An Archive of Our Own, a project of the Organization for Transformative Works
Silmarillion, 41k, Russingon; the Cool Motive Still Murder story, now complete.
Then the swan-ship was still, for only the two of them were left alive on it. There were other bodies, many of them. The fighting must have been fierce. Maedhros looked at Fingon, and Fingon at him. They had been close in friendship once, but they had not spoken to one another in many long years. Not since the day when Fëanor had held a sword to Fingolfin’s breast, before the gates of the house of Finwë.
Fingon does things for love, from Alqualondë to Thangorodrim.
Genuinely think that all discourse about the feanorians can be solved by rereading the silm bc every 5 lines jirt makes it clear that it’s canonically their fault. Yes, even Alqualondë.
I was contemplating the problem of Elvish class society in Valinor in a post-scarcity world and realised there are a couple of clues in the Silm text that point to where class shifts from what Tolkien considers a harmless hierarchy* in a land where Elves are so rich there is diamond dust in the streets and the Noldor are giving the Teleri so many jewels they scatter them on their beaches; to one that creates concepts of entitlements, possession / ownership, debt and therefore the underpinnings of a war society.
High princes were Fëanor and Fingolfin, the elder sons of Finwë, honoured by all in Aman; but now they grew proud and jealous each of his rights and his possessions. ....
And when Melkor saw that these lies were smouldering, and that pride and anger were awake among the Noldor, he spoke to them concerning weapons; and in that time the Noldor began the smithying of swords and axes and spears. Shields also they made displaying the tokens of many houses and kindreds that vied one with another; and these only they wore abroad, and of other weapons they did not speak, for each believed that he alone had received the warning.
The language of rights and possessions is interesting here, especially in context of proud and jealous. proud and jealous ofc suggest the establishment of barriers, of enclosure and fencing to prevent the blurring of boundaries and borders that denote "ownership" and therefore "possession". It also denotes a move from having wealth because this is a land of abundance, to displaying wealth as a means of status - which we can understand to mean that the accrual of more wealth than others becomes vital. In a land where hard work is immaterial to the gain of any wealth, we can infer that more wealth is generated by the process of creating scarcity: hoarding jewels (as Feanor does with the Silmarils & other jewels, later on), hoarding land, hoarding other natural resources, closing them off to public access and use. This scarcity must be artificially maintained, which means new laws to enforce new structures and to maintain a rigidity and separation between class structures, rather than allow permeability and mobility.
The language of rights also suggests several possibilities. One is the "rights" of a mere prince versus a crown prince, which I delved into more over here, so I won't go over it again. The other possibility is also the rights of a "lord" over his "following", not only in terms of obedience or nebulous "support", but specifically in commanding various feudal duties or aids: e.g. paying various fees and tributes, having the responsibility to raise a certain number of soldiers (or other resources; most likely swords / bows / axes atp), commanding various services etc. until this moment, we have a sense of the Elves as open-handed and generous creatures, who are happy to share without a second thought. Now we have this preoccupation with rights, which ofc raises the question of "whose rights"? And therefore, also, whether a prince and a commoner will have similar rights? If so, what distinguishes a prince from a commoner? What confers on him greater power and status in this society?
The natural fallout of this hardening of a class system into something that relies on delineating rights and possession (i.e. ownership) is the need to enforce these rights and ownership. The quick segue in the narrative into the accusation of theft and usurpation and therefore, into forging weapons, suggests that in addition to the inference we can make that new laws had to be created, force and violence is now seen as a possible avenue for enforcing these rights, entitlements and ownership. No one has to use it yet, because this is still at a nascent stage in a society where generosity rather than hoarding control has been operative; but it is beginning to emerge. It also means this is the point at which in Noldor society, a series of exceptions are being created and seeded: violence is wrong, except when it is a means of enforcing rights, ownership and entitlements. In doing so, it necessarily produces a subject against whom violence can be wielded, and whom it would be just to wield violence against: in other words, a subject who is less than the person who can claim to have faced an infringment on their rights, entitlements or ownership.
I am also very interested in "Shields also they made displaying the tokens of many houses and kindreds that vied one with another". This suggests the point at which family (at large, versus just amongst the royal family) goes from a means of purely delineating kinship, to a means of organising society hierarchically. It suggests a proto-militarisation taking place, not only in actually arming themselves, but also in the sense of mobilising around feudal affiliations to houses and kindreds. Status is being displayed not only in wealth, but also now in military strength and the following that can be commanded. Affiliations are being narrowed down from a broader connection to "Elves" (or even just "High Elves") down to "Noldor" and now to specific factions / lords. In doing so, this paves the way for a certain level of dehumanisation to enter Noldor society specifically, ameliorated by the states of exception created under the emergence of a "rights" and "entitlements" framework. Not only may violence be wielded against those who encroach on rights, it may be wielded against anyone who is deemed to be on "the other side".
