| October 20th 2003: A Review of Osanwe-kenta a Beyond the Shire report by Michelle Laundhardt Throughout the mysterious and surprising workings of the six degrees of Kevin Bacon, I finally got to read the Tolkien's essay "Osanwe-kenta" ("Enquiry into Communication of Thought")", published in Vinyar Tengwar No. 39. The essay is contemporary with the essay Quendi and Eldar, which was published in The War of the Jewels. According to the note, it was probably written around 1959-60. The essay relates the discussions of Pengolodh on thought transmission (sanwe-latya, "thought opening"). I'll start off with a quote: "Pengolodh says that all minds (sama, pl. samar) are equal in status, though they differ in capacity in strength. A mind by its nature perceives another mind directly. But it cannot perceive more than the existence of another mind (as something other than itself, though of the same order) except by the will of both parties. The degree of will, however, need not be the same in both parties. If we call one mind G (for guest or comer) and the other H (for host and receiver), then G must have full intention to inspect H or to inform it. But knowledge may be gained or imparted by G, even when H is not seeking or intending to impart or to learn: the act of G will be effective, if H is simply ‘open’ (lata; latie ‘openness’). This distinction, he says, is of the greatest importance.All minds, even those of incarnates, have this ability, but it is subject to limitations, primarily related to the hroa. The Valar are the least limited, and here there is a comment on how they communicate with Eru: "They are, of course, open to Eru, but they cannot of their own will ‘see’ any part of His mind. They can open themselves to Eru in entreaty, and He may then reveal His thought to them". Manwe, being pure, was always open, and even Melkor could read him. Incarnates (primarily elves and men, but the discussion probably applies to the Istari) are limited by their hroa, in fact doubly limited, because the limit works both on the transmitter and the recipient (the phrase used is "pass one mantle of hroa and into another"). Because of the limitation, it requires strengthening to be effective. Strengthening can occur through affinity, urgency, or authority. Affinity refers to psychic closeness, not physical; it can exist through kinship, partly because of the physical and mental similarities, as well as the ties of love and sympathy. It can also exist through friendship, "which is likeness or affinity of fea to fea." Urgency refers to great need of the sender, as in great joy or fear, and the transmission is clearer if the recipient shares in the urgency. Authority applies to a person who has a duty to another, or to rulers who can issue commands or seek the truth. Interestingly, physical distance "in itself offers no impediment whatever to osanwe." Another limitation is reliance on language, which is clearer and more precise for incarnates. Habitual use leads to neglect of osanwe, which is then resorted to only in times of great urgency, when language is ineffective (e.g., due to distance). Even those who could use osanwe would tend to rely on language. However, those who have affinity understand each other's words better, and in fact much of what they say is not put into words: "There can be no doubt that here osanwe is also often taking place; for the will to converse in lambe is a will to communicate thought, and lays the minds open." (Applying these to the LotR, it could support the notion that it was Gandalf who urged Frodo not to put on the Ring at Amon Hen, since this was a primal "No", not requiring any precision of language, and strengthened by affinity, great urgency and authority. Language would still be required for other purposes, such as the note given to Butterbur, or the meetings with Saruman. It is less likely that Faramir's dream came from Gandalf, IMHO, because of the poetry involved, which is intimately tied with language.) These limitations apply to the Valar when they assume bodily forms and resort to language, but to a far lesser extent, due to their greater control over their hroa, their affinity amongst themselves and their consequent lesser reliance on language, and in relation to other beings, their thoughts have the highest authority and urgency. Only greater minds can converse through thought with more than one other; when several confer, only one can transmit at a time. In a note at this point, there is also a discussion of the use of hroa by the ainur. When a particular form is used often or long, the bond to it grows stronger, and becomes habitual, approaching the state of incarnation. There is also an opinion that when the spirit uses the hroa to further its personal purposes, and even more for enjoyment of bodily faculties, it finds it increasingly difficult to operate without it. Most binding are the faculties related to the life of the hroa, such as eating and drinking as opposed to appreciation of art or music. Most binding of all is procreation. There is no axan (rule, primarily preceding from Eru) against such use of hroa by the Ainu. "Nonetheless it appears to be an axan, or maybe necessary consequence, that if they are done, then the spirit must dwell in that body that it used, and be under the same necessities as the Incarnate." The only case in the Elder Days is that of Melian. (My comment: with reference to the Istari, they were in fact "incarnate"; in their case, the consent of Eru was obtained, as told in the Unfinished Tales. Another comment: I'm not too clear on what the axan refers to. Apparently not occasional use; even the Valar ate and drank on high occasions. It might refer to all habitual use, in which case the comment that Melian was the only case is limited to the good Ainu, but does this mean that Melkor and Sauron had to eat? Or it might refer to begetting, but if so, is the comment still limited to good Ainu, and if yes, what does this imply for Ungoliant? Or worse, for Tom Bombadil, and what base did he reach with Goldberry? At this point I wash my hands like Pontius Pilate, and leave further probing to the reader.) To break the barrier of Unwill, Melkor would feign friendship so that the other mind would lay open to him, and win their friendship, or place his own thought within them before they closed. However, he wanted even more to dominate and corrupt those whose minds were closed, the recalcitrant. With them, fear was unavailing, because it closed the mind more quickly. Instead, he became a master of language. While Melkor for most part knew less than about the Children of Eru than the other Valar, he was alert in things that might aid his design, and took interest in language, which the Eruhini would have by nature. He became a master of language: "In Valinor Melkor used the Quenya with such mastery that all the Eldar were amazed, for his use could not be bettered, scarce equaled even, by the poets and the loremasters." (So does Aman have its own Satanic Verses?) Thus by deceit and intimidation, Melkor could coerce others into revealing their thought, but through language rather than osanwe. There is also a discussion of the correctness of Melkor's captivity and release. It suggests that while elves would see the captivity as punishment, it was more that "he was deprived for a term, fixed by promise, of his power to act, so that he might halt and consider himself, and have thus the only chance that mercy could contrive of repentance and amendment. For the healing of Arda indeed, for his own healing also. Melkor had the right to exist, and the right to act and use his powers. Manwe had the authority to rule and to order the world, so far as he could, for the well being of the Eruhini; but if Melkor would repent and return to the allegiance of Eru, he must be given his freedom again. He could not be enslaved, or denied his part. The office of the Elder King was to retain all his subjects in the allegiance of Eru, or to bring them back to it, and in that allegiance to leave them free." Melkor's release is also justified. Since the Valar could not read Melkor's thought, they had to trust his professions of repentance (not being incarnate, lie-detector tests would likely be considered unreliable and inadmissible as evidence; sorry, Curious). While continued captivity could prevent Melkor from harming Middle-earth, it could not uproot his evil; even the Valar could not do so, unless Melkor repented. But he did not do so, and his humiliation made him crueler and more cunning. And the worst evil of keeping him captive was not some violent outburst by Melkor, but a step towards evil by Manwe in breaking his promise. In one of the notes there is also a discussion of foresight. Being a bit mentally tired, I'll just type out the whole thing: "Pengolodh here elaborates (though it is not necessary for his argument) this matter of ‘foresight’. No mind, he asserts, knows what is not in it. All that it has experienced is in it, though in the use of the Incarnate, dependant upon the instruments of the hroa, some things may be ‘forgotten’, not immediately available for recollection. But no part of the ‘future’ is there, for the mind cannot see it or have seen it: that is, a mind placed in time. Such as mind can learn of the future only from another mind, which has seen it. But that means only from Eru ultimately, or mediate from some mind that has seen in Eru some part of his purpose (such as the Ainur who are now the Valar in Eru). An Incarnate can thus only know anything of the future, by instruction derived from the Valar, or by a revelation coming direct from Eru. But any mind, whether of the Valar or of the Incarnate, may deduce it by reason what will or may come to pass. This is not foresight, not though it may be clearer in terms and indeed even more accurate that glimpses of foresight. Not even if it is formed into visions seen in dream, which is a means whereby ‘foresight’ also is frequently presented to the mind. "Minds that have great knowledge of the past, the present, and the nature of Eru may predict with great accuracy, and the nearer the future the clearer (save always the freedom of Eru). Much therefore of what is called ‘foresight’ in careless speech is only the deduction of the wise; and if it be received, as warning or instruction, from the Valar, it may be only deduction of the wiser, though it may sometimes be ‘foresight’ at second hand. " Not much to say here, except to note the comment that the Incarnate only know the future by instruction of the Valar or revelation from Eru, meaning the moments of foresight of elves and men apparently come directly from Eru. Which throws a lot of my theories on Divine Economy out of whack. I was intending to include some of the notes on Quenya, but I don't know how to type the special characters needed, so I'll hold off for now. 
|
