#moringottocakemetapost

[moringottocake]

The thing is, when I dove into the silm fandom, my first interest were well-researched and layered (Sauron) redemption fics, because they are the closest to what fascinates me: Growth and development of a character who has done evil things and gradually realizes there is more they did not consider yet in life. I am interested in the internal process of this growth. The pains, regrets, awkwardness, guilt, and the tonnes of responsibility weighing their mind down to force them to become, and no longer just "be".

And this forward and open ended growth that that interests me is not redemption in the literal sense: bringing the evildoer back into the fold and see them conform to a prescribed good.

That's bending over backwards. Ouch!

So I never even tried my hand at a dark lord redemption fic. It's been done wonderfully by some pretty amazing authors.

So instead I ask myself how interesting an opposittion to the Valar and Eru can look like and be a change from what Tolkien already wrote. And by interesting I mean showing the Dark Lords as forces of messy, weird, and sometimes ingenious becoming as a foil to the stagnant idea of bliss in Valinor.

That's also why I love seeing how Melkor is sometimes framed as the Valar of change. And if you decide to depict Manwë as the keeper of "We have always done it this way", the conflict writes itself without even using labels like good or evil anymore, so the discussion gets even more interesting.

And then there are the facets of humor I love when critiquing things to make it entertaining and fun.

Good crack can be the most serious thing you have read in a while.

[moringottocake]

What Darkness do the Dark Lords Embody?

Another one why I write the dark lords more neutral, and in an explorative manner:

This might be a bit of a hot take, because "dark" is such an imprecise word in my lexicon. It does not work as a shorthand for "horrible" in my *personal* books.

It can mean many things, and most are first and foremost neutral, before context is added.

For example: Dark things can be unseen, obscured, taboo, and also private. Also, darkness is mysterious, intriguing and causes surprises. So many fascinating ways to surprise that do not have to follow what's expected.

Many positive deeds go unnoticed because they cause no friction, or the "wrong" person is doing them, sonoting is "of note".

Also, negativity bias does a good job at obscuring good things in life right in front of our eyes.

On top of that, taboos are often attactched to marginalized experiences, no matter how benign, neutral, or horrible they may be.

And then there is Privacy, which is vital for personal freedom. So when privacy is dark, a lack of privacy is harsh light shone all over you.

Also, there is skin color and marginalization.

For me *personally*, instead of using the descriptor "dark", naming negative things for what they are works better because I get a more precise picture of what to imagine or expect.

So my dark lords revel in doing things that are not expected from the point of view of Tolkien's texts, because their darkness obscures all that potential for actions and decisions.

Also especially Melkor is dark enough for preferring underground living situations. But so do dwarves too. Their narrative role development from Lost Tales to the Lord of the Rings is very interesting.