I think its important context within which Feanor drawing his sword on Fingolfin must be read. What Feanor is doing is not merely responding to provocation, but making explicit what is implicit in the newly emerging Noldor politic - that violence or the threat of it may be wielded in the pursuit of the enforcement of one's rights / entitlements (in this case, Feanor's right to the title, estate and power of being crown princes). It asks if people are prepared to follow this system to its logical consequences. Most of the Noldor clearly aren't ready for it at this point and cavil.
This is also, imo, the point at which the Valar make a crucial mistake in identifying Feanor alone as the mover of discontent, rather than identifying the situation as a structural problem that has been embedded deep into the Noldor. I think its very interesting to read this failure to identify what's happening against this little line, within the two pages covering these events: "he seldom remembered now that the light within them was not his own / for the Valar were ill-pleased that the Silmarils lay in Tirion and were not committed to their keeping". The light in the Silmarils ofc comes from the Two Trees, but the light in the Two Trees per Myths Transformed** comes from the Unsullied Light that Eru Iluvatar gives to Varda, who in turn sets it in the lamps, the stars and the Two Trees.
There's a lot to be said about this, but the shortest version is that what is implied to be going on here is also very much a contestation of ownership, but in this case who gets to be the one who "stewards" the Unsullied Light*** - the Valar position themselves as the ones who are the ultimate authority, Feanor contests this (reiterated in his speech to the Noldor, where he tells the Noldor they will be "masters of the Unsullied Light"), but in this act of contestation, the Valar establish a claim to ownership that is distinctly absent from Eru Iluvatar's original gift, i.e. they have created and are trying to enforce a scarcity which shouldn't exist, which is the very same thing the Noldor are doing. I think its possible that this is what makes it difficult for them to identify the broader structural nature of the fundamental shift Noldor society is undergoing.
Both, I think, lay the foundations for this society to fester and therefore for the final act in this particular descending series of events to take place: the First Kinslaying.
This is where the concept of a debt - and therefore an entitlement and right to repayment - is first articulated, then enforced with force:
You renounce your friendship, even in the hour of our need,’ he said. ‘Yet you were glad indeed to receive our aid when you came at last to these shores, fainthearted loiterers, and wellnigh emptyhanded. In huts on the beaches would you be dwelling still, had not the Noldor carved out your haven and toiled upon your walls.’
The articulation of debt is implied in "you were glad to receive our aid" / "you renounce your friendship". Friendship here is contingent on the Teleri giving their ships to aid the Noldor. When it is refused, the point is stressed that this makes the Teleri ungrateful, that they are breaking an unspoken social contract where they have received gifts from the Noldor, but are not returning these gifts when asked. In classic terms, this is a failure of the gift economy (actual gift economy, not its misuse in fandom), where the gifts that are assumed to have been freely given (the building of the city of Alqualonde; jewels) now take on the sheen of gifts that were given with a diplomatic purpose in mind i.e. to reinforce alliances, build relations and create a subtle debt which is to be repaid in kind at a later date. Feanor is staking a claim to the ships: because the Noldor helped you once, you owe us a debt [couched in terms of friendship] which must be reciprocated by giving us this specific thing we want. A debt is being generated on the spot and its payment is being demanded in fealty and material assistance.
There is also the language that manouevres subtly to reconstitute the Teleri as less than the Noldor. They are not "kin", they are other, a lesser people who depended on the Noldor in their time of need and now are ungratefully rejecting the Noldor in their hour of need. It is the manouevering of a demagogue, repositioning the Teleri as subjects whose rights and entitlements to their ships are lesser than those of the Noldor, who perhaps would not have what they have if not for the Noldor. The rhetoric is squarely dehumanising - "fainthearted loiterers" "in huts on the beaches would you be dwelling still" - and positions the Teleri as primitive, childlike, uncomprehending, therefore also the other side of it: that someone else should be stewarding their resources for them, that perhaps rightfully all of this belongs to the Noldor since it came from them (Olwe's response in squarely saying the ships did not come from the Noldor is very telling). In doing so, Feanor has created the atmospheric precondition for violence: if the Teleri are less than the Noldor, if they wouldn't have what they have if not for the Noldor, if they are ungrateful to the Noldor, if they break a contract (which was never articulated before!) for a repayment of a debt, then it is legitimate for the Noldor to enforce their right to repayment with force.
