# Favourite characters



## Aldarion (Oct 25, 2019)

Gunna quote myself from another forum:
"Personally, I like it when characters are not completely black-and-white. Denethor is my favourite character in Lord of the Rings because of that. He is not a nice person, and goes mad towards the end, but he also never gives in to Sauron (like Saruman does) and generally tries to do the right thing for Gondor - no matter the personal cost, to him or the people around him. In reality there can be no victory without sacrifice, and oftentimes that sacrifice involves compromising one's own morals. Morally upstanding characters are all good and nice, until you realize how many people they have sacrificed to uphold their moral standards."

I also like Aragorn, Gandalf, and Theoden for his Cool Old Guy vibe.

So who are your favourite characters in LotR?


----------



## Deleted member 12094 (Oct 25, 2019)

Just a suggestion for you, Aldarion: if you like the personality of Denethor then you might enjoy this reading (if you had not already found it).


----------



## Aldarion (Oct 25, 2019)

Merroe said:


> Just a suggestion for you, Aldarion: if you like the personality of Denethor then you might enjoy this reading (if you had not already found it).



No, I have not. Thanks!


----------



## Halasían (Nov 3, 2019)

Aldarion said:


> So who are your favourite characters in LotR?



From my first reading of the book, I liked *Halbarad*, *Galadriel*, *Éowyn*, and *Faramir*. Subsequent readings had me liking *Strider/Aragorn*, and pinpointing the change at the time he wrestled with Sauron through the Palantir. *Saruman* was another I come to like as one of the 'fallen good' characters. I thiught I'd like the hobbits more as I loved *Bilbo* in my one and only reading of The Hobbit, but Frodo seemed sort of 'meh'. Of all of them, I liked *Samwise Gamgee* the best of all of them. Also, I came to like *Eomer* as well in further readings.


----------



## Inziladun (Nov 5, 2019)

I like Sam, he has all the qualities of a true best friend.


----------



## 1stvermont (Nov 6, 2019)

Treebeard.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 6, 2019)

Faramir, no doubts about it. In the book he was a Saint!


CL


----------



## 1stvermont (Nov 7, 2019)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> Faramir, no doubts about it. In the book he was a Saint!
> 
> 
> CL




If i remember correct he was Tolkien's as well. Sam Gamgeee the hero.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 7, 2019)

1stvermont said:


> If i remember correct he was Tolkien's as well. Sam Gamgeee the hero.


Yes, I believe so!




CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 14, 2019)

Faramir is one of my favorite characters also. The struggles he went through often go unrecognized (as, indeed is the case with Aragorn). That was clearly true for Peter Jackson, who said his character had to be changed because he was too "one-dimensional".

But of course, he's important to the structure of the story: as one of Shippey's "contrasted parallels", to Eomer in particular, and also to Aragorn to a degree. Most importantly, he appears as the other pole on the axis of moral wisdom from Boromir. Milton provides a literary parallel here, and if I may cite Northrop Frye once more:



> As a Christian, Milton has to reconsider the epic theme of heroic action, to decide what in Christian terms a hero is and what an act is. Heroism consists in obedience, fidelity and perseverance through ridicule or persecution, and is exemplified by Abdiel, the faithful angel. Action for him means positive or creative act, exemplified by Christ in the creation of the world and the recreation of man. Satan thus takes over the traditional qualities of martial heroism: he is the wrathful Achilles, the cunning Ulysses, the knight-errant who achieves the perilous quest of chaos; but he is from God's point of view a mock-hero, what man in his fallen state turns to with admiration as the idolatrous form of the power, the kingdom, and the glory.



A couple of things can be said about this. First, Milton was explicitly writing a theodicy (as, it could be argued, was Tolkien, though I won't take that up here); but as that same moral polarity can be found in the literature of many cultures, the _structural _principle is what is important.

Second, Boromir falls _before _he becomes a "Satan" -- or to use another likely result, a Macbeth; a "fortunate fall" indeed, and justifying Aragorn's words: "No! You have conquered. Few have gained such a victory". Perhaps we could say that there was a basic inner nobility of character which caused his attempt on the Ring to bring the _lex talionis _down upon his head immediately, rather than after the foul deeds that would surely have followed, had he been successful. His equally immediate repentance, once the Ring was removed, could be attributed to this same quality.

I'd note that the "perilous quest" for Boromir was the journey to the half-fabled Imladris, the difficulty of which Tolkien admitted went nearly unremarked in the story, and so little recognized. But he had to leave things out.

Which brings me back to Faramir and structure: though the complexities of his character often go unrecognized, they are there; further, he was clearly a_ necessary _character for the structure of the story, as he was totally unplanned and unexpected by the author: "I didn't want him, though I like him; but here he came, walking out of the woods of Ithilien". This is as clear an example of the way in which Story shapes itself, rather than being manipulated by the storyteller, as any I can think of.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 14, 2019)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Faramir is one of my favorite characters also. The struggles he went through often go unrecognized (as, indeed is the case with Aragorn). That was clearly true for Peter Jackson, who said his character had to be changed because he was too "one-dimensional".
> 
> But of course, he's important to the structure of the story: as one of Shippey's "contrasted parallels", to Eomer in particular, and also to Aragorn to a degree. Most importantly, he appears as the other pole on the axis of moral wisdom from Boromir. Milton provides a literary parallel here, and if I may cite Northrop Frye once more:
> 
> ...


**applause*


CL*


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 14, 2019)

_**blush**_

I wonder why the site has seemingly started underlining random words?


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Nov 14, 2019)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I wonder why the site has seemingly started underlining random words?


Maybe to do with the Wiki part of the site?



CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 16, 2019)

Hmm. A possibility.


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 16, 2019)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Faramir is one of my favorite characters also. The struggles he went through often go unrecognized (as, indeed is the case with Aragorn). That was clearly true for Peter Jackson, who said his character had to be changed because he was too "one-dimensional".


The only thing that here was "one-dimensional" was PJ's brain, and that of his co-scriptwriters Fran Walsh, his wife (?) and Philippa Boyens. It will remain for me the most pathetic failure of imagination until … no, it will remain, I don't watch worse film garbage anymore, as I haven't for decades for good reasons.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 16, 2019)

As I've mentioned before, I assume what's meant is _two- _dimensional, i.e. lacking depth, as "one-dimensional" would mean invisible.

Which, considering what was done to him, might have been a better solution.


----------



## Olorgando (Nov 16, 2019)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> As I've mentioned before, I assume what's meant is _two- _dimensional, i.e. lacking depth, as "one-dimensional" would mean invisible.
> 
> Which, considering what was done to him, might have been a better solution.


I'm going out on thin ice for me here, as my last organized math teaching is over 40 years ago. One-dimensional is a (hypothetical) point with no dimensions at all. Two points define the ends of a line, three points the angles of a (minimal definable surface) triangle. The fourth point breaking away from the surface to define volume (the minimal geometric version of this being a tetrahedron).
PJ apparently didn't learn much geometry - or did he? His Faramir didn't even have *one* point ...


----------



## Aldarion (Nov 17, 2019)

Olorgando said:


> I'm going out on thin ice for me here, as my last organized math teaching is over 40 years ago. One-dimensional is a (hypothetical) point with no dimensions at all. Two points define the ends of a line, three points the angles of a (minimal definable surface) triangle. The fourth point breaking away from the surface to define volume (the minimal geometric version of this being a tetrahedron).
> PJ apparently didn't learn much geometry - or did he? His Faramir didn't even have *one* point ...



Actually, from my math lessons, point would be zero-dimensional as it cannot be measured at all, it is just a point. One-dimensional is line, as it has a measurable length (x), two-dimensional is square or rectangle (length and width / length and height / x, y) and three-dimensonal is a cube or cuboid (length, width, depth / x, y, z).

Basically, you get first dimension by pulling along a point, second dimension by pulling a line, and third dimension by pulling a rectangle to form a cuboid.

Peter Jackson was apparently so horrified of possibility of spraining something he refused to pull anything at all...


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Nov 17, 2019)

Well, he pulled one on us!  

On second thought, maybe that should be


----------



## Alcuin (Nov 18, 2019)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Faramir is one of my favorite characters also. ... [H]e’s important to the structure of the story: as one of Shippey’s "contrasted parallels", to Eomer in particular, and also to Aragorn to a degree. Most importantly, he appears as the other pole on the axis of moral wisdom from Boromir. ...
> 
> ...Boromir falls before he becomes ... a Macbeth; a "fortunate fall" indeed, and justifying Aragorn’s words: "No! You have conquered. Few have gained such a victory". Perhaps we could say that there was a basic inner nobility of character which caused his attempt on the Ring to bring the _lex talionis_ down upon his head... His equally immediate repentance, once the Ring was removed, could be attributed to this same quality.
> 
> ...


From _Letter_ 328,
A few years ago I was visited in Oxford by a man whose name I have forgotten… He had been much struck by the curious way in which many old pictures seemed to him to have been designed to illustrate _The Lord of the Rings_ long before its time. … I think he wanted at first simply to discover whether my imagination had fed on pictures, as it clearly had been by certain kinds of literature and languages. When it became obvious that, unless I was a liar, I had never seen the pictures before and was not well acquainted with pictorial Art, he fell silent. I became aware that he was looking fixedly at me. Suddenly he said: “Of course you don’t suppose, do you, that you wrote all that book yourself?”

