but would not wed her as he was bound to the Siege of Angband and his duties. It embittered Andreth deeply, but Finrod's words on how Men and Elves should not intermarry are something that should be read by any-one who wants to write an Elf/Mortal romance.
I view Tolkien's mythology as ancient history and prone to all it's biases, mistakes and omissions, and read it as such, but when I see older mythology or Biblical history wound into it, I enjoy it a great deal. If you can get hold of Morgoth's Ring, it would be worth it.
This reminded me irresistibly of Atrabeth Finrod ah Andreth and of Finrod. After learning such legends Andreth would tell him of the Fall of Man. He followed that through and guessed that the redemption of Man would come through Man. Since only Eru could oppose Melkor, but could not wholly enter into his creation lest he destroy it he had to be both ' without ' it and ' within ' it. If one is a Christian of course, this clearly points to the Messiah. What I really love about Atrabeth is the weaving of that into the tales of the Elder Days and Tolkien's own mythology. It's very clever even if one reads it without any religious beliefs at all. If one does have those, it sews in Tolkien's universe to ours, which he meant to do I think, as this is supposed to be pre-history.
Although he did not want to expand on it, I have thought of writing a small story of my own OC being around at the time of Christ ( which according to my AU he is ) Probably not at the birth, Jael's already done a wonderful story, ' We Three Kings ' about Elves going to Bethlehem. Possibly the Crucifixion.
Man ignored your counsel:
made me think of this passage,
" What did ye do, ye men, long ago in the dark? How did ye anger Eru? "
Author's Response: Um, I've never heard of Atrabeth Finrod ah Andreth. Is it part of the HoME? I'm still trying to get hold of that :-( My approach to Tolkien's creation is through his poem Mythopoeia and his discussions with C.S. Lewis on religion, as well as some of C.S. Lewis's writing. I think ME has a sort of disrupted version of Christianity that needed the influence of Christ to be made whole; like Judaism two thousand years ago, without the direct and immediate guidance of God. Then again, I'm probably reading too much into it! Thanks for the review.
Oh, very well done. It sounds like a chant... it would be astounding recited in a cathedral.
Author's Response: Yes, it was originally intended as a creed, but it didn't work out quite that way. Chanting is exactly what I had in mind though. Thanks!
You are amazing! I love how Christian it is because I am one two. I definitely agree with you on Stephany Meyer. I used to read The Inheritance Trilogy, what do you think of it? I thought it was a little too easy to read. *shrugs*
Author's Response: Thank you! I don't believe Tolkien had it in him to create a non-Christian universe, as such a strong Christian. But why is being easy to read a fault? You can definitely see the growth in Paolini's writing skills over the first two books, but especially in Eldest he conveys some very salient points, no matter how 'easily' they are phrased. That's my opinion, anyway.