We understand that with "...until his host was assembled. When he judged that his strength was enough", Feanor understands that this force will have to be enforced through his soldiers; we understand those soldiers are armed; we understand that on the basis of his response to Fingolfin and his willingness to use his sword on him to enforce his entitlement to the throne, that these swords are not only symbolic, but that they can be used as "force" in order to "enforce" a claim; we also understand those soldiers have been primed to think of their entitlements as greater than those of whoever is constructed as their enemies. Therefore, it is inevitable that the theft of the ships, repositioned as a repayment of a long pending debt in the eyes of the Noldor, will result in the drawing of swords, in order to enforce the payment of that particular debt. Therefore, when Feanor contemplates the theft of the ships, it is an act that is fully justified in his eyes & therefore, any means he undertakes to commit this is fully justified, even when if it means the use of force and violence to do so. Therefore, the conditions for the First Kinslaying were sown fully decades before they actually happened - because what each instance of rights, ownership, entitlements, enclosure, enforcement, militarisation, dehumanisation does is set in place the notions that there is a point where violence will not only be tolerated, but it will be necessary. Tragic, perhaps, but this violence will be necessary to uphold a constructed notion of "fairness" and "merit". It is simply part of the "war unending" that Feanor promises Morgoth.
*not my view, but for the sake of argument, I'm adhering to Tolkien's implications
**unfortunately also the round world version of the tale, but which i think is a good reference point for certain theological questions re. the Valar
***Tolkien calls this gift of the light a "peril… for without peril they would be without power" and describes the Trees themselves as having some good i.e. healing the hurts of Morgoth, but also "could easily have a selfish aspect: the staying of history — not going on with the Tale. This effect it had on the Valar."
“Maglor’s canonical wife” this “Maglor’s canonical wife” that. I raise you this: Maglor’s many awkward situationships with people he ended up on the opposite side of kinslayings. This all culminates in him marrying Daeron, getting divorced, and then remarrying after 3 ages.
Elenwë Headcanons and Thoughts about why Turgon went across the Ice
The question of why, exactly, Turgon leaves Aman with his daughter and wife in tow is thorny. More than any of Fingolfin’s children, he is the only one to stick by his father in condemning Fëanor’s oath, and generally express reluctance to leave Aman (Fingon does not lmao but also chooses to shut up at this juncture as opposed to gainsay his dad in public).
So why the about-face? How does Turgon end up on the Grinding Ice, bitterly pursuing the road, as opposed to turning back with Finarfin and his host when the option presents itself? And more importantly, why is his family coming with him on the no doubt perilous journey?
The short answer is one of the founding stories of Tolkien’s mythos is the Fall of Gondolin, and Turgon and Gondolin have been basically synonymous since the start. Tolkien needs Gondolin to exist, so Turgon needs to get to Beleriand somehow and found the damn city. Other have spoken before on how the sheer consistency of Turgon’s necessary presence means that his motivations and actions start to tangle as earlier versions clash with later conceptions – to some extent, this problem is extant for all characters deeply embedded in the three greater narratives as Tolkien himself conceives of them. So we can call it a day and say: because Tolkien wants Gondolin.
But the more intriguing, in-universe answer admits more possibilities. A couple of answers have been brought up: one, that Turgon’s stubbornness means that the moment he commits he is never turning back. I find this convincing right up until we get to the moment where Turgon ostensibly commits – shouldn’t this legendary stubbornness mean he’s more likely to say “fuck everyone I’m staying” if that’s the choice he’s committing to? Another possibility: everyone apart from his mum is going and he has major FOMO. Fair, but runs into the same problems as the above. More crucially, this doesn’t explain why his wife and daughter come with him, when as we see in the case of Finrod, this was not guaranteed.
Even if we allow that Turgon, seeing his whole family including his father decide to leave, wants himself to take part, this doesn’t explain how he would have balanced this decision against his nascent family. Whereas Fingolfin’s other children are free to act in their capacity as free agents, Turgon has the bonds of his own familial duties where he is the father as opposed to the child: he holds responsibility for Idril’s health and happiness in a way that is impossible to translate for his other siblings. So what gives?