Pure Gandalf! I was too well acquainted with G[andalf] to expose myself rashly, or to ask what he meant. I think I said: “No, I don’t suppose so any longer.” I have never since been able to suppose so.​Faramir seems to me altogether similar to Aragorn: like Aragorn, he is tempted to take the Ring by force, frightens Frodo and Sam with that possibility, then humbles himself in a manner nearly identical to Aragorn’s: the parallels are striking! He is the cure for the Black Shadow that has overtaken Éowyn, who wanted Aragorn. His father Denethor “was as like to [Aragorn] as to one of nearest kin,” (Appendix A) and so also seemed to Pippin: “by some chance the blood of Westernesse runs nearly true in him,” said Gandalf of Denethor and Faramir. One thing missing (among a myriad of others!) from Tolkien’s depiction of Aragorn in Peter Jackson’s films is that Aragorn was “old and lordly and grim.” (_Treason of Isengard_, “King of the Golden Hall”) “[Aragorn] was _old,_ and that is not only a physical quality: when not accompanied by any physical decay age can be alarming or awe-inspiring.” (_Letter_ 244) Faramir is not: much like Aragorn, but less lofty and more approachable. Faramir is my personal favorite; Éowyn, who becomes his wife – they deserve one another! – is a close second.


----------



## Shieldmaiden of Rohan (Jan 1, 2020)

I, too, love it when a character is not completely black or white. Tolkien is always blamed if creating an universe that has only black and white but it is not true. Obviously they never heard of Gollum or of Saruman the White both of whom where not completely bad but rather corrupted by the ring.

My favourite characters however where Merry and Pippin. I am re-reading and wonder if it is still like this when I read it now that I am much older.
Why are they my favorite characters? Well, because I am a bit with Tolkien here. I am an hobbit in all but size. I like gardens and tres and farmland. I do not smoke a pipe, but used to some cigarettes from a very young age on ( obviously that is not a smart or healthy thing to do so I stopped when I was pregnant with my first son). I am very fond of mushrooms and like to dress in bright colours. I like to laugh and spend time with friends. I like how they always keep their cheer.
Both of them where the characters I could most easily identify with. Frodo, I felt, was much to serious for a hobbit.
I also liked Eowyn. “What do you fear, lady“ [Aragon] asked “A cage“ [Eowyn] said “To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of found great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire“. As a teen I identified with this a lot... but most unfortunately I did not have the chance of deeds even remotely brave in the years to come. It’s bit difficult to show your courage if you are a stay at home mum and do not have the witch king of Angmar living next to you.

For me who I liked most was always the ones who I identified to most. Was it the same for you?


----------



## Olorgando (Jan 1, 2020)

Shieldmaiden of Rohan said:


> ...
> For me who I liked most was always the ones who I identified to most. Was it the same for you?


That identification is a tricky business. I can only say what my feelings are now, not how they may have changed (except that there have not been any reversals) over the decades.

Any Elves, because of the immense gulf of age and skills separating us from them, seem too remote. As I mentioned elsewhere, Arwen Evenstar was 2690 years old when her future husband Aragorn Telcontar was born ...
My sympathy for Sam has certainly grown over the years, especially his remaining grounded and not getting a swelled head - his antithesis would be Lotho 'Pimple' Sackville-Baggins. Frodo had become a bit too 'Elvish' at the end - not a criticism, just an observation.
Among the humans, while we're dealing almost exclusively with aristocracy, I would say Faramir (in the book!!!) is the one I find most appealing. Wiser than his older brother Boromir, in some ways even than his Father Denethor; but not so remote - again, here, a bit of 'Elvishness' enters the picture - as Aragorn. As I am not an equestrian, I lack the experiences that might make other people sympathize with the Rohirrim. Here I would says that my greatest sympathies are for Éowyn, caring for an uncle seemingly withering with care, the unrequited love for Aragorn ...
At the end, it kind of comes down to my avatar. And this definitely has to do, partially, with the passage of time. Gandalf always was one of my favorite characters, and Ian McKellen definitely put a face on him. While of course Gandalf's true identity as a highly disguised Maia makes him even more remote than the Elves, the disguise is so thorough that it never really is lifted, except in vague glimpses, during the story. And then I'm catching up to Ian McKellen's age when the films premiered. I'll soon have caught up to him even for RoTK ...


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jan 1, 2020)

Shieldmaiden of Rohan said:


> Tolkien is always blamed if creating an universe that has only black and white but it is not true.


He noted this criticism in a letter, citing Boromir as a "mixed" character who had gone unrecognized as such by early critics.

Tolkien had set himself a difficult task: redeeming the romance, a form much older than the novel, and regarded, by the early 20th century at the latest (earlier in France) as a juvenile precursor to the later, more "developed" form. He felt it still had things to say to us, and spent his career fighting against that attitude, not only in his fiction, but in his academic work, as his lecture on Beowulf demonstrates; where the critical concensus in his day lamented the intrusions of monsters and dragons into the poem as peripheral distractions, he showed that they were in fact central to the poet's message. "On Fairy Stories" is another well-known example.

Traditionally, characters in the romance _are_ black or white, all good or all evil, something hard to accept in a modern world of dingy antiheroes, so Tolkien did in LOTR what he did in The Hobbit: make the story's protagonist a character like us, a "regular guy" -- that is, a character of the Low Mimetic fictional mode familiar to 20th century readers, through whose eyes we are (re)introduced to the worlds of fairy tale and romance. The task was easier in The Hobbit, as a children's story; more difficult in a work aimed at adults.

The result is a mixing and intertwining of modes. To use Frye's classification of modes, we see Ironic-mode characters -- Gollum, most notably; Low Mimetic characters like the hobbits; the High Mimetic Boromir; and characters who approach, and in some cases fulfill, "pure" Romance-mode characteristics.

Of the last, two are Aragorn and Faramir. Alcuin noted parallels between them above; it's interesting that they are each introduced as fairly stern, mysterious, and somewhat cold figures, and only gradually do the hobbits see them for what they really are: "pure" Romance heroes. I use the quotation marks deliberately, to indicate the double meaning: they are "pure" examples of the Romance mode, and they are also what we think of as "pure": morally pure.

Given that, I'd say their characters are not so much "developed", as gradually _revealed. _Tolkien stated in a letter that he "had no more idea than Frodo" who Strider was, and I suppose he would have said he was "discovering" the truth about him. But whatever he thought he was doing, what he was actually doing was introducing, to the hobbits and the reader, a romance hero. This may explain Frodo's rather odd remark about a "disguise" I brought up on another thread: the author was _disguising, _initially, Aragorn's true nature from the reader. This is the case with Faramir too, though the process is shorter, presumably because any reader who had gotten that far in the narrative would by that point have come to accept romance figures as a matter of course, rather than being shocked by the introduction of such a "pure" character.

At this point, I have to part ways with Alcuin; because of their roles as full romance characters, I do not believe, nor do I see any evidence, that either was "tempted" by the Ring. Certainly both frightened the hobbits, and in similar circumstances, but I think these can be explained.

Aragorn can be dealt with fairly easily: he was alarmed by the fatuous behavior of the hobbits, something even Butterbur noted: "Your party might be on a holiday!". "Strider" clearly felt they needed shaking up, and awakened to the dangers they faced. And he did so, in the most direct, and it must be admitted, threatening manner:

_'If I had killed the real Strider, I could kill you. And I should have killed you already without so much talk. If I was after the Ring, I could have it --- NOW!'_

Note the conditional: "_If" _ he was "after" the Ring. But he is not:

_'But I _am _the real Strider, fortunately,' he said, looking down at them with his face softened by a sudden smile. 'I am Aragorn son of Arathorn; and if by life or death I can save you, I will.'_

I'd suggest this declaration of name and lineage is no mere flourish; Aragorn is well aware of his line's disastrous history with the Ring, and sees it as his duty, as part of his quest, to repair "Isildur's fault". The Ring would have no pull on him.

The case of Faramir is a little more complex, but as I've gone on too long already, and have addressed it elsewhere, I'll treat it briefly. He, unlike Aragorn, is in a dilemma: on the one hand, he is ordered by Denethor to kill all he finds in Ithilien without leave, and he is in no doubt about what his father would desire, should such a powerful artifact as the Ring fall into his hands.

On the other hand, as a romance hero, he is aligned with the "good" side; not merely the good of Gondor, but Good, as a romance ideal. To revert to Frye's terms, he is forced to choose between two courses of action, both dangerous, either of which could be called "natural" -- but one is the "nature" of a fallen world, the other is Nature as an order.

The frightening of the hobbits by the Men is described in almost the same words:

Aragorn: _He stood up, and seemed suddenly to grow taller. In his eyes gleamed a light, keen and commanding._

Faramir: _He stood up, very tall and stern, his grey eyes glinting._

And Faramir's words and actions nearly mirror Aragorn's in the same situation:

The "threat": _'And here in the wild I have you: two halflings, and a host of men at my call, and the Ring of Rings. A pretty stroke of fortune! A chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality! Ha!'_

And the "reveal": _ 'But I am not such a man. . .it was safe to declare this to me.'_

The difference lies in the fact that Aragorn has no choice to make; he had long determined what course to take. Faramir does, and I see his reaction in "standing up" and his words, as showing he has realized the import of the moment; his naming of himself as "Faramir, Captain of Gondor" in fact echos Aragorn's declaration -- in this case, his obligation to his city. He clearly sees the bitter irony of his situation, as indicated by the "Ha!" and his quiet laughter, before becoming "grave again".

