Talk:Vala (Middle-earth)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Valier?
I was redirected here from Valier. Why did that happen? I was hoping for something about Austrian publicist and rocket enthusiast Max Valier and I am a bit confused about why I've been sent on to the Valar (I suspect Valier would not be unhappy at the connection between himself and mythical god-figures, however ;)). --Trithemius 03:40, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Siblings
I'm a little hazy on the explanation for some of the Valar having brothers and sisters. Is it because they came from the same part/overlapping parts of Eru's mind (relating 'each comprehended only that part of the mind of Ilúvatar from which he came' from the Ainulindalë to 'brethren in the thought of Ilúvatar' from the Valaquenta), or just because he decided that's what they would be?
AGGoH 19:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Valar as Gods?
I have to disagree that the Valar are not gods. They seem more like a second order of gods, with Ilúvatar being the sole member of the first order. Ilúvatar is, of course, the creator God, but many mythologies have creator gods, and this does not preclude lesser beings from being considered Gods. The Valar do seem more like gods than like angels, for example, having specific areas of responsibility in the world, as do many gods in mythology.
Oh, by the way, the Valar are not gods although in Arda/Middle-Earth they were worshipped as demi-gods but they are actually when you think about it, the equivolent of the Seraphim in Christianity. The only actual god in Tolkien's legendarium was Eru Illuvatar, an allegory of the Monotheistic Christian God. That's my take on it anyway. -User:Anon 13/6/06
- Illuvatar doesn't seem too much of an allegory for the God of Christianity, Illuvatar is much less directly involved, almost a deistic god. They were not gods as Tolkien thought of gods, but they do seem to operate with more autonomy than one typically thinks of angels having.--RLent 23:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- J.R.R. Tolkien himself has said in his letters that the Valar are not gods, but should be referred more to as "Powers".
- -User:Anonymous —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.208.2.91 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] On the subject of Melkor
He is one of the Valar. The article doesn't describe that in enough detail.
- Melkor is not one of the Valar. From the Valaquenta: "The Lords of the Valar are seven; and the Valier, the Queens of the Valar, are seven also...Melkor is counted no longer among the Valar, and his name is not spoken upon Earth." AGGoH 16:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- He is still one of their number. And he didn't lose his position as a Valar until after he stole the Simiril and Ungoliant poisoned the Trees. JONJONAUG 12:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- This is a semantic difference. Melkor both was and was not a 'Vala' depending on the usage of the term. To be precise, he was their equal (or better at some points) in power and intended to be one of the 'governors' of Arda... however since he rebelled against Eru and did not work with the Valar he was not considered one of them. Tolkien lists the fourteen Valar - excluding Melkor from their number, but then he also calls him the 'evil Vala'. To put it another way, the prayer "May the Valar turn him aside" used in LotR was clearly not meant for Melkor... in common Middle-earth usage 'the Valar' are the fourteen. Melkor is excluded from his proper place amongst them because of his Fall. --CBD ☎ ✉ 13:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- All true. I would say the article should explain how Melkor lost his title, but continue to refer to the fourteen Valar and deal primarily with them, as that's the best figure for most contexts. In general usage would it be a good idea to describe Melkor as an Ainu rather than a Vala to avoid confusion? AGGoH 20:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
I agree -Anon
[edit] Vala?
why is this article called Vala instead of Valar, I'm sure there's a good explanation (maybe Vala is plural for Valar or something), but it's not given and it should be. Jztinfinity 20:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- I added a parenthetical statement explaining that 'Vala' is the singular form of 'Valar'. --CBDunkerson 23:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Vala is the single of Valar and Valar is the plural of Vala. Just like Maiar is the plural of Maia and Ainur is the plural of Ainu. -User:Anon 13/6/06
[edit] Redirecting
Maybe we should create separate articles instead of redirecting Ainur to Valar. Valar are the greater Ainur, and Ainur are the Valar and the Maiar altogether. Leader Vladimir
- There used to be separate articles, but as both were rather small I merged them. Additionally, all the named Ainur from the Ainulindalë became Valar (and Morgoth). -- Jordi·✆ 05:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Middle-earth and Arda discrepancy
According to the article Middle-earth #Usage and Misunderstanding, that Middle-earth is geologically small and therefore the name of the article should be 'Vala (Arda)'
Also, these "Vala" are supposed to be celestial gods/angels watching over the Eä
However, Arda is not as famous as Middle-earth, so a reasonable compromise would be 'Vala (Lord of the Rings)' --KelvinHOWiknerd(talk) 15:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- I would oppose renaming the article over such niggly points. In respect to the Valar, "(Lord of the Rings)" is no more precise than "(Middle-earth)", since they appear principally in other books. Besides, most of the Tolkien articles are disambiguated, when necessary, with "(Middle-earth)". I think we should maintain this uniformity. Ideally we should have chosen something with broader applicability, like "(Tolkien)", but it would now mean moving a lot of articles. Elphion (talk) 03:29, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- I object to the word "niggly"... it's racist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.77.67 (talk • contribs)
-
-
- No it's not. See niggle. Carcharoth (talk) 06:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Rewrite the section on Origin
I have made many changes in the section Origin and acts, though for the most part these are stylistic. The following paragraph, however, I believe seriously misstates Tolkien's intention, and I have materially rewritten it:
- With the Akallabêth, the Valar were removed from power by Eru Ilúvatar, and Aman was removed from the world. With this, the Valar's influence on the world was ended, and in the Third Age their final deed would be to send the Istari to Middle-earth to aid against the mounting threat of Sauron.
Elphion (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Ungoliant
Why is Ungoliant listed under the "Queens" of the Valar? She is not listed in The Silmarillion alongside the other Valar and, even in her own article, is not called a Vala but shown to have an ambiguous identity. I strongly recommend that this be corrected, unless someone can show support for Ungoliant as a Vala. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UrsaLinguaBWD (talk • contribs) 05:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Ungoliant is not clearly accounted for. Like Bombadil, her origin is never related. It's not even clear that she was originally one of the Ainur. Certainly Tolkien would never have agreed that she was one of the "Queens of the Valar". I have removed her from the list. I also moved Melkor out of the list of the "Lords" of the Valar (which is clearly inappropriate), but left him in his own section among the Chief of the Valar. Elphion (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)