A generally well-regarded answer seems to be that Elenwë loved him enough to disregard her own misgivings and follow, daughter in tow, onto the Ice where she tragically died. Fair enough. There are also other explanations leaning further into the role of patriarch or further away. However, I propose another theory: Elenwë was way more gung-ho about leaving for Beleriand than her husband, and it was her determination that put his last misgivings to rest.
This solves some issues immediately. Why is Elenwë on the Ice? Because she wanted to be in Beleriand. Why is Turgon on the Ice even after being expressly against leaving? Because he’s not going to abandon his family, either his dad, his siblings, his wife or his daughter. It also creates an impetus for the about-face that we see in Turgon’s motivations: how does he go from arguing against Fëanor on the subject of leaving Aman to going all-in onto the Helcaraxë? The answer: Elenwë also wanted to leave.
This creates a really strong conception of Elenwë in my head. The rest is where we really get into deranged headcanon territory so! Here we go.
Basically all we get of Elenwë is that she’s Vanyar, she’s Turgon’s wife and Idril’s mother, and that she died on the Ice. This is basically a blank canvas for anyone to do whatever with so really there is no right and wrong here. But while I was thinking about her, I noticed that her name looked really, really familiar.
Elenwë. Star-elf. Elen, synonymous with El. Elwë. Elu Thingol??????
And that’s how I started thinking of Elenwë as basically having Thingol’s personality.
And this was great. This was crazy. This basically opened my third eye to an Elenwë that is basically a female Elu: proud, uncompromising, a bit of an arrogant shit, makes really bad jokes, super tall, and again, proud and proud and proud. Thingol in-story is basically occupying the same narrative role as Turgon in Doriath (Doriath and Gondolin are two sides of a mirror in a way Nargothrond, alas, is not invited), and this makes me think that Elenwë was really a match for Turgon in the sheer strength and abrasiveness of her personality. Also, as is noted, the -wë suffix is usually masculine and also quite old. It’s used for Manwë, Elwë, Finwë, Ingwë – all rulers of import. Of course, Voronwë is also in there, but what I am getting at is that an Elenwë who is ancient, was born in Cuiviénen, followed Ingwë on the Great Journey and is a pillar of Vanyarin pride in the same way Thingol is the proud king of Doriath is not impossible to imagine. And that this Elenwë I can see having a fire lit under her to go back to Beleriand after the Darkening of the Trees, where her death on the Ice is not so much Turgon’s familial tragedy as it is her own: a thwarting of her own ambition that her bereaved husband and daughter have to take up after her.
But let’s say we take this Elenwë as she is. What does she want?
And I’m going to come out and say it. I think she went across the sea to get those damn Silmarils back so they could resurrect the Two Trees.
Which is exactly what Fëanor would have murdered her on the spot for, and exactly what they swore the Oath against. But having that as Elenwë’s primary motivation really fits for me, especially with her Vanyarin background with the cultural delight of that people in the light of the Trees.
This headcanon is personally extremely compelling to me because it casts some huge snarls into the accepted narrative that Elenwë is the number one reason Turgon would mourn and miss Valinor, while also decoupling Elenwë as a nostalgic symbol for the light of Aman. I am also attracted to the idea of a young Turgon having an extremely scandalous courtship and marriage with the ancient Elenwë in Aman – an Elenwë who is older than Indis, even. Thinking on the expression on Fingolfin’s face when the woman he personally called aunt in his childhood marries his second son has made me laugh irl. And more to the point: it structures the relationship between Turgon and Elenwë in a way that makes it more complex and insane to me than if Elenwë did indeed leave Aman purely for love of her husband. It gives me something to chew on!
not only do i think huan was right to leave celegorm, i love that he does. i love that in a story called release from bondage, it is the animalized character who refuses to be accomplice to abduction, imprisonment, and planned rape. i love that loyalty framed as blind and unconditional is neither. i love that huan, who has seen celegorm grow up and watched him forming himself into something monstrous, will not follow him indefinitely, and judges him when no one else in his society will. can there be grief and hurt and sorrow on both sides? yes, although i think for celegorm it’s at this point mostly anger and resentment. but framing huan’s “betrayal” as just mean and nasty and selfish and based in ainur4ainur sentiment removes the vital context in which the action occurs. is it betrayal to reject the harming of another? is it betrayal to walk out on an attempted rape? whose suffering are we prioritizing here?
the best thing a man can be is gay and suicidal and miserable and utterly unlikable and unpleasant to be around and prone to addiction and abused and traumatized and not breaking the cycle and
Quotes about Thingol’s alliance/friendship with the Dwarves:
“Ever cool was the friendship between the Naugrim and the Eldar, though much profit they had one of the other; but at that time those griefs that lay between them had not yet come to pass, and King Thingol welcomed them.”
