feanor a villian

[afro-elf]

Your black and white argument isn't working much either. So, according to you Feanor is an unredeamable @$$#$$?

Damn it I've got that Michael Jackson song in my head.


I believe that he had MANY chances at redemption, but he failed.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Damn it I've got that Michael Jackson song in my head.

:evil look:
My work here is done.

I believe that he had MANY chances at redemption, but he failed.

And I say that pride and emotion blinded him. This does not mean that he was an evil b*stard, it just means that he was weak. Pffft. Remember, even in the end - to use your analogy - Anakin was redeemed.

[afro-elf]

The Valar were BLIND as well. There is much that they didn't see or understand

Yet Manwe knew more of the music than any. I don't think he was at all mistaken in his doom. Not all knowing a being blind are not synomynous.

For me it would hav been a wiser choice to repent and listen to the Valar than not.

I still fail to see how otherwise was "better"

Yes Anakin made a choice that Feanor did not. Vader saved his son and thus himself. Feanor did not. Is he innately evil? No?
were many of his actions? Yes. Could he have been Redeemed" Yes. Did he make the choice to? No.

As I said before Osse willing served Morgoth and repented.

I still believe that repentence should have been the choice and fail to see how any other action would have been better

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Yet Manwe knew more of the music than any. I don't think he was at all mistaken in his doom. Not all knowing a being blind are not synomynous.

Okay, bad choice of words there.

For me it would hav been a wiser choice to repent and listen to the Valar than not.

Indeed. Doubtless it would have been, but an oath was sworn, and the evil already wrought. I'll say it again, it was not the oath that brought about the dissolution of the ties between the Noldor and the Sindar; it was the blood spilling in Valinor.

I still fail to see how otherwise was "better"

Not saying that at all. I'm saying that they swore an oath.

As I said before Osse willing served Morgoth and repented.

Yes. But did he have Feanor's pride?

I still believe that repentence should have been the choice and fail to see how any other action would have been better

NOT better. Quit putting words in my mouth. It comes back to the oath. At the very least you can say about Feanor, is that he wasn't an oath-breaker.

Also, it makes for a more interesting plot device (did I say those evil words? ) for the oath to remain.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

So what would Feanor have done by saving his sons? They were already in quite a bit of trouble. Again, what would have happened if he had released them from their oath?

[afro-elf]

NOT better. Quit putting words in my mouth. It comes back to the oath. At the very least you can say about Feanor, is that he wasn't an oath-breaker.

I haven't put anything in your mouth. The better thing was me strive at the choice made. Yes, I will give you that he was not a oath breaker.

Yes. But did he have Feanor's pride?

True: Very true.

Also, it makes for a more interesting plot device (did I say those evil words? ) for the oath to remain

I was gonna bring that up early but I wasn't gonna stoop that low. I had already called you a Christain.

So what would Feanor have done by saving his sons? They were already in quite a bit of trouble. Again, what would have happened if he had released them from their oath?

To make it simple all of the EVIL deeds of several of his sons would not have been committed. The instead of pursuing a hopeless venedetta their talents could have been used differently. Yes because they were in ME they would have had wars with Morgoth. However the blind pursuit of the Jewels would not would have eliminated much folly.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

*EG hits herself in the head*
Maybe it would be best if I actually finished the book before posting anymore on this subject

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf I was gonna bring that up early but I wasn't gonna stoop that low. I had already called you a Christain.

You want I should come over there and kick YOUR family jewels?

Originally posted by afro-elf
To make it simple all of the EVIL deeds of several of his sons would not have been committed. The instead of pursuing a hopeless venedetta their talents could have been used differently. Yes because they were in ME they would have had wars with Morgoth. However the blind pursuit of the Jewels would not would have eliminated much folly.

And again, I will say that much of the hostility was due to the spilling of blood NOT the oath.

*The sound of a breaking down record ensues*

[afro-elf]

And again, I will say that much of the hostility was due to the spilling of blood NOT the oath.

DUH. I've been teaching Saudis for to long. I got you now


. Yes, I concur that things were pretty messed up. However, the quest did not ease any of the tension. As Maedhros tried to heal the wounds between the houses of Finwe, the quest for the Silmarils only made life MORE difficult for the exiles.

I think that if they were working for redemption for their sins that life in Belerlaid would have been not necessarily easy but easier and further folly cause by the quest would not have arisen.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Yes, I concur that things were pretty messed up. However, the quest did not ease any of the tension. As Maedhros tried to heal the wounds between the houses of Finwe, the quest for the Silmarils only made life MORE difficult for the exiles.

