feanor a villian

[afro-elf]

I could have forgiven feanor for all things save for dying command he knew that his sons could not win and he doomed them all ( all people of ME) with his dying wish

to doom yourself is one thing but to drag your children and an entire population is unforgiveable

sort of like osama dooming all of afghanistan

it seems tolkien reoccurring sins are pride and greed

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by afro-elf
I could have forgiven feanor for all things save for dying command he knew that his sons could not win and he doomed them all ( all people of ME) with his dying wish

to doom yourself is one thing but to drag your children and an entire population is unforgiveable

sort of like osama dooming all of afghanistan

it seems tolkien reoccurring sins are pride and greed When Feanor was dying, he knew that his efforts were in vain, and that Morgoth could not be defeated by the Noldor. He swore his sons to stand by their oath, because he was powerless to remove them from it. He and his sons swore the oath I think before Manwe and Varda and called Iluvatar as witness.

[Tar-Elendil]

i believe they swore the oath at tirion.

[Strange-Looking Lurker]

I think he's the bad guy even without his dying wish. It would have been better had he died at birth.

[Tar-Elendil]

i dont think he was a villain. i believe his pride sometimes got in the way of wisdom like what happened when he swore the oath. i believe he had such pride that people often mistakes him as a villain. aye, if they had not swore their oath many woes wouldnt have occured. But even less woes wouldnt have happened if the two trees werent created by yavanna. blame yavanna! not feanor!:)

[Sister Golden Hair]

I think we should give some of the blame to Feanor's mother.

[azalea]

Why is that? (I have just been reading it, so I am looking for some good "analysis":) ).

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by azalea
Why is that? (I have just been reading it, so I am looking for some good "analysis":) ). After Feanor was born, his mother Miriel was so weakened because of the fire of Feanors spirit, that she chose to not continue, and went to Lorien and lay down to die, leaving Feanor without a mother, and Finwe in great grief. Because of her death and because at that time, the Noldor were still in the days of their youth, Finwe wished to bring forth more children. Instead of him devoting his life to his mighty son, he married again and Indis bore him two more sons, Fingolfin and Finarfin. This of course caused great strife and jealousy for the affections of Finwe between Feanor and his half brothers.

From the Silmarillion:

many saw the effect of the breach within the House of Finwe, judging that if Finwe had endured his loss and been content with the fathering of his mighty son, the courses of Feanor would have been otherwise, and great evil might have been prevented; for the sorrow and the strife in the house of Finwe is graven in the memory of the Noldorin Elves. But the children of Indis were great and glorious, and their children also; and if they had not lived the history of the Eldar would have been dimisnished.

[afro-elf]

but that would mean no finrod:eek:

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by afro-elf
but that would mean no finrod:eek: True, had Finwe decided not to wed Indis. Still because of the choices made by Feanor's parents, the outcome had much to do I think with Feanor's behavior.

[azalea]

Okay