“He took thought therefore how he should make for himself a kingly dwelling, and a place that should be strong, if evil were to awake again in Middle-earth; and he sought aid and counsel of the Dwarves of Belegost. They gave it willingly, for they were unwearied in those days and eager for new works; and though the Dwarves ever demanded a price for all that they did, whether with delight or with toil, at this time they held themselves paid. For Melian taught them much that they were eager to learn, and Thingol rewarded them with many fair pearls.”
“Therefore the Naugrim laboured long and gladly for Thingol, and devised for him mansions after the fashion of their people, delved deep in the earth.”
“And when the building of Menegroth was achieved, and there was peace in the realm of Thingol and Melian, the Naugrim yet came ever and anon over the mountains and went in traffic about the lands.”
“But as the third age of the captivity of Melkor drew on, the Dwarves became troubled, and they spoke to King Thingol, saying that the Valar had not rooted out utterly the evils of the North.”
“Therefore Thingol took thought for arms, which before his people had not needed, and these at first the Naugrim smithied for him.”
“Their smithcraft indeed the Sindar soon learned of them.”
“Daeron the Minstrel, chief loremaster of the kingdom of Thingol, devised his Runes; and the Naugrim that came to Thingol learned them, and were well-pleased with the device.”
*Note: “Naugrim” means “stunted people.” Yeah… the Sindar and Noldor were pretty insensitive about naming other groups, weren’t they?*
Even Celeborn references the old friendship between the Dwarves and Iathrim:
"'Welcome Gimli son of Gloin! It is long indeed since we saw one of Durin’s folk in Caras Galadhon. But today we have broken our long law. May it be a sign that though the world is now dark, better days are at hand, and that friendship shall be renewed between our peoples.' Gimli bowed low."
Donning my "Thingol's lawyer" cap because I once again came across a fic that blamed him for not fighting Morgoth.
First of all, Thingol did fight Morgoth, while the Noldor were busy murdering and stealing and betraying each other. He allied with the Laiquendi, Falathrim, and Dwarves to battle Morgoth's forces. You could almost call it... a Union! And his army won a partial victory without special Tree-light powers. But by the time the Noldor came, he'd retreated because his forces were decimated (and he had no idea that "help" was coming). That, coupled with the remaining Laiquendi refusing to fight, means that Doriath likely did not have much of a standing army.
The Noldor arrived under mysterious circumstances, were secretive yet clearly showed internal factions, highly militarized, had explicit intentions to rule Beleriand without regard for the Sindar who already lived there, and insulted Thingol in a specifically racial manner. Not off to a great start! And then he learned about the Kinslaying and Doom of Mandos that they hid for decades!!
The Doom that specifically states: "On the House of Fëanor the wrath of the Valar lieth from the West unto the uttermost East, and upon all that will follow them it shall be laid also... To evil end shall all things turn that they begin well; and by treason of kin unto kin, and the fear of treason, shall this come to pass. The Dispossessed shall they be forever."
So, from the beginning of the First Age, Thingol was surrounded by Noldorin warlords, half of whom posed an implicit threat to him and his people, and he lacked the material power to keep them in check. He lacked that power because he fought Morgoth and suffered heavy losses. Even so, he sent his Marchwardens to aid the Haladin and welcomed refugees from the Bragollach. I take the quote: "The most part of the Grey-elves fled south and forsook the northern war; many were received into Doriath, and the kingdom and strength of Thingol grew greater in that time" to mean that at that point, Doriath did have more manpower, but I'm not sure how many were willing to fight.
Thingol then set the Silmaril quest. That was stupid. He should not have done that. But let's look at what happened: Luthien was kidnapped and assaulted, Finrod was usurped, and the implicit threat became explicit. This is the background for his (and most of Doriath's) refusal to join the Nirnaeth. I'll let the text speak for itself.