Nevertheless, he makes the choice of Order, that is, the order that is the framework of romance.


----------



## Phuc Do (Feb 18, 2020)

Glorfindel and Eomer.


----------



## Aramarien (Feb 28, 2020)

As Shieldmaiden of Gondor mentioned, that reading LOTR when you are older, your perspective may change.
A favorite character may be one that you identify with, understand, admire, or want to be like.
I started reading LOTR when I was 13. At the time I had a "crush" on Faramir and Aragorn and loved Eowyn. Faramir and Aragorn were ideals. They were strong, highly moral and good men. Aragorn appeared to be the ideal and unattainable, but Faramir was attainable.
Eowyn was strong and defeated the Witch King of Angmar with the help of Merry. To my teenage self, Eowen was a role model and here was finally a strong relatable female in the all male cast!!

As I got older, I appreciated Gandalf more and more. Here is a Maiaa with all this wisdom and latent power, but has to hold back and lead, not force. He had to have patience with the young and inexperienced: Fool of a Took!!! But he loved the Hobbits all the same. He was wise enough to know he could always still learn.

From the very beginning I have loved Sam and Frodo. Sam was loyal, devoted, faithful, and the most true hearted of friends. I loved his sense of humor and humbleness.

But, even after all these years, my favorite character is Frodo. Perhaps it is what I said above about a favorite character: identifying with, understand, and admire. In the beginning, he was quiet, but admired hobbit in the Shire. He was educated by Bilbo, and indeed, more educated than Bilbo was when Bilbo first went on his adventure. He enjoyed his friends and his simple life, but was always drawn to exploring. Frodo often said he was afraid, more because he more fully understood what he was getting into than the other hobbits. Despite this, he volunteers to destroy the Ring for others' sake, to save the Shire. He goes into the quest with the feeling that he most likely will not survive, but still goes. This is true bravery and courage. He really underestimates himself. He doesn't realize how much inherent wisdom and insight that he possesses. Frodo keeps going and going even when there is no hope left. He keeps going when he has been wounded, tortured physically, mentally, and spiritually.

Although initially Frodo is happy that the quest is complete, in the end he suffers a kind of PTSD and addiction withdrawal from the Ring. But there is hope that he will be healed.

We have a hero that does not have the "standard" hero traits of bravery and courage of arms in battle, but had a huge interior battle with the lure of the Ring. A hero with high moral standing, empathy for others (especially with Gollum), caring and not wanting to endanger others (choice to go to Mordor alone at the Falls of Rauros). 
I love Frodo.


----------



## Sir Gawain d'Orchany (Mar 15, 2020)

Gondor Faramir
Rohan Erkenbrand
Imladris Elrond
Lorien Baldur
Hobbit Merry


----------



## TrackerOrc (Apr 10, 2020)

Gollum.
Maybe not eveyone's cup of tea, but a fascinating character nonetheless.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 10, 2020)

Yes, one of the tragic characters in LoTR that so many obtuse critics starting in the 1950s just failed to notice.
His near-repentance on the way up to Cirith Ungol when finding Sam and Frodo sleeping, wrecked by Sam's incomprehending rudeness when Sam woke up ...
And something of a warning, if not easy to see, to all of us. I mean, much as been written about how Saruman seems to have had many successors or at least emulators in the hypothetical times from the Fourth Age onwards into our own "real" present, how Orcs, no less that Elves and Dwarves, represent one aspect of Human behavior writ large or even exaggerated, but still recognizable. Maybe we don't "realize" it due to their being described as so small, but Hobbits are much closer to us than Elves, Dwarves or Orcs. I believe I recall JRRT once more or less stating (perhaps in a letter) that their small size was kind of a visible manifestation of their small imaginations and parochial mind-set - their extreme aversion to adventures and disbelief of anything they had not seen in the Shire, etc. So besides Sarumans and Orcs, how many Gollums are there among us?


----------



## TrackerOrc (Apr 11, 2020)

Yes, I've never been much of a fan of Master Samwise. He obviously played a crucial part in the tale, but the master-servant relationship with Frodo is a little cringeworthy at times, and he behaves quite badly to poor old Gollum. Although I do have to own up to a generalised anti-Hobbit bias at times...little bit twee for my taste at the start of the story and I never really take to them after that. Definitely a personal view here, probably inasmuch as I've always liked the anti-hero and the flawed characters in any stories.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 12, 2020)

TrackerOrc said:


> ... Although I do have to own up to a generalised anti-Hobbit bias at times...little bit twee for my taste at the start of the story and I never really take to them after that. ...


Ever thought of the following: they're *us*, transplanted into a fantasy ("Romance") world where they (as we) can not ever seem as anything but out of place … 😬


----------



## TrackerOrc (Apr 12, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> Ever thought of the following: they're *us*, transplanted into a fantasy ("Romance") world where they (as we) can not ever seem as anything but out of place … 😬


Interesting take, Olorgando. If they are supposed to be _us_, then I definitely think Tolkien has sanitised us too much; I don't think it's so much being out of place as being much too good for our own good!


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 13, 2020)

Certainly in the Hobbits being totally *un*-warlike and very *un*-adventurous does not fit our own species' behavior - at least that of a minority. But for example the US with its (reputed!) high mobility is rather an exception. Far more people "stayed at home" in the countries from which the majority of emigrants entering the US came from than actually emigrated. So the US got a rather unrepresentative sample of the populations from which immigrants came from. In Germany, there has been something of an "intranational" migration, traditionally from marginal areas, almost always middle-mountain (forested) areas that there are quite a few of in Germany. But the populations there were in absolute terms quite small, and far more often, especially in rural areas, people can be proud of having been settled there for generations. But JRRT did model his Hobbits on a distinctly unmechanized rural countryside, something that had already become somewhat rare in England even before his birth, as he often lamented. So the Hobbits are again not necessarily a "representative" sample of "us", but they are a sample.


----------



## TrackerOrc (Apr 13, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> Certainly in the Hobbits being totally *un*-warlike and very *un*-adventurous does not fit our own species' behavior - at least that of a minority. But for example the US with its (reputed!) high mobility is rather an exception. Far more people "stayed at home" in the countries from which the majority of emigrants entering the US came from than actually emigrated. So the US got a rather unrepresentative sample of the populations from which immigrants came from. In Germany, there has been something of an "intranational" migration, traditionally from marginal areas, almost always middle-mountain (forested) areas that there are quite a few of in Germany. But the populations there were in absolute terms quite small, and far more often, especially in rural areas, people can be proud of having been settled there for generations. But JRRT did model his Hobbits on a distinctly unmechanized rural countryside, something that had already become somewhat rare in England even before his birth, as he often lamented. So the Hobbits are again not necessarily a "representative" sample of "us", but they are a sample.


I've always thought of the Shire as representing an idealized version of the countryside Tolkien grew up in, but which, as you say Olorgando, he knew hadn't actually existed for quite some time. The rise of cities (especially the creep of suburbs into what had once been rural areas), increased mechanisation etc all earned his ire, and I think it safe to say that his depiction of the Shire was a lament for a lost time and place; I think what makes LoTR stand out above, say, The Wind in the Willows, (although I love that book as well), is that he actually has the Shire being changed/attacked by the horribly modern forces of Saruman - he doesn't just present the Shire in a vacuum, he shows us how fragile these things are, even if they are actually fictional.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 14, 2020)

TrackerOrc said:


> … I think what makes LoTR stand out above, say, The Wind in the Willows, (although I love that book as well), is that he actually has the Shire being changed/attacked by the horribly modern forces of Saruman - he doesn't just present the Shire in a vacuum, he shows us how fragile these things are, even if they are actually fictional.


Another thing that makes the film a far lesser work than the book. But I suppose there was just no chance to include the Scouring of The Shire in the film. I believe it was in the RoTK EE that one of the actors commented that at one (premiere?) screening, he ran across Jack Nicholson in the parking lot, running his car's engine to warm the car up in preparation of his family, who were still in the theater watching the film to its end, leaving the theater. Nicholson's comment even for the cinematic version was "too many endings!" Which is why a TV miniseries might have done LoTR more justice, given the right producers and director(s) - and scriptwriters!
And just from a "battle bombast" perspective, after the Pelennor Fields, 200 Hobbits vs. 100 ruffians is hardly more than a barroom brawl ...


----------



## TrackerOrc (Apr 14, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> Another thing that makes the film a far lesser work than the book. But I suppose there was just no chance to include the Scouring of The Shire in the film. I believe it was in the RoTK EE that one of the actors commented that at one (premiere?) screening, he ran across Jack Nicholson in the parking lot, running his car's engine to warm the car up in preparation of his family, who were still in the theater watching the film to its end, leaving the theater. Nicholson's comment even for the cinematic version was "too many endings!" Which is why a TV miniseries might have done LoTR more justice, given the right producers and director(s) - and scriptwriters!
> And just from a "battle bombast" perspective, after the Pelennor Fields, 200 Hobbits vs. 100 ruffians is hardly more than a barroom brawl ...


I enjoyed most of what the movies had to offer, but I think that's because I went in with the idea that this was always going to be Peter Jackson's take on things. It's a massive piece of fan fiction if you like. I never expected it to be true to the books in every way (could there even be something like that?) so all the little surprises didn't bother me. and, to be honest, some of them worked really well, in the context of the films, which is the only way we can actually judge things.


