Q: How Well Did Tolkien Imagine Longevity?
ANSWER: I received this stream of questions from a reader in June 2021:
I would really love to hear you philosophize on the topic of longevity and how it relates to the “Gift of Men”. I am not particularly interested in Tolkien’s thoughts on it but rather how you would imagine that it could shape human (or Elven) psychology and morality. Do you think Tolkien did a good job at imagining what the psychology of a long-lived being would be like or do you think that some other authors did a better job?
Do humans reach contentment with their amount of life lived at a certain point and approach death with a sort of serenity if they remain free from pain because of a state of wisdom that is acquired through a long life or is it the experience of aging that makes people grow tired of life? Do you imagine that Aragon died peacefully and content or that he was still longing for more time? Would it be reasonable to assume that a Numenorean culture would have produced a culture of wisdom where death was in fact viewed as a Gift or do you think that Tolkien was correct in portraying them as greedy and jealous for more years?
Do you think that a being that has lived for thousands of years such as many Elves would develop a psychology that renders them incomprehensible to humans?
Before I dive into this, let me say that I receive many long, complex requests like this. I leave them in the queue for so long because it’s hard to answer so many questions at once, especially when they require a lot of research. That said, this request gives me license to “philosophize on the topic”.
I’d say it’s debatable whether I’m qualified to philosophize on longevity. But then, I’m older now than J.R.R. Tolkien was when he first began philosophizing about it. So maybe that counts for something.
Did Tolkien Do A Good Job Of Imagining A Long-Lived Being’s Psychology?
In my opinion, yes and no.
I’m sure many people would point to Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth as an example of Tolkien’s philosophy regarding Elvish thought. That’s an easy, quick answer. I sort of addressed this topic in July 2019 with “How Does the Psychology of Tolkien’s Elves Compare to Typical Humans?”. That was a synthesis of my reading many random comments by Tolkien’s Elvish characters in the books.
Think of Legolas when he calls his companions “children”. Up until that moment in the story, I perceived Legolas as just another generic adventurer – ageless in that literary style where the character’s ages don’t really matter. In fact, the only member of the Fellowship who ever strikes me as “young” (in that I felt Tolkien wrote him to be that way) was Pippin. And even he has his moments of maturity.
It’s not easy to write characters of different ages. In every generation kids have their own way of talking, their own style of banter. You don’t really see that distinction until you’re old enough to realize you’re not a teenager or an early twenties person any more. One day you’re around people younger than yourself and you suddenly feel a bit out of place, like you’ve walked down this road before and you know all the trees and everyone around you is filled with awe and amazement because they’ve never seen trees this tall before (or something like that).
I think it would have ruined the stories if Tolkien had allowed many characters to stop the action and philosophize about how they see the world differently. But he did include a few scenes where, especially if you apply the knowledge of hindsight, you can see what he was thinking.
Tom Bombadil seems old. I’ve never figured out how I could always see him as “old” in my mind even while he’s dancing and singing silly songs. But maybe that’s the point. He’s so old he doesn’t care what people think of him.
Galadriel’s Lament feels old. When I first read the book (I was about 15 years old), I couldn’t relate to Galadriel’s song. I was more attuned to Frodo’s silly song in Bree because it reminded me of songs from my kindergarten days (which was probably Tolkien’s intention). But Galadriel’s lament speaks to the heart on a level that requires some maturity. Anyone who’s spent years missing a beloved childhood home – a place you can’t go back to – probably appreciates Galadriel’s lament better than someone who’s never lost that special place. If you can always go back to whatever special childhood home you cherish, you can’t feel what Galadriel felt. Even after spending thousands of years in Middle-earth, she still felt the deep sadness of losing Valinor. It took me years to appreciate that song, to see it that way.
Treebeard’s History Lesson. When he tells Merry and Pippin about the experiences of the Ents, I do get a sense of oldness about him. Of all the “ancient” characters in Tolkien’s stories, I think Treebeard is the most believable. He describes things that are hard to relate to, because he’s speaking for a people who are more like trees than humans. Tolkien did a great job (in my opinion) of imagining how the Shepards of the Trees should be, were they real. Fangorn’s youth is a place you can’t visit because we never lived in a world like that. He reaches across thousands of years to remind the Hobbits that everyone in Middle-earth is special, and that we should cherish what we have because we don’t know when we’ll lose it.