"From Doriath came little help. For Maedhros and his brothers, being constrained by their oath, had before sent to Thingol and reminded him with haughty words of their claim, summoning him to yield the Silmaril, or become their enemy. Melian counselled him to surrender it; but the words of the sons of Fëanor were proud and threatening, and Thingol was filled with anger, thinking of the anguish of Lúthien and the blood of Beren whereby the jewel had been won, despite the malice of Celegorm and Curufin. And every day that he looked upon the Silmaril the more he desired to keep it forever; for such was its power. Therefore he sent back the messengers with scornful words. Maedhros made no answer, for he had now begun to devise the league and union of the Elves; but Celegorm and Curufin vowed openly to slay Thingol and destroy his people, if they came victorious from war, and the jewel were not surrendered of free will. Then Thingol fortified the marches of his realm, and went not to war, nor any out of Doriath save Mablung and Beleg, who were unwilling to have no part in these great deeds. To them Thingol gave leave to go, so long as they served not the sons of Fëanor; and they joined themselves to the host of Fingon." [[Yes, he should have listened to Melian, but I'm not going to equate his stubbornness and foolishness with the Feanorians' open threats of another kinslaying.]]
Moreover, Thingol knew that only the Valar could defeat Morgoth, and he may have heard from Cirdan that Turgon was trying to send mariners back to Valinor for aid. And to recap: he knew about the Doom of Mandos and the risk of being entrapped in it. He was blind to the fact that he was already entrapped by the Oath but, well, I never claimed he was perfect.
TDLR; there was absolutely no reason for Thingol to join the Union of Maedhros and, even if he had, they still wouldn't have won. He most definitely made mistakes and did some horrible things- "abandoning Beleriand" was not one of them.
Lol I just realized that part of my post could have been summed up in the fandom's fave quote: "A king is he that can hold his own, or else his title is vain. Thingol does but grant us lands where his power does not run." Which is objectively true, but fans tend to forget the reason why he had no control over those lands and genuinely think he never resisted Morgoth. They also forget that he brought everyone who was able and willing to come with him when he withdrew behind the Girdle.
Besides, a closer reading of the full quote makes it clear that it comes from the same ideology that underlies Feanor's comments to the Teleri -> "In huts on the beaches would you be dwelling still, had not the Noldor carved out your haven and toiled upon your walls." and Turgon's to Eol -> "By the swords of the Noldor alone are your sunless woods defended. Your freedom to wander there wild you owe to my kin; and but for them long since you would have laboured in thraldom in the pits of Angband."
no bcs like i genuinely think if you stole a rock from the literal primordial evil father of lies and died in the process. i think your granddaughter gets to flip off the guys who show up to her after NOT attempting to steal the remaining two rocks. even if their dad made them. especially after they razed her land and killed her family. like i think she deserves to tell them to stick it up their ass
like whatever, i guess we can side eye dior. (did i mention one of them attempted to rape his mom?) but like. the NERVE to show up in sirion demanding the fucking rock. i wish elwing had a gun to shoot them in the face
since he is my fave feanorian, what do you think of maglor and also its REALLY important and is the only solution to save the world, would you perhaps marry or fuck maglor, just asking for a friend.
maglor to me is a case of moral clarity coupled with the complete lack of a spine to do anything meaningful about it. i don't think his heart was ever fully in the oath, and if it was, he grew disillusioned pretty quickly. he doesn't change very substantially across his arc either; he's almost always in the shadow of his brothers' ambitions and just allows himself to get swept along in the tide of things. he can lead, but unlike maedhros he can only ever do so for others' designs; like maedhros he's a coward, but in a different way. and just like maedhros, i fear his fanon version has also thoroughly disenchanted me to him :')
as for the second question hfkjsdhkfdsh...... i GUESS i'd marry him if the world was at stake since the tolkienverse espouses selflessness 🙄🙄🙄 he's going in the cuck chair tho
sometimes you really do need others' stupidity to shake you out of yours bc i used to be such a thingol hater and then one day i found myself stumbling across "here's why thingol is undeniably 100% the worst father in the silmarillion" and "here's why the fall of doriath and the third kinslaying are all because of thingol" and "here's why thingol is racist to the impoverished oppressed refugee noldorin exiles" and i had to sit back and go hm. ykw it gets to a point
The reason Earendil is a paradigm-shifting character who succeeds in lifting the Doom of the Noldor is because unlike the rest of the Finweans he's a) gainfully employed (sailor) and b) his wife loves him send tweet
where's that post about having to handhold other fans to explain to them that a woman reminding them of their shitty female relative/teacher is not grounds for character analysis
I’ve curated my silm content so much that I always get shocked whenever I see ooc kidnap fam content/earendil and elwing hate…. Life can be scary sometimes