Undoubtedly.

I think that if they were working for redemption for their sins that life in Belerlaid would have been not necessarily easy but easier and further folly cause by the quest would not have arisen.

And again, undoubtedly. However, that's not my quibble. The Sindar Elves would have regarded them (that is the Noldor) as dodgy regardless of whether or not Maedhros' peace campaign worked or not. The spilling of blood, remember?

[afro-elf]

quibble

that's is such a cute word

I'm not gainsaying your kinslaying thing


I think we have truce

sheep are nice. Just stay away from saudi boys.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
that's is such a cute word

That's me. Cute all over.

I think we have truce

Oh? So you admit I'm right then?

[Andúril]

BoP:
Cute all over.

All over?

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Anduril
All over?

Well... apart from the hairy toes.

[Blackheart]

#1 reason Feanor is irredeemably evil:

I have no problem identifying with him.

Do a personality comparison between say.. Morgoth, Feanor, and Hitler.

Talented... yes. Morgoth had talent beyond any of the Ainur. Feanor was gifted beyond any of the Noldor. Hitler, despite what his detractors say, was a talented strategian before he went insane.

Charismatic... Yes. Morgoth was charismatic, he was able to fool the other Valar, manipulate and lead the fallen maiar. Feanor lead an entire nation to it's doom in a mad quest. Hitler... lead an entire nation to doom in a mad quest...

Prideful.. Check. Check. Check.

Considers themselves to be "misunderstood and ill-treated" Morgoth resented the fact that he was not recognized as the "Lord of Arda". Feanor, even before Morgoth was released, was quick to anger at any who gainsaid him, Hitler had a persecution complex.

You can go on and on. The only difference between Feanor, and the other two is that there was a "greater" evil for him to oppose. But it still doesn't mean that he wasn't a villian. It just means that Sometimes Villians can serve a greater good.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

But Feanor did not have malicious intent in mind. He did not wish to take over the world, or destroy masses of people. His motivations for his actions were based on his pride, AND the affects of Melkor's lies. His mistakes lay in his tendency to follow his emotions and his pride, rather than his wish to rule the world. He may have wanted power, but he certainly did not want something completely out of the boi\unds of reality.

He may have had those things in common with Melkor and Hitler, but do not take those similarities too far. His faults were on a smaller scale. Though he caused a great deal of trouble (understatement) he did go through his life with evil intent. He was a fiery spirit and that was just the way he was, but he was NOT inherently evil.

And he did not lead an entire nation to doom in a mad quest, just most of one. But he did not lead most of said nation to doom in a mad quest with the purpose of leading them to doom in a mad quest. He simply let his pride take over, rather than being rational. That in itself is not being a villain.

[Blackheart]

He may have had those things in common with Melkor and Hitler, but do not take those similarities too far. His faults were on a smaller scale. Though he caused a great deal of trouble (understatement) he did go through his life with evil intent. He was a fiery spirit and that was just the way he was, but he was NOT inherently evil.

Neither was Hitler or Melkor to begin with. Thanks! Another point I could have included, and I missed it. drat. I'm sure Melkor sincerely thought that Arda would have been better off under his rule. Ditto for Cpl. Hitler, Stalin, and anyone else you can think of.

And he did not lead an entire nation to doom in a mad quest, just most of one. But he did not lead most of said nation to doom in a mad quest with the purpose of leading them to doom in a mad quest. He simply let his pride take over, rather than being rational. That in itself is not being a villain.

Err. I beg to differ. Instead of being rational, he let his pride take over and doomed "most" of a nation. My dear fellow, what else would you call villainry?

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

He let pride and anger take over and in the process doomed most of a nation, but that is not villainry. I define villainry as causing 'trouble' with malicious intent, not as having issues with controlling one's emotions and pride. He did not want to wreak havoc on the world for wronging him, he wanted vengeance and to cause Melkor trouble for a. stealing the Silmarils, and b. killing Finwe, his father. At that point he lost rationality, and that drove him to do things he would not have done if he had been thinking clearly. Which means he had a bad temper. So do I. (eek. I think I'm a little too much like him. . .) That does not make him a villain. Hitler and Morgoth also, I admit, lost rationality, but they lost it on a different scale, and a different way, then Feanor.

[afro-elf]

EG

what about him abandoning the host of Fingolfin and then burning the ships?

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by afro-elf
EG

what about him abandoning the host of Fingolfin and then burning the ships?

Again, he was being irrational, but not evil, not villainous. He did not stop to think. What he did was terrible, but it was the cause of yet another moment of irrationality rather than trying to cause harm to his kin.