From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


  • I have removed the {{prod}} tag which proposed that this article be deleted, because I think that this article has merit and so should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here as notification. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article as that process is only to be used when there is no opposition. Warden (talk) 22:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

This article contains a great deal of information not directly related to the Ainulindale, especially after the sentence "Melkor was among them, and has meddled in every development of History, just as he did with every element of the Great Music in Heaven". Is this someone's essay? Original research? --Urbane legend 12:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

A disappointing article[edit]

Not really up to its subject in content or style.

I agree wholeheartedly. The article needs to be reworked.
I suggest following the template for book using the following headlines:
  1. Overview?
  2. Synopsis
    This will need to be cut back drastically as the current synopsis is far too long (about 2100 words compared to about 3700 words in the book!)
  3. Concept and creation
    The Ainulindalë has a special history, as Christopher Tolkien points out in The Book of Lost Tales 1
  4. Critical response
    There is a significant body of analytical and critical literature that could and should be drawn upon to flesh out a proper section on this
  5. Further reading
    Starting with the article in Hammong & Scull's Reader's Guide
  6. See also
    At the very least, this should include links to articles for books containing earlier versions of the story
  7. References
  8. External links?
The headings with question marks of course only apply insofar as there is something relevant to go into that section.
Troelsfo (talk) 11:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Angel Analogy[edit]

"...have a role and level of power similar to that of angels in Judeo-Christian mythology." Disagree. Angels were chiefly messengers of God. They dwealt in Heaven and had no real power over the Earth, except when God sent them down for some specific task. OTOH the Ainur (Valar + Maiar) were created by Iluvatar to have dominion over the World. They dwealt on Arda and lived alongside its people, albeit in a separate land initially. The Valar had the power to create and destroy, to shape the world, basically whatever they saw fit--although they were not permitted to "animate" living beings, as exemplified by Aulë and his Dwarves. If anything, the Valar represented "gods" with Iluvatar representing an "over-God", as it were. No analogy exists in the Judeo-Christian mythos for this relationship (although Hinduism & Bhuddism may be a different story.) Any angelic role might tenuously be represented by the Maiar, the servants of the Valar. (FYI Melkor/Morgoth was one of the Valar, whereas Sauron was a Maiar as were Gandalf and Saruman.) --Jquarry 22:35, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

If you disagree, edit it out of the article. --Urbane legend 14:34, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Some very basic parts of the entry I found in place, but a substantial part did come from an essay I wrote, though have never published. Perhaps I ought to have noted the later bits as 'filler' or elaboration relevant to Ainulindale? At any rate, you'll find it's been modified. The question of whether the Ainur are comparable to Judeo-Christian 'angels' is a bit more complicated that the commentor would make it seem. There are quite a few variants on 'angel', when one walks the route from Babylon to Rome to Canterbury. At the end of the day, in all Christendom, Islamdom and Hebrewdom, the angels are immortals, sons of god, who have power in the world, up to and including the ability to meddle. The Hallmark Cards image of Cupid-cum-blonde-Harp-Player is not, strictly speaking, the 'priestly' or 'theological' view of just what Gabriel and Michael are. Angelic beings are divided into hierarchies and given sweeping responsibilities: many traditions hold that the world and everything in it has been 'given over' to Satan, for example. The djinn of Islam are accorded elemental realms (air, earth, fire, water). There is a stronger connection between Valar and Angels than one might think, which is only natural considering Tolkien's religious beliefs and education. User:Blackthornbrethil

- Pronunciation & Elements -

Prehaps something should be said of the pronunciation? I know when I first read it, I remember thinking it was "an-yool-in-dale" or something like that, when it's pronounced "ein-oorl-een-dal-eh" - I don't know the correct pronunciation. Someone else does, I hope.

Also, had it not been noted in the original essay that the four chief creators of the earth are very similiar to the classic water-air-earth-fire grouping? [Ulmo, Manwe, Aule, Melkor]. --Poddster 13:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I added the pronunciation aid, but will leave out the earth-wind-fire thing, as it might seem too 'commentary-like' for some. User:blackthornbrethil Black Thorn of Brethil 13:07, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

While the correction from 'lee' is absolutely correct, I disagree with the change to 'lay'. Of course, there seems to be a dearth of 'final authority' on the question of pronunciation of Elvish words. I have found many sources giving directly contradictory advice about such words as Ainulindalë, which casts grave doubt on such sources. Using the texts (LoTR, Silmarillion and the HoME series by C. Tolkien), I have found several remarks about how the diacritical mark ¨ over a vowel at the end of a word is not to be confused with the European umlaut (demonstrating "the change of a vowel that is caused by partial assimilation to a succeeding sound or that occurs as a reflex of the former presence of a succeeding sound which has been lost or altered" [thank you Merriam-Webster!]), but rather is used only to show that the final vowel is neither silent, nor lengthens a prior vowel. That is, to show that it is pronounced as it normally is elsewhere in a word. Since 'e' in transliterated Elvish is always produced as is the short 'e' of English (like 'pet', 'step', 'Shetland'), the final 'e' on any such word is thus pronounced 'eh' (or thereabouts). Hence "leh" in the article. The question of using the IPA symbols for pronunciation is left to a real linguist - it certainly can't be the only pronunciation model used in this article, as the vast majority of readers are unfamiliar with the IPA in any detail. I do encourage any adjustments to the pronunciation to include specific text-references. For starters, I would refer readers to the simplest examples - the Appendices in LoTR - especially the notes on 'pronunciation'.black thorn of brethil 20:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Original Research[edit]

This page appears to contain substantial amounts of "original research" and POV, especially in the Comparisons section. These need to be removed or referenced if possible. QmunkE 13:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Referenced. Point out the remaining original research and POV needing cleanup. black thorn of brethil 18:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge with Music of the Ainur[edit]

Maybe this article should be merged with Music of the Ainur. Meneth 20:25, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

String Theory?[edit]

According to string theory, reality is composed of "one-dimensional oscillating lines" -- waveforms, if you will. It occurs to me that as music can be described by an oscilloscope, could "the Music of Ainur" (oscillations of a metaphysical waveform) be considered a metaphor for the strings of string theory? Though string theory had not emerged in Tolkien's day, and though Tolkien himself stated that he despised allegory, it is possible that the Music of Ainur was, in an accidental way, prophetic of string theory (not necessarily as the product of a choir of angels, however). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:45, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes! The 'Wind' of Occult mythos can be safely understood as an enfolded order, Collapsing into material certainty (when the music's over...) (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Too much?[edit]

The article is practically the whole thing. Can't it be trimmed down some? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Good job[edit]

Well done to the people who added nonfictional analysis and commentary. This is an area where many articles about fiction struggle. Mr. Guye (talk) 05:42, 29 May 2016 (UTC)