----------



## Sir Eowyn (Apr 15, 2020)

Well, obviously Eowyn, for one. She feels the most just like a character out of Scandinavian legend, like the ones that Tolkien loved.

As well Tom Bombadil and Goldberry... you actually feel there's something erotic between them, which is the only time in the trilogy that's the case. It's funny, but whenever I picture Tom Bombadil, he always looks exactly like the late D, H. Lawrence. Bearded.

As much as I love the first movie in particular and have heatedly defended it, I'm not going to defend at all their covering of Faramir later. Wasn't just the script; just not a very good actor. He is, however, for me a very strange figure in the book... I never know quite how I feel about him. Indeed the most saintly character, and a blatant self-portrait. 

And adore Galadriel... she even troubled Tolkien morally, feeling at the very end that he had to revise her, not a Noldor rebel but an innocent bystander. We all know which is more truthful, imaginatively.

I always hear it said that the figures out of old myths were either good or evil, but I don't think that's so. Look at old Celtic fairy tales, the faerie folk are ambiguous, dangerous. Figures like Achilles, Lancelot, similar. Tolkien's breed of moralism feels unique to the twentieth century.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 15, 2020)

TrackerOrc said:


> ... Peter Jackson's take on things. It's a massive piece of fan fiction if you like. ...


And never mind the TH films ...
Films, like all visual arts, do have that "a picture is worth a thousand words" advantage over the written word. On the other hand, some things are difficult to put into films (the long Council of Elrond chapter, almost totally dialogue probably being the most obvious example). What irks me is what appears to be the irrepressible urge, by at least that part of the film industry taking its cues from Hollywood, to squash everything into one or a few cookie-cutters, an urge bordering on the autistic.
But where I definitely draw the line is where central tenets of a book are stood on their head. If PJ & PB & FW (or any other scriptwriters) think they can improve on this aspect of the books, they all need their heads examined. Every one of these changes was unadulterated garbage. The best one can assume for these unwarranted changes, including at least to some aspects of characters, are that they as scriptwriters were as obtuse and incomprehending as many of JRRT's negative critics (despite claiming to have read LoTR several times, PJ at least).


----------



## Sir Eowyn (Apr 15, 2020)

Olorgando said:


> And never mind the TH films ...
> Films, like all visual arts, do have that "a picture is worth a thousand words" advantage over the written word. On the other hand, some things are difficult to put into films (the long Council of Elrond chapter, almost totally dialogue probably being the most obvious example). What irks me is what appears to be the irrepressible urge, by at least that part of the film industry taking its cues from Hollywood, to squash everything into one or a few cookie-cutters, an urge bordering on the autistic.
> But where I definitely draw the line is where central tenets of a book are stood on their head. If PJ & PB & FW (or any other scriptwriters) think they can improve on this aspect of the books, they all need their heads examined. Every one of these changes was unadulterated garbage. The best one can assume for these unwarranted changes, including at least to some aspects of characters, are that they as scriptwriters were as obtuse and incomprehending as many of JRRT's negative critics (despite claiming to have read LoTR several times, PJ at least).



Okay, I have to throw this in there... thousand percent agreed about Faramir, etc. but Boromir and Saruman? In the book they're not as interesting, in my view. Making Saruman magnificent instead of just an old petty liar does dispense with Tolkien's moral point, but in this case... good. Moralizing may concern the purists, but for storytelling it gets in the way, from time to time.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 15, 2020)

Boromir and Saruman weren't stood on their head, not nearly. But they are both peripheral characters (in the book). You mentioned Faramir etc. Yes, there are too many etc. That brain-damaged "go home, Sam" by Frodo on the Stairs of Cirith Ungol. Aragorn having renounced his kingship (if I recall this correctly) and being "in exile". The Elves leaving Rivendell. The Ents deciding *against* action at the Ent-moot and being suddenly (Ents? *suddenly?!?!?*) convinced otherwise by a cheap little trick by Merry and Pippin - and the Ents (OK, they are *very* old, but …) looking as if they have advanced dementia (I almost expected one to have dribble coming from the corner of his mouth). Pure, unadulterated garbage.


----------



## Sir Eowyn (Apr 15, 2020)

Well, it does say Aragorn has chosen "exile" in the movie, but in context it seems that's a failure to act, much more than actively renouncing the kingship. I agree they go beyond this, but if you look at the book, well, Aragorn is indeed around for a very long time without marching into Minas Tirith and claiming the kingship. In fact, he was already IN Minas Tirith, serving the Steward Ecthelion for years, in hiding. This can all, yes, be explained away as Aragorn has perfect foresight (or, more probably, Elrond does) and knows he cannot strike until the time is absolutely right. But it's a little bit ambiguous, why he did remain a Ranger for so long. Not trying to claim they were accurate here, but that it's a LITTLE more ambiguous than what everyone says, that he was absolutely, superbly all-out confident from the very beginning, that he'd again be King of Gondor and Arnor (the latter no longer exists at that time, the War of the Ring).

I like the Ents, but yes, their voting against any action was off the mark. I noticed in your list of things they got badly wrong, almost none of them were in Fellowship.


----------



## Aldarion (Apr 16, 2020)

Sir Eowyn said:


> Well, it does say Aragorn has chosen "exile" in the movie, but in context it seems that's a failure to act, much more than actively renouncing the kingship. I agree they go beyond this, but if you look at the book, well, Aragorn is indeed around for a very long time without marching into Minas Tirith and claiming the kingship. In fact, he was already IN Minas Tirith, serving the Steward Ecthelion for years, in hiding. This can all, yes, be explained away as Aragorn has perfect foresight (or, more probably, Elrond does) and knows he cannot strike until the time is absolutely right. But it's a little bit ambiguous, why he did remain a Ranger for so long. Not trying to claim they were accurate here, but that it's a LITTLE more ambiguous than what everyone says, that he was absolutely, superbly all-out confident from the very beginning, that he'd again be King of Gondor and Arnor (the latter no longer exists at that time, the War of the Ring).
> 
> I like the Ents, but yes, their voting against any action was off the mark. I noticed in your list of things they got badly wrong, almost none of them were in Fellowship.



It is actually explained... last time somebody claimed a throne of Gondor without direct descent line led to the Kingslaying (now _that _is what I would like to see a series about, even if it turns out another fanfic). Aragorn did not want to risk a repeat of that, as it would lead to destruction of Gondor if it happened again.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 16, 2020)

Neither perfect foresight on anyone's part, nor absolute confidence on Aragorn's part, certainly. No one had perfect foresight, neither Aragorn, nor Elrond, not even Gandalf, or for that matter the entire White Council combined. But there had been portents. There is the matter of almost unseemly haste in the marriage of Aragorn's (II) parents, Arathorn (II) and Gilraen. as the latter was younger than was customary among Dúnedain women to get married. Arathorn was then killed only two years after Aragorn's birth. Gilraen gave Aragorn the name 'Estel' hope. The most portentous event, though practically unnoticed for a long time, was Bilbo's finding the One Ring in 2941 TA, when Aragorn was 10. Sauron abandoned Dol Guldur the same year, a well-planned retreat rather than being forced out by the White Council (as it was at first thought to be). In 2951 Sauron declared himself openly, began rebuilding Barad-dûr and gathering force in Mordor - and Aragorn and Arwen met in the woods of Imladris. Aragorn had just had his true name and ancestry revealed to him by Elrond. Mount Doom bursts into flame again in 2954, and Aragorn meets and befriends Gandalf in 2956.

So by the time Aragorn is 25, he knows that he is the heir of Isildur, and of Elendil, for that matter. Sauron is back openly in Mordor after an absence of over 2950 years - very bad news, as no force could conceivably attack Mordor to intervene. Aragorn then undertakes his great journeys and errantries up to 2980, perhaps some way into enemy territory, and serves both Thengel of Rohan, Théoden's father, as well as Ecthelion II of Gondor, Denethor's father. In 2980 he meets Arwen again, in Lórien, and they plight their troth, Aragorn giving Arwen the (immensely ancient) Ring of Barahir. Elrond then told Aragorn that Arwen should wed no lesser man than the King of the reunited Kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor (the latter would have to be reestablished). One thing about Aragorn, with Elrond, Gandalf, almost certainly Galadriel, and very probably Celeborn, he had an entirely peerless group of "consultants". There would be no rash moves of any kind (Treebeard would have very much approved of this cautious approach). And as Arwen echoes Lúthien, in looks and many other ways, so does Aragorn Beren. Even the condition laid on Aragorn by Elrond is an echo of the quest for the Silmaril. Though not nearly with the kind of murderous intent as that of Thingol, the likelihood of Aragorn becoming King of the Reunited Dúnedain Kingdoms must have looked pretty much as hopeless. And there was this recalcitrant Steward in Gondor ...

So Aragorn had powerful motives, for himself personally and for Middle-earth, to do what he was doing. None of this "angst-ridden" baloney that PJ has Viggo Mortensen display. Aragorn had no certainty, almost no hope to achieve his aims. But that did not sway him a micron from his path. Very much that "theory of (hopeless) northern courage" that JRRT saw as the supreme contribution of northern Europe. Perhaps something PJ thought unpalatable to us wimpy Seventh-Agers, perhaps something he simply did not understand.

A PS: The Army of The Dead deciding the Battle of the Pelennor Fields, even bringing down Mumakil?!? 🤮
PPS: also not in the film "Fellowship".