Have Other Authors Done A Better Job than Tolkien?
I can’t say I’m widely read in fiction about ancient beings walking among us mere mortals. That said, I can’t think of anyone who did as good a job as Tolkien at zooming in on the differences in philosophy and perception between ancient beings and young beings.
Edgar Rice Burroughs attempted to do something like this with his John Carter stories, where the Barsoomians could live for thousands of Earth years. Carter is “immortal” but his history only goes back a few generations in human experience.
Andre Norton’s Witch World books attempted to differentiate between the Old Race and younger peoples (newcomers to their world), but there were older, much more ancient god-like beings who occasionally appeared in some of those stories (like Ninutra, Sytry, and Volt to name a few). Even so, these characters didn’t do much to impart to the reader a sense of their agelessness.
Most writers would probably avoid having a character dwell on what it means to have lived forever, or a very long time. Doctor Who occasionally introduces some hoary old character (like the Satanic being in “The Impossible Planet”/”The Satan Pit”). The Doctor him/herself is quite ancient (even ignoring that Timeless Child nonsense Chris Chibnall dreamed up). The writers occasionally have the Doctor think so far ahead of his/her foes and companions that the audience just rolls with it when they reveal how some trap was cleverly set even while it looked like the Doctor was beaten. So maybe some of the Doctor Who writers have matched or exceeded the standard set by Tolkien.
Can Tolkien’s Humans Be Content with Their Lifespans?
To recap the question: “Do humans reach contentment with their amount of life lived at a certain point and approach death with a sort of serenity if they remain free from pain because of a state of wisdom that is acquired through a long life or is it the experience of aging that makes people grow tired of life?”
You bring up Aragorn, who like many Númenórean kings before him, willingly gave up his life rather than wait until the bitter end. I don’t know much about Catholic teachings, but I think Tolkien was implying that Aragorn and others like him died in a state of grace.
So, no, I wouldn’t say that old age beat him down to where he was tired. He made a rational choice to give back the gift he was given (longevity) so that he could pass on to the next phase of his existence (I know that sounds ridiculously clinical). Aragorn didn’t see death as something to be feared. Rather, he knew (based on his education in Rivendell and his faith in God) that something longer, richer awaited him. And he was ready to accept that.
Did Númenórean Culture Develop Enlightened Wisdom about Life and Death?
To recap this point: “Would it be reasonable to assume that a Numenorean culture would have produced a culture of wisdom where death was in fact viewed as a Gift or do you think that Tolkien was correct in portraying them as greedy and jealous for more years?”
Well, I think the whole point of the Númenórean story is that they were blessed with such enlightenment and then (most of them) abandoned it. And that abandonment happened at least twice. Arnor and Gondor were founded by the Faithful Númenóreans; but Faramir told Frodo and Sam that even among his people many feared death and they struggled to find ways to prolong their lives.
The Númenóreans were doomed to fall not once but twice. I think that’s why Aragorn’s reign as the Renewer (Envinyatar) was so important. He gave the Númenóreans a third chance to live in grace and to worship God. But, of course, anyone who has read the Bible knows that wouldn’t have lasted long. I think Tolkien meant to portray the Númenóreans as fearful of death and prone to faithlessness, like all Men, because as a Christian he believed there was only one man in history could truly redeem us: Jesus. I don’t see how Númenórean culture of any age could do anything but gradually fall away from grace.
Can We Humans Understand Truly Ancient Beings?
To recap the original question: “Do you think that a being that has lived for thousands of years such as many Elves would develop a psychology that renders them incomprehensible to humans?”
We humans do strive to understand the ancient. We probably do a poor job of it. Every generation has reimagined God (or the gods) in some way. We’ve enhanced and elaborated on the stories we tell ourselves about immortal beings.
The young always think they know better and understand the elderly. And we don’t.
