“why do you reread the silmarillion, tara, isn’t it dry?”
because, my good bitch, 90% of the lord of the rings is food and tom bombadil and 90% of the hobbit is dwarf names and the other 10% of them, well, you know. they made a good three movies about that part of the former and a bad three movies about that part of the latter.
90% of the silmarillion is elves committing War Crimes and seething about how they can’t fuck their cousin and the other 10% is one half The Greatest Hetero Love Story Ever No Really Fuck Off and one half That Time A Man Really Did Fuck His Sister, written in that way where someone really wants you to know that if he translated beowulf into english it’d read like this too.
what i’m saying is that objectively speaking it’s fucking unhinged and feral and the fact that both the hobbit and the lord of the rings are functionally expansions of what would just be paragraphs in its coda, comparatively, just gets more hilarious to me the older i get. it’s not like they don’t all have the same problems inherent to their setting, after all, and i dismiss the rest by comparison mostly in jest - but give me the one that’s literally The Epic Of Bad Decisions Because If They Made Good Decisions They Wouldn’t Be Fun To Write Down, any day.
also the swords. i love me a cool sword with a fucked-up and bloody story behind Why It’s Got That Name and Why It Looks Like That and the damn if the silmarillion doesn’t have itself a fistful.
anyway. that’s why, hypothetical question-haver.














