: Well, first of all, welcome to the board! :)

: I started the White Council almost two years ago hoping for the kind of discussions we have here. It has exceeded my expectations.

: : I have some inter-related queries relating to the Professor's
: : conception or use of "fate" in his writings. As an initial
: : matter, I am neither a student of philosophy nor a believer in
: : pre-determination. Nonetheless, I find the Professor's
: : references to fate to be ambiguous.

: This is a toughie.

: : Eru gives the Atani a "new gift" so that "they should have a
: : virtue to shape their life, amid the powers and chances of the
: : world, beyond the Music of the Ainur, which is as fate to all
: : things else."

: : My questions are : (1) are the Valar also constrained by fate?
: : In favor of this interpretation appear to be the express
: : statement "to all things else" in the quote above, as well as
: : the Dooms of Mandos which almost invariably involve the Valar.

: Somewhere, perhaps in MORGOTH'S RING, perhaps in THE PEOPLES OF MIDDLE-EARTH, there is an essay where Tolkien discusses the Valar's declining role in the world. I think he says somehing to the effect that they had greater leeway nearer the beginning of Time, but as Time progresses they have fewer and fewer choices before them.

Perhaps this is why the Valar acted somewhat freely with respect to the elves but tend not to interfere with men. For the Valar to insert themselves into the actions of "free acting" men might be "perilous". This might also explain the Change in the World and why the Valar turned to Eru when Numenor invaded Aman, rather than acting themselves. But, as I said, I am not a beleiver in fate and prefer to look for other explanations.

: Of course, in "Ainulindale", it's stated (or implied, depending on how you interpret the passage) that the Ainur never really got the full measure of the themes of Iluvatar, and that Iluvatar did not reveal the entire Vision to them. Hence, even they don't know how Time will end.

: : (2)If the Valar are constrained by fate, then why is Arda
: : considered "marred"?

: Personal choice is still important to Tolkien. It sort of goes back to Iluvatar's statement concerning Melkor's deeds redounding to Iluvatar's glory. All the choices made by individuals will be taken up and incorporated into the ever-changing theme. Hence, having the freedom to choose, the Valar can depart from the theme they know. Melkor was thus able to depart from the theme he knew and "mar" Arda. The marring, if I understand MORGOTH'S RING properly, was not so much a physical "marring" as the fact of Morgoth's imbuing Arda with so much of his personal essence.

This explanation is more to my liking. Then questions such as whether the Valar's summoning the elves to Aman was a mistake are open for debate (although Mandos said this decision was so doomed if I recall). I also agree with your interpretation of Morgoth's Ring. Because Melkor expends so much of his personal power on Arda, the Vala who raised the Hithlaeglir to interfere with Orome's riding could also be wounded by Fingolfin in combat.

: : (3) Doesn't the injection of the Free Will of the Atani disrupt
: : or eliminate Fate? (I don't expect a canonical answer to this
: : one but am interested in the views of others)

: I am of the opinion that Men have greater leeway than Elves because their ultimate (individual) fates do not lie within the bounds of Arda the way the Elves' fates do. Hence, each Man plays only a brief role in the unfolding theme and cannot really affect it much.

: Elves still have freedom of choice, but their nature seems to predispose them toward making certain types of choices more readily than certain other choices.

: I would probably never be able to back this up with any sort of textual evidence, however. This is all just opinion and speculation.