I think Tolkien implied that observation in the relationships between his ancient and mortal characters in many ways. At their parting, Aragorn didn’t fully understand Arwen. She was thousands of years old and even though she had chosen mortality for his sake, she wasn’t ready to accept it. He was kind of glib with her (according to “The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen”). Was that Tolkien’s intention or was he just trying to write a Romance in which the guy was more in a state of grace than his wife?
The implication of the tale’s ending is that Arwen eventually achieved that state of grace, too. But I don’t think that means Aragorn was vindicated. He just didn’t fully understand what she had given up – even though he himself lived to be more than 200 years old. For most of her life Arwen had expected to go on living, or to be a part of Elvenkind forever. It was only in the last few hundred years of her life that her expectations changed.
I think Tolkien did a better job of representing the divide in thought between Elves and Men by leaving their conversations short and frustrating. When Gildor Inglorion hosted Frodo for a night, he remained very mysterious (despite the fact the narrative said they spoke for a long time). Gildor’s excuse was that the Elves had their own regrets. And yet, much like the Doctor, Gildor planned ahead and made arrangements that Frodo didn’t understand or fully appreciate.
Thanks to Gildor, Frodo was helped along his way by Bombadil, Aragorn, and Glorfindel. But Gildor also gave Frodo good advice (that Frodo kept trying to ignore). I can almost imagine Tolkien thinking to himself, “How would a kid respond to this kind of advice from his grandfather?” We rarely heed the advice of our elders when we’re young. And when we’re old enough to appreciate the life wisdom the elderly would share with us, it’s often too late to ask them for more.
I’m sure Tolkien understood that he couldn’t really understand the mind of a being who was thousands of years old. So it seems to me like he extrapolated from the differences between generations that we all experience in youth and maturity. He was old enough to have lived those differences from both sides.
And he was good enough as a writer to seed the story with just enough of this nearly incomprehensible Elvishness to make them feel frustratingly old and incommunicative. Elrond was the most talkative Elf in the story, and you really don’t learn much from his wisdom about what it means to be an Elf. I think we learned more about Elf philosophy from Tolkien’s letters and personal essays than from the story.
So, maybe Tolkien’s message to the reader is “these people are so old we struggle to relate to them”. Or maybe he was just subtly conceding that he as a writer couldn’t share enough details about the way Elves think to help us understand that divide, unless he sacrificed the quality of the story.
The one scene where an Elf elaborates on these differences between Elves and short-lived Men has always seemed to fall short of the mark to me. That’s where Legolas attempts to explain to the Fellowship how Elves perceive the passage of Time:
Legolas stirred in his boat. ‘Nay, time does not tarry ever,’ he said; ‘but change and growth is not in all things and places alike. For the Elves the world moves, and it moves both very swift and very slow. Swift, because they themselves change little, and all else fleets by: it is a grief to them. Slow, because they do not count the running years, not for themselves. The passing seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long stream. Yet beneath the Sun all things must wear to an end at last.’
That is, to the best of my knowledge, the only real example of Elvish philosophy Tolkien included in any published story.
I can almost agree with his “passing seasons are but ripples ever repeated in the long long stream”. But I can also remember details about every summer and winter I’ve experienced for most of my life. Would a being as old as Elrond be able to remember so many details of so many thousands of years? At some point I think even an Elf must forget some details of his or her experience.
But There Must Always Be Some Common Points
Except for their longevity, Elves aren’t that different from Men.
They eat, sleep, and breathe just like we do. They are also vulnerable to physical trauma just as we are. Tolkien’s Elves know pain, loss, and regret.
Maybe they would feel some things more deeply than us. Maybe they would need to disassociate themselves from past experiences more willfully than we do.
How would an Elf’s need to balance the biological needs of life with the passing of thousands of years affect their thought? Tolkien explored Elvish philosophy in language, music, marriage, art, and culture. But he could only imagine the probable differences and likely similarities between long-lived and short-lived humans (which in essence is all Elves and Men are).
So I think Elvish philosophy would share many similar concerns with our own historical philosophies. What are Good and Evil? What are nurturing and destructive for people? What is important or worth doing?
