I think this was far better without Baldur resurrecting because of that. It suddenly becomes much more understandable as to why Odin and Loki have a falling out. His son is dead, and Hel will not release him.
When it comes to myth, it's not my way to say 'better.' But you're quite right that it is a better fit for the rest of the tradition, morally, philosphically, and aesthetically.
It's much akin to the way post-Christian Rhiannon forgives Pwyll instantly, without so much as an offer to atone so that they can all live happily ever after. In the original, she curses him to forget not only her, but their son, but keep the pain of their loss, then makes him deathless and promptly takes her son back to her own world. So Pwyll is still wandering bereft, searching for a family he can't even remember. By the time Christianity came to the Isles, there was no room for a woman to mete out justice, even a royal woman of the fae. And a mere human? They did their best to see that Vennolandua, first of the warrior queens, was forgotten completely.
There were no few points of pagan virtue that were deemed far too subversive even to record.
My biggest love, the thing that appeals to me about the Norse faith, is the drive to do something knowing you'll fail. Odin knows he can't bring his son back. He knows he will never win Ragnarok. He knows it has come before and shall come again.
Oh yes. The Norse could have taught the Greeks a thing or two about the beauty of the tragic.
But that's no reason not to try.
If I may, it's far more exquisite than futile, stubborn defiance.
A guarantee of defeat is no reason to compromise one's integrity. To be worthy, we must be prepared to suffer any cost. To suffer agony, defeat, humiliation is vastly preferable to betrayal of that we claim to stand for.[/QUOTE]