----------



## Sir Eowyn (Apr 17, 2020)

For the PS first, yes, those few minutes between the time the corsair ships show up and the time they take down the Mumak is the nadir of Tolkien on film, as far as I'm concerned. Since the peak, on the other hand, is everything from Moria to Amon Hen, the contrast astounds me.

Alright, yes, there were portents, signs. I buy why he bided his time. I just think in the first film (theatrical version) it's not mentioned except for one line about "exile" (in context, ambiguous), and other than that they don't really get into it, not until the later films, which I won't answer for. I think it doesn't bother me that much, chiefly, because Viggo's such a good actor he sells whatever he's doing. Faramir, for example, is in lesser hands, so the problems with the script are made worse. For me it's just that Aragorn here is depicted as having some angst, as most beings would if faced with becoming King out of wilderness. Perhaps it was indeed a failure to understand that mad Northern courage Tolkien grasped so well. In fact, his book succeeded against all odds, in a 1950s with no real respectable market for it, against all fashion, as out-there stylistically as it gets... and he won. In a way, then, Aragorn's triumph parallels Tolkien's.

There's more true courage in being afraid and in doing it nonetheless than in total fearlessness. Unless Aragorn somehow kept his nerve every hour of every one of the days for sixty years and more, I'm sure he had his private doubts. By the time of the War, though, he'd mastered them. Just a shift, then, in timeline, looked at that way. Yes, I'm well aware there's no evidence for that at all; it's just conjecture. No denying they took some liberties there, and if not all fans accept them, well, that's more than understandable.

To add a favourite character: Shelob. One of the great horrific beings ever written by anybody. Terrifying mixture of beast and ancient sorceress.


----------



## Olorgando (Apr 17, 2020)

Sir Eowyn said:


> … There's more true courage in being afraid and in doing it nonetheless than in total fearlessness. ...
> … To add a favourite character: Shelob. One of the great horrific beings ever written by anybody. Terrifying mixture of beast and ancient sorceress.


A point made forcefully by JRRT about Bilbo going down to Smaug's lair despite his fear, almost to excess, yes.

Total fearlessness certainly not. That is a concept known to both Germanic and Celtic myths and legends, the berserker (a Germanic-derived term, I believe, meaning bear-shirted - kind of something JRRT worked into Beorn in TH). No, that often implies recklessness, something Aragorn never showed. Biding his time, certainly. When he first met Gandalf in 2956, he was still a "pup" of 25. Then he would have at best been accepted as a foot soldier, perhaps cavalryman - or perhaps a scout, as there is mention that even as a (late) teen he went about with Elladan and Elrohir. and their "hobby" was Orc-hunting. And Aragorn at 25 probably knew that he had, barring an untimely death, well over a century before him, as a Dúnadan. And things simply had to come to a head, to a crisis, and he was the one on the spot at this crisis, as none of his chieftain or king ancestors were. The crisis started slowly around the year 3000 TA ("The shadow of Mordor lengthens."), then after Bilbo's farewell party in 3001 (by which time Aragorn was 70, probably looking 30), Gandalf began to suspect Bilbo's ring to be the One Ring. He asked for Aragorn's help in searching for Gollum. They renewed their hunt from 3009 onwards for eight years, during which time Gollum was captured by Sauron, to be released in 3017. That is also the year Gandalf read the scroll of Isildur in the archives of Minas Tirith. Which brings us up to 3018, when things began to get "interesting" ...

Shelob. Hmm. With you love of things Gothic horror, I would guess the following are also on a list including Shelob:
The Nazgûl and especially the Witch-king (with perhaps a nod towards Sauron in his ring-loss scene at the beginning of Fellowship), Orks and especially Uruk-hai, with perhaps Lurtz a special favorite (he *was* in "Fellowship"), Bilbo's "Orc-face" at Rivendell, the King of the Dead, the Wargs (though my feeling is these at least were done better in TH the film), the Fell Beasts ...


----------



## Sir Eowyn (Apr 17, 2020)

The Fell Beasts disappointed me (on screen), since they merely look like long-necked dragons without the awesome power of a dragon. In the book they're more like carrion birds, some awful plucked bird of prey... much better. Love the others you mentioned, at least in the earlier flick... that cheesy Witch-king you get in film three is a joke. And yes, Lurtz is about the scariest, most imposing Orc that anyone could have done. At eleven, I could barely look.


----------



## Aramarien (Apr 22, 2020)

I didn't have that much of a problem with changes in the story line, except for what Olorgando said: "That brain-damaged "go home, Sam" by Frodo on the Stairs of Cirith Ungol. " I almost walked out of the movie theatre with that scene!! This is not so much the change of storyline, but of character. Frodo would NEVER send Sam home like that!!

The major problem I have with the movies is this change in the characters, especially with Aragorn, Faramir, and most importantly Frodo. I felt there was a changeling there. The closest glimpse I saw of the real Frodo was the last leg of ROTK when Frodo and Sam were at the feet of Mt. Doom. 

Some of the actors did well with their characters. Although I have read LOTR more than 20 times, Sean Bean's portrayal of Boromir was the first time I really, really SAW the character and understood him. Tolkien did write him that way: arrogant as a captain of men would be, yet brave, courageous, and loyal (until the Ring lured him). When Pippin thought of Boromir in ROTK, he felt he always liked him.


----------



## Shadow (Feb 12, 2021)

TrackerOrc said:


> Gollum.
> Maybe not eveyone's cup of tea, but a fascinating character nonetheless.


He’s my overall favourite as well. The multiple personalities, themes of heavy addiction, self loathing and loneliness give him complex layering. I like that he’s a representation of what the ring can do to you.

From a pure heroism point of view I can’t go past Gandalf and Aragorn. Sam is my favourite Hobbit.


----------



## Olorgando (Feb 12, 2021)

Looks like you may not have settled on a favorite avatar yet, Shadow.
I get e-mail notifications about new posts in TTF while I'm logged in, and there was a change in avatars in the last two e-mails ... 

EDIT: Oops, that's in the push notifications by my browser (MS Edge), not in the e-mails ... 🥴


----------



## Shadow (Feb 12, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Looks like you may not have settled on a favorite avatar yet, Shadow.
> I get e-mail notifications about new posts in TTF while I'm logged in, and there was a change in avatars in the last two e-mails ...


I like the current one. Captures the story rather succinctly. I’ll keep it.


----------



## Erestor Arcamen (Feb 12, 2021)

I like it Shadow, I had that one as a wallpaper for my phone but can't find it in my album. Looks great as an avatar


----------



## GaladrielAdmirer (Feb 12, 2021)

Aldarion said:


> Gunna quote myself from another forum:
> "Personally, I like it when characters are not completely black-and-white. Denethor is my favourite character in Lord of the Rings because of that. He is not a nice person, and goes mad towards the end, but he also never gives in to Sauron (like Saruman does) and generally tries to do the right thing for Gondor - no matter the personal cost, to him or the people around him. In reality there can be no victory without sacrifice, and oftentimes that sacrifice involves compromising one's own morals. Morally upstanding characters are all good and nice, until you realize how many people they have sacrificed to uphold their moral standards."


I think that's really cool. Denethor is a very interesting and moving character, and I think his and Saruman's reactions to the palantíri make a very important point.

That question is so complicated for me. I think I'd most like to be Galadriel, hence the name. But I also relate to Frodo. I do also believe Sam is really the hero/main character of the books and he's wonderful. There are so many to love for so many reasons.


----------



## ale62 (Mar 11, 2021)

Hello! Gimli of course.
Btw, not sure if this is the right place for this question...but does anyone have the text of The Oath of Elendil song please?


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Mar 12, 2021)

There's a song? 🤔


----------



## Aldarion (Mar 12, 2021)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> There's a song? 🤔


----------



## Shadow (Mar 17, 2021)

Heroes: 

1. Gandalf 
2. Aragorn 
3. Sam
4. Legolas 
5. Gimli

Villains:

1. Gollum
2. Saruman
3. Sauron
4. Witch King
5. Shelob


----------



## Olorgando (Mar 17, 2021)

Shadow said:


> Villains:
> 
> 1. Gollum


Very much agree. IIRC correctly JRRT himself called Gollum the most tragic figure in LoTR, nearly repenting in that scene in chapter VIII of Book Four "The Stairs of Cirith Ungol". And also, in my mind, another point made by JRRT that these diminutive Hobbits were far, far tougher than we arrogant Big Folk. I very seriously doubt that any of the later Nazgûl managed to resist *their* secondary or whatever rings more than a fraction of the time (478 years between his murder of Déagol - a *very* bad start in ownership - and loss of the *One Ring* to Bilbo) that Gollum became horribly deformed - but *not* a wraith,


----------



## ale62 (Mar 20, 2021)

Aldarion said:


>


Thank you so much Aldarion! This song generates a state of ecstasy and tranquillity for me.
https://www.leavingcard.com/gb/viewpdf/1616259333357v7N6LYP7ch28/xrslvr1616259378721.pdf


----------



## Shadow (Mar 28, 2021)

Olorgando said:


> Very much agree. IIRC correctly JRRT himself called Gollum the most tragic figure in LoTR, nearly repenting in that scene in chapter VIII of Book Four "The Stairs of Cirith Ungol". And also, in my mind, another point made by JRRT that these diminutive Hobbits were far, far tougher than we arrogant Big Folk. I very seriously doubt that any of the later Nazgûl managed to resist *their* secondary or whatever rings more than a fraction of the time (478 years between his murder of Déagol - a *very* bad start in ownership - and loss of the *One Ring* to Bilbo) that Gollum became horribly deformed - but *not* a wraith,


As a protector of Frodo, and for his own safety, Sam was right to be suspicious of Gollum so I don’t begrudge his attitude towards him at any point of the story, even though it denied Gollum repenting. I like that Gollum is a villain who killed Deagol and plotted Frodo’s death, but also a victim who wrestled with himself. He’s not on Sauron‘s side - he’s on his own. He’s a survivor. His appearances in the books are fleeting but memorable, and his impact on the timeline is considerable.


----------



## ulfang (Mar 29, 2021)

my favourate character is galadriel just because shes orignally represented as perfect and pure but then you see her almost fall to the temptation of he ring increibly quickly before only just managing resist it despite being incredibly old wise and powerful and knowing exactly what the ring can do it show shes not just black and white or just white in her case


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (Mar 4, 2022)

Olorgando said:


> JRRT himself called Gollum the most tragic figure in LoTR ... but not a wraith.


I cannot help agreeing with that - not only because one cannot just disagree with the author of the book we're discussing 😅 - but because if there is one character, I've always found pitiful, it is Gollum. He had only two goals in mind - to survive, and to get the Ring. The latter was against his will. He hated the Ring, but he was drawn to it.
Sam only had the Ring for about half an hour in the books, but already he had such a hard time parting with it, and then kind of wanted it back. Bilbo had it for sixty years, and it took Gandalf's intimidation to make him drop it. And already, he felt thin. I think that means wraith-like. But Gollum had the Ring for so much longer! I believe it's almost _five hundred years_.
Yet he is not a wraith, as Olorgando stated about a year ago. Does not that make him the strongest creature of the Third Age that we know of? I would argue that he is.


Shadow said:


> his impact on the timeline is considerable.


I think "considerable" is a word that does not do justice to his impact on the timeline! He was the one to destroy the One Ring, after all.

_*P.S. I do not usually write answers this long, or answers in abandoned threads like this one, unless I am hit by a feeling of inspiration, or I am supposed to be doing school-work online 😂*_


----------



## Uminya (Mar 4, 2022)

After a fresh reread of LotR, I think Theoden is my favorite character. His transformation from Wormtongue-addled dotard to a dedicated, compassionate leader is incredible; he treats others with a dignity that humanizes him in a way that I had never really appreciated before. I love how he speaks and how he is moved by the words and deeds of others without losing his sense of purpose. I think that, of all the leaders depicted in Lord of the Rings, he is the most relatable and understandable.

Merry also became a character that I appreciate much more (I too would have followed Theoden). Both he and Pippin experienced a transformation of their own, growing from awkward tagalongs into hobbits with confidence and a willingness to defend the things they love and hold dear.


----------



## LadyGaladriel1980 (Mar 4, 2022)

My absolute favorite Charaktere is Galadriel, for me she is a symbol for Wisdom and peace. and i really admire her, because she was strong enough, not to take the one ring, when Frodo has offered it to her. She was a real strong personality, and it must be very hard for, that her brothers all died in fight against Morgoth or Sauron. But she never lose her believing in the Good, she stayed strong, although she had lose many of her loving relatives(also her neece Finduilas, which was killed brutalle by Orks) and she has seen her daughter Celebrian suffering after getting tortured by Orks...but Galadriel stayed always strong and never has lose her Believe in the Good. I really admire her for her strenght and wisdom.


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (Mar 4, 2022)

LadyGaladriel1980 said:


> because she was strong enough, not to take the one ring, when Frodo has offered it to her.


Quite a lot of people did that, though. Gandalf, Faramir (kind of), Frodo, etc.


----------



## LadyGaladriel1980 (Mar 4, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> Quite a lot of people did that, though. Gandalf, Faramir (kind of), Frodo, etc.


Yes, you are totally right with this, but for me Galadriel is my favorite. I was totally fascinating of her, when i first saw "The fellowship of the ring" and when i first read the book after watching the movie. I love her ethereal charisma in the movie and in the book. And i admire her also for wear this burden, i mean, her mirror is a burden, because she can see a lot of horrible things in it that could happen. She did see Kankra(i guess, in english the name of her is Shelob) in the mirror, that was the reason why she gives Frodo the light of Earendil.
It must be a very hard burden for Galadriel to have the gift to look into a lot of possible futures, and also a big burden to look into the heart of everyone.
But she is strong enough to deal with that, i really admire that strengh. Very impressive, that she can see so much possible dark futures without losing her courage and her confidence in the good.

And: Frodo was not strong enough to stand against the power of the ring, ony because Gollum try to steal the ring, when Frodo decide on Mount Doom to keep it, the ring was getting destroyed when Gollum bites Frodos Finger with the ring off and fell into the Mount doom with the ring. Frodo has stay strong for a very long while...but at the end the ring has break Frodos will.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Mar 4, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> Faramir (kind of)


I'd point out he was "kind of" only according to PJ.


----------



## Alice (Mar 4, 2022)

Witch King, of course. Who else?


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (Mar 5, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I'd point out he was "kind if" only according to PJ.


In the books, he was never "offered" the One Ring. He had an easy way of getting it, but I don't think Frodo ever wanted to give him it. Maybe I need to re-read the books again (it's been some time), but that is what I meant by 'kind of'.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Mar 5, 2022)

Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, you're correct-- Frodo certainly never tried to give the Ring to him

I discussed Frodo's three attempts to rid himself of the Ring on another thread somewhere, and his growing resolve. By the time he met Faramir, he was determined to try to carry it to Mt.Doom.


----------



## Rōmānus (Mar 21, 2022)

I like Denethor and Saruman. Denethor is like the Aragorn of the South and they are so alike as to be brothers (LotR, Appendix A: The Stewards). Although Aragorn is superior, and like true kings he actually has divine right having been crowned by Gandalf. I liked Saruman’s fall and his predicament being the mightiest being with his former crew (the Wise), but a lesser being with the new guy he does not want to be with. He even ended up making a ring that was likely the equivalent of the experiments before the Elves/Sauron made the Rings of Power (later divided into the Three, Seven, and Nine).


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Uminya said:


> After a fresh reread of LotR, I think Theoden is my favorite character. His transformation from Wormtongue-addled dotard to a dedicated, compassionate leader is incredible; he treats others with a dignity that humanizes him in a way that I had never really appreciated before. I love how he speaks and how he is moved by the words and deeds of others without losing his sense of purpose. I think that, of all the leaders depicted in Lord of the Rings, he is the most relatable and understandable.
> 
> Merry also became a character that I appreciate much more (I too would have followed Theoden). Both he and Pippin experienced a transformation of their own, growing from awkward tagalongs into hobbits with confidence and a willingness to defend the things they love and hold dear.


As a father he was to me...for a little while... 

Merry, Elrond, Sarumon & Faramir (LOTR)
Earendil and Ecthelion (Unfinished Tales/Fall of Gondolin/Silmarillion)
Bilbo & Radagast (Hobbit)


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

As for me, Galadriel's mysterious personality and mystical demeanor resonated with me _completely_. Perhaps for the very first time, I actually felt understood by her, and that's what drew me so greatly into LotR and, now, The Silmarillion. _#HouseofFinarfin_

And this is _exactly _how I see the world today:

_*"The world has changed. I see it in the water. I feel it in the Earth. I smell it in the air. Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it."*_​


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 17, 2022)

Hmm. . .sure your favorite character isn't _Treebeard _? 🤔


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Hmm. . .sure your favorite character isn't _Treebeard _? 🤔


Who are you referring to? Me? _Why _would my favourite character be an Ent, _for Eru's sake...

Even Olórin would have been closer, since he's a Maia, and he learnt from Nienna._


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 17, 2022)

_Then Treebeard said farewell to each of them in turn, and he bowed low three times slowly and with great reverence to Celeborn and Galadriel. 'It is long, long since we met by stock or by stone, _A vanimar vanimalion nostari!_' he said. 'It is sad that we should meet only thus at the ending. For the world is changing: I feel it in the water, I feel it in the earth, and I smell it in the air. I do not think we shall meet again.'_
The Return of the King, "Many Partings'


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> _Then Treebeard said farewell to each of them in turn, and he bowed low three times slowly and with great reverence to Celeborn and Galadriel. 'It is long, long since we met by stock or by stone, _A vanimar vanimalion nostari!_' he said. 'It is sad that we should meet only thus at the ending. For the world is changing: I feel it in the water, I feel it in the earth, and I smell it in the air. I do not think we shall meet again.'_
> The Return of the King, "Many Partings'


Ah, forgive me - now I see why.

But I believe the movie version had Galadriel speaking those lines in the prologue. Since I first watched snippets of the movies, I have always associated that part with Galadriel.

I remember reading halfway through _The Two Towers_, after reading the second half of _The Fellowship of the Ring, _before _The Silmarillion _eternally claimed me. 

I never got to read _The Return of the King_, and I don't plan on doing so anytime soon, since I find _The Silmarillion _very highly intriguing.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 17, 2022)

I hope you're not saying you never finished LOTR?! 😳


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I hope you're not saying you never finished LOTR?! 😳


*In a cold and distant voice*

_*That is my whole point.*_

I have a Féanorian will deep within me - do not attempt to persuade me of anything, or it shall be unleashed in due time...


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 17, 2022)

OK, you're banned from posting until you go back and finish it! 😉


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Why, I hope it is not for twelve years?

Or maybe even for three Ages...?

I see that simply with my words, you have no power nor any will to exile me.

_A true Féanorian standard indeed._

Or perhaps I am too acquainted with Námo's doomed prophecies, that his dispassionate personality has been engraved within me, and you find yourself utterly unable to move me even in the slightest?

With both of these demeanors combined, I daresay you have entwined yourself into a direly unfortunate situation indeed.

_Yet with your subtly persuasive attempt to make me finish LotR, I have no pity for you, for my heart belongs to The Silmarillion. In fact, the one who should be exiled is you... 

...yet ironically, despite my steadfast will, I have ultimately lost my power to do so...Námo help me... _


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> As for me, Galadriel's mysterious personality and mystical demeanor resonated with me _completely_. Perhaps for the very first time, I actually felt understood by her, and that's what drew me so greatly into LotR and, now, The Silmarillion. _#HouseofFinarfin_
> 
> And this is _exactly _how I see the world today:
> 
> _*"The world has changed. I see it in the water. I feel it in the Earth. I smell it in the air. Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it."*_​


That was Faramir for me.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Meriadoc Brandybuck said:


> That was Faramir for me.


Everybody's perception is different. 

Now @Squint-eyed Southerner has declared to thrust me into the Outer Darkness if I do not read LOTR...

_What an interesting plight._


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Everybody's perception is different.
> 
> Now @Squint-eyed Southerner has declared to thrust me into the Outer Darkness if I do not read LOTR...
> 
> _What an interesting plight._


Well to be fair, you won't get the whole entire saga without LOTR


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Meriadoc Brandybuck said:


> Well to be fair, you won't get the whole entire saga without LOTR


Absolutely great.

Nobody's on my side, just because of how much I love _The Silmarillion_. 

Just like how nobody was on Melkor's side either when he was sent into the Void.


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Absolutely great.
> 
> Nobody's on my side, just because of how much I love _The Silmarillion_.
> 
> Just like how nobody was on Melkor's side either when he was sent into the Void.


I never said I wasn't on your side. I love the Silmarillian. Earendil, Ecthelion & Melkor are some of the greatest figures in Tolkien's works.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Meriadoc Brandybuck said:


> I never said I wasn't on your side. I love the Silmarillian. Earendil, Ecthelion & Melkor are some of the greatest figures in Tolkien's works.


I know, just making a point for the drama.  xD


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> I know, just making a point for the drama.  xD


I'm a Hobbit...I don't do drama lol


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 17, 2022)

Meriadoc Brandybuck said:


> I'm a Hobbit...I don't do drama lol


The Ainur hardly either...especially a Maia of Námo and Nienna, for they are concerned with the many burdens as well as the ultimate fate of this world.


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Very true Milady. May we live in peaceful times!


----------



## Annatar (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Nobody's on my side, just because of how much I love _The Silmarillion_.


Well, I would say Tolkien would also prefer to read The Silmarillion than The Lord of the Rings, if it wasn't both by him.

"The Silmarillion" is serious, profound literature, while "The Lord of the Rings" is opium for the masses. But still the best on that level. It would certainly be an educational gap not to have read The Lord of the Rings. And once you've done that, you should continue to infantilize yourself, and enjoy "The Hobbit", and then - after you haven't forgotten "Roverandom", of course - turn your brain back up to "The Unfinished Tales" and "The History of Middle-earth".

But every year in December you will read to your children from "Letters from Father Christmas".

That being said, there's a lot more of Tolkien that's either aimed entirely at children or entirely at the educated, intellectual linguist. And some are even somewhere in between.



Faramir of Gondor said:


> I'm a Hobbit...I don't do drama lol


Unless you're a Took.



Miriel Amaniel said:


> Just like how nobody was on Melkor's side either when he was sent into the Void.


Well, I was on his side.

But Melkor would have also read the Lord of the Rings, unlike you...


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 17, 2022)

Annatar said:


> Well, I would say Tolkien would also prefer to read The Silmarillion than The Lord of the Rings, if it wasn't both by him.
> 
> "The Silmarillion" is serious, profound literature, while "The Lord of the Rings" is opium for the masses. But still the best on that level. It would certainly be an educational gap not to have read The Lord of the Rings. And once you've done that, you should continue to infantilize yourself, and enjoy "The Hobbit", and then - after you haven't forgotten "Roverandom", of course - turn your brain back up to "The Unfinished Tales" and "The History of Middle-earth".
> 
> ...


Do not insult a Valar for she may smite you.


----------



## Annatar (May 17, 2022)

Faramir of Gondor said:


> Do not insult a Valar for she may smite you.


😂

She would have permission, but I'm sure she takes my advice very seriously.


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (May 17, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> has declared to thrust me into the Outer Darkness if I do not read LOTR...


I mean, this is the Tolkien Forum, where the expectation is that you read LotR.... it could help you with participating in LotR-related threads.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 18, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> the expectation is that you read LotR....


Such an expectation is not my expectation, for I like to go my own way. I still plan to re-read _The Silmarillion for a few more times _after I have read it the first time - so LotR is not at the top of _my_ list.

_At least not for this moment..._



Faramir of Gondor said:


> Very true Milady. May we live in peaceful times!


May _you _live in peaceful times indeed! Alas, it is deeply unfortunate that such peace does not hearken to me!



Annatar said:


> I'm sure she takes my advice very seriously.


Would I really, if I am not on your side?

I would truly advise you to reconsider that statement, Annatar.



Faramir of Gondor said:


> Do not insult a Valar for she may smite you.


Hmm...

_I thought I was a Maia, of Námo and Nienna?

Do you hold me in such high regard, as to count me among the Valar - the highest of the Ainur? That being said, there was a moment in time where I was the Ninth Arata..._


----------



## Faramir of Gondor (May 18, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Hmm...
> 
> _I thought I was a Maia, of Námo and Nienna?
> 
> Do you hold me in such high regard, as to count me among the Valar - the highest of the Ainur? That being said, there was a moment in time where I was the Ninth Arata..._


So you are on par with Gandalf & Saruman? They are Maia as well are they not?


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 18, 2022)

Faramir of Gondor said:


> So you are on par with Gandalf & Saruman? They are Maia as well are they not?


Yes, and the Light of the Two Trees is still within me, and within the incarnate form of an elf, perhaps I would be _slightly_ more agile than them. But I wouldn't mind if I was on par with them either.

Being the Maia of one of the Féanturi, I am able to sense the féa of others _very_ acutely...and sometimes my own féa proves very handy in communicating with others also... 



Faramir of Gondor said:


> I'm a Hobbit...I don't do drama lol


Now you'll _have _to delete this, my lord, since Faramir is a brave Man, not a chubby Hobbit. 



Annatar said:


> But Melkor would have also read the Lord of the Rings, unlike you...


Unlike me indeed, for I go _my_ own way!

Do not ignite my long-dormant Féanorian will within me...

_*...Or else you shall regret it evermore.*_


----------



## Annatar (May 19, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Do not ignite my long-dormant Féanorian will within me...


Wow, Feanoric fire lies dormant in you? Why shouldn't I ignite it?
Maybe you'll forge a new Silmaril? 😸


----------



## Persephone (May 19, 2022)

I loved Sam, both the BOOK and MOVIE versions.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 20, 2022)

Annatar said:


> Wow, Feanoric fire lies dormant in you? Why shouldn't I ignite it?
> Maybe you'll forge a new Silmaril? 😸


I would forge another, but how would I be able to do so without the Light of the Two Trees? 

Oh, never mind, I'll be on my way to forging one anyway before you even realise it...but then you'd follow in Melkor's path and *take it from me...wouldn't you?

And that flame is only for myself to ignite, when I deem that the time has come.*

_Basically...

*Calm demeanor of Finarfin + steadfast will of Fingolfin + fiery passion of Féanor = me.*_


----------



## Berylla (May 20, 2022)

Aldarion said:


> Gunna citeer mezelf van een ander forum:
> "Persoonlijk vind ik het leuk als personages niet helemaal zwart-wit zijn. Denethor is daarom mijn favoriete personage in Lord of the Rings. Hij is geen aardig persoon, en wordt tegen het einde gek, maar hij geeft ook nooit in op Sauron (zoals Saruman doet) en probeert over het algemeen het juiste te doen voor Gondor - ongeacht de persoonlijke kosten, voor hem of de mensen om hem heen. In werkelijkheid kan er geen overwinning zijn zonder opoffering, en vaak houdt die opoffering in dat iemands moreel oprechte karakters zijn allemaal goed en aardig, totdat je je realiseert hoeveel mensen ze hebben opgeofferd om hun morele normen hoog te houden."
> 
> Ik hou ook van Aragorn, Gandalf en Theoden vanwege zijn Cool Old Guy-vibe.
> ...





Aldarion said:


> Gunna quote myself from another forum:
> "Personally, I like it when characters are not completely black-and-white. Denethor is my favourite character in Lord of the Rings because of that. He is not a nice person, and goes mad towards the end, but he also never gives in to Sauron (like Saruman does) and generally tries to do the right thing for Gondor - no matter the personal cost, to him or the people around him. In reality there can be no victory without sacrifice, and oftentimes that sacrifice involves compromising one's own morals. Morally upstanding characters are all good and nice, until you realize how many people they have sacrificed to uphold their moral standards."
> 
> I also like Aragorn, Gandalf, and Theoden for his Cool Old Guy vibe.
> ...


Mm



Aldarion said:


> Gunna quote myself from another forum:
> "Personally, I like it when characters are not completely black-and-white. Denethor is my favourite character in Lord of the Rings because of that. He is not a nice person, and goes mad towards the end, but he also never gives in to Sauron (like Saruman does) and generally tries to do the right thing for Gondor - no matter the personal cost, to him or the people around him. In reality there can be no victory without sacrifice, and oftentimes that sacrifice involves compromising one's own morals. Morally upstanding characters are all good and nice, until you realize how many people they have sacrificed to uphold their moral standards."
> 
> I also like Aragorn, Gandalf, and Theoden for his Cool Old Guy vibe.
> ...





Aldarion said:


> Gunna quote myself from another forum:
> "Personally, I like it when characters are not completely black-and-white. Denethor is my favourite character in Lord of the Rings because of that. He is not a nice person, and goes mad towards the end, but he also never gives in to Sauron (like Saruman does) and generally tries to do the right thing for Gondor - no matter the personal cost, to him or the people around him. In reality there can be no victory without sacrifice, and oftentimes that sacrifice involves compromising one's own morals. Morally upstanding characters are all good and nice, until you realize how many people they have sacrificed to uphold their moral standards."
> 
> I also like Aragorn, Gandalf, and Theoden for his Cool Old Guy vibe.
> ...


To be honest, Sam, Boromir Faramir and as soon as i read this denethor, because sam sticked with frodo till the end. Frodo abandoned him but he kept helping him no matter what. He was just an amazing, honest, brave and kind friend and also a great cook. Boromir really wanted to help frodo but the ring leaded him to his death, just like isildur. Faramir just wanted to be loved by his father and wanted to do the right thing and denethor is my favourite because of the same reasons.


----------



## Goldilocks Gamgee (May 21, 2022)

Miriel Amaniel said:


> Calm demeanor of Finarfin + steadfast will of Fingolfin + fiery passion of Féanor = me.


You know what this reminds me of? That term people like using right now - Mary Sue.

Just kidding, I'm sure your character isn't a Mary Sue.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 21, 2022)

Goldilocks Gamgee said:


> You know what this reminds me of? That term people like using right now - Mary Sue.


You know what you've said now wants me to do? Chase you in fiery passion exactly like how Galadriel chased Féanor out of Valinor into Middle-Earth.

_That's one thing I definitely won't regret doing...hehehe... _


----------



## Persephone (May 23, 2022)

Berylla said:


> To be honest, Sam, Boromir Faramir and as soon as i read this denethor, because sam sticked with frodo till the end. Frodo abandoned him but he kept helping him no matter what. He was just an amazing, honest, brave and kind friend and also a great cook. Boromir really wanted to help frodo but the ring leaded him to his death, just like isildur. Faramir just wanted to be loved by his father and wanted to do the right thing and denethor is my favourite because of the same reasons.



The thing with Sam is there's nothing in it for him, essentially. Frodo had to do it. Whether Sam went with him or not, there is no consequence to Sam. It could have been disastrous to Frodo. Sam CHOSE to go. His loyalty and love for his master were the only reasons why he went. I don't think I have met anyone who is a complete stranger who has that much love for another person without any romantic link.


----------



## Annatar (May 24, 2022)

Interesting topic regarding Sam!


Persephone said:


> His loyalty and love for his master were the only reasons why he went. I don't think I have met anyone who is a complete stranger who has that much love for another person without any romantic link.



Sam and Frodo were not strangers before, but they did have more of an employer-employee relationship and a difference in status.
Although perhaps a very deep friendship had already developed from this before the journey to the East?

Indeed, this seems a bit strange in this day and age, which also leads to the fact that more and more articles of this kind have been popping up recently:









Queer readings of The Lord of the Rings are not accidents


Following breadcrumbs to find ourselves, in history and fiction




www.polygon.com





What do you guys think about this?

On the other hand, the argument of a deep male friendship is often made. This may have been normal in Tolkien's lifetime. Today, male friendships are usually rather superficial, I'd guess.

Here's a good counter-argument:






I don't have a final opinion on this topic, but I tend to the interpretation of "Just Some Guy". There are probably good arguments for both sides. In the end, one could perhaps only judge it correctly if one had lived in Tolkien's time and in his environment.


----------



## Lómelindë Lindórië (May 24, 2022)

Annatar said:


> In the end, one could perhaps only judge it correctly if one had lived in Tolkien's time and in his environment.


Well spoken - one would understand such a situation best if only they had experienced it for themselves, for no other replication could match first-hand witnessing.


----------



## Melkor (May 24, 2022)

Faramir of Gondor said:


> I never said I wasn't on your side. I love the Silmarillian. Earendil, Ecthelion & Melkor are some of the greatest figures in Tolkien's works.


I am flattered .

I have many favorite characters, hard to pick one. I really like elves, so Legolas, Fingolfin, Fingon, Maedhros, Finrod, Turgon, Thingol, Elrond, Lúthien, Idril - these are pretty high in my list.


----------



## Annatar (May 24, 2022)

Melkor said:


> I have many favorite characters, hard to pick one. I really like elves, so Legolas, Fingolfin, Fingon, Maedhros, Finrod, Turgon, Thingol, Elrond, Lúthien, Idril - these are pretty high in my list.



Master, you like elves? Do I understand you correctly that by this you mean who do you want to torture first and worst?


----------



## Melkor (May 24, 2022)

Annatar said:


> Master, you like elves? Do I understand you correctly that by this you mean who do you want to torture first and worst?


Yeah, exactly .


----------



## Persephone (May 24, 2022)

Annatar said:


> Interesting topic regarding Sam!
> 
> Sam and Frodo were not strangers before, but they did have more of an employer-employee relationship and a difference in status.
> Although perhaps a very deep friendship had already developed from this before the journey to the East?


Well, when I say "strangers" I mean, they are not related by blood. I would expect that kind of devotion from someone like a mom or dad, or a sibling. A lover may also show that kind of love - but they are none of those. Like you said, they have an employee-employer relationship and, granted, they were friendly, there will always be that barrier there. Like, I will never sacrifice my life for my boss. I will only do so much and then I'm giving up. 

Sam went all the way



Annatar said:


> Indeed, this seems a bit strange in this day and age, which also leads to the fact that more and more articles of this kind have been popping up recently:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have seen many theories, but I do think that Sam and Frodo are just friends. No romance there


----------



## cart (May 25, 2022)

Feanor, The blue wizards (mostly due to my imagination), Morgoth (discovering this listing in the complete guide to middle earth flipped my understanding of the world of Arda (which i had no clue there was more to the world) i read his entry so many times as a kid that if i let the book open up by itself by setting it on it's spine 8/10 it opens on the melkor entry), earendil


----------



## Gloranthan (Dec 7, 2022)

If this belongs in _the Lord of the Rings_ subforum, please move it, just wasn't sure because it's removed than the book plot.

Feanor is my favorite character of Tolkien's works (he's absurdly irresponsible, but he didn't take guff from anyone, ever), and Morgoth is my second (he's a terrible person, but he is very Metal). But neither of these *lunatics *show up in _LotR_.

My favorite character from _LotR _is Legolas. I love when he's running on the snow and singing songs while everyone else trudges along trying not to die! I love when he _sleeps while running_. I am an elffriend (Alfred!), and he's the only one we get to know outside the Silmarillion. John Howe may have weirded up the Balrog, but he did a great job with Legolegs (I have a Legolas Lego figure from the Lego TV game they made, so he's eternally Legolegs to me). Aside from his sweet super powers and magic eyeballs, he's one of the most genuinely nice and likable people in the book (Aragorn seems like a great guy, too, would definitely invite him to dinner). I love how he _personally_ bridges the gap between Elf and Dwarf, and I wish we had the stories of him and Gimli going around being awesome bros.

Can anyone tell me what color Legolas' hair was? I genuinely do not know.

I also like Aragorn (Conan the Paladin) and Gandalf (do not make this man angry, but he's great at birthday parties - man, what a great magician to secure for your elevendy-first birthday!).

Sauron is cool but he's hardly in the book. Mostly, the titular Lord of the Rings is just a shadowy presence, he suffuses the book but hardly appears. This is probably wise, as it's very difficult to write a demigod and not undersell it. In my headcanon (and JRR may contradict me somewhere I'm unaware of), but I certainly never thought of him as a big eye. I figured he was at the top of Barad-Dur and literally looked out the window to see Frodo - an actual physical presence. I don't know how I imagine him, but it's not Poison Ivy Plate Armor man. He was a Dark Lord in form, but I think of him more like Fistandantulus (a character who takes much from Sauron, in Dragonlance) - a mighty wizard, who isn't 12' tall and doesn't look like a Monty Python character (THE KNIGHTS WHO SAY NEE!) - in my mind his appearance isn't so much terrifying as the perpetual cloud of malevolence. In my headcannon his form was not fair not because he looked like a monster or Hextor from D&D (another Morgoth/Sauran ripoff) but radiates spiritual hatred. He couldn't assume a 'fair form' meaning he couldn't stop projecting malice and fear, not so much being ugly and dangerous looking.

Honorable mention to the Mouth of Sauron, because I like Black Numenoreans and sorcerers.


----------