Tolkien’s Elves were explorers, inventors, technologists, artists and artisans, writers and musicians. They were literally like us in many ways. So how could they not think about things as we would? Even when you point out the specific Elvishness of their thought, it was all imagined by a short-lived Man.
I don’t see how I can adequately judge Tolkien’s views on longevity. But if I’m still around a few hundred years from now, hopefully I’ll have had time to give the matter a little more thought. Maybe then I can provide a better answer.
See also
How Does The Psyhology of Tolkien Elves Compare to Typical Humans?
Have Island, Will Rebel (Classic Essay)
Do Elves Dream of Eclectic Sleep? (Classic Essay)
Shhh! It’s A Secret Ring! (Classic Essay)
# # #
Have you read our other Tolkien and Middle-earth Questions and Answers articles?
Very interesting post. It calls to mind something Tolkien said to his son after the death of his wife, Edith.
“I should like ere long to have a long talk with you. For if as seems probable I shall never write any ordered biography – it is against my nature, which expresses itself about things deepest felt in tales and myths — someone close in heart to me should know something about things that records do not record: the dreadful sufferings of our childhoods, from which we rescued one another, but could not wholly heal the wounds that later often proved disabling; the sufferings that we endured after our love began – all of which (over and above our personal weaknesses) might help to make pardonable, or understandable, the lapses and darknesses which at times marred our lives — and to explain how these never touched our depths nor dimmed our memories of our youthful love.” (Letter 340, July 1972)
It seems like Tolkien was concerned that important things might be lost if there was no one left to remember them. That’s of course reflected in what may be the most famous non-Tolkien Tolkien quote: “Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it.” Even though Tolkien never wrote that, it seems like his characters often said something similar, especially the older characters.
Tom: “Few now remember them, yet still some go wandering, sons of forgotten kings walking in loneliness, guarding from evil things folk that are heedless.”
Elrond: “My memory reaches back even to the Elder Days… I have seen three ages in the West of the world, and many defeats, and many fruitless victories.”
Aragorn: “Then there will be need of valour without renown, for none shall remember the deeds that are done in the last defence of your homes. Yet the deeds will not be less valiant because they are unpraised.”
So, for whatever it might be worth, when Tolkien himself was long lived, and looking back on his life, he may have adopted the point of view of many of his long-lived characters. Perhaps he anticipated through his characters his own eventual psychological state.
Although I have always struggled to translate it into modern-speak, I think Legolas’ little homily on how Elves experience time was a determined attempt by Tolkien to suggest the differences between an immortal (to all intents and purposes) and a mortal mindset. Maybe its very obscurity reflects how difficult it would be to appreciate the differences.
Having started reading Tolkien’s works way back in the 60’s, I had always been interested by how Tolkien perceived humanity and its struggles, and then compared them to the elves. For the most part I was comfortable with his writings regarding this, which continued as more writings and more details got released over the years. However, it was reading Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth that made me rather depressed as not just the elves (as Tolkien had mostly been suggesting) were greatly saddened to an extent by their fate but as expressed by Andreth, so were Men. Elves forever struggling against the fading of Arda, and Men struggling against their own nature, then dying. I would greatly try keeping anyone already in a rather moody state to stay away from reading that as I’d rather encourage them go to his writings expounding on eucatasrophe and evangelium,.
I think one thing that must be emphasized with the Numenorians culture of accepting death, as well as their turn to no longer accepting it, is the extent that a cultural worldview can contribute. A real life example might be Japan up until WW2. The culture of the Samurai developed a cultural comfort with the idea of dying for your master. More than that, one of the more respectable ways to die was by willingly gutting yourself with a tanto whilst a good friend was assigned the privilege of cutting your head off. To the average modern Westerner, this is an incomprehensible perspective to have. Fast forward to today, it is also probably incomprehensible to the average person in Japan.
Also, I feel that one of the more successful attempts at portraying the headspace of extreme, alien longevity and perspective is “God Emperor of Dune”. I would also imagine that human myth and folklore also provides some fabulous examples. It is an extremely interesting topic, and I am always hunting for more works that explore the inhuman or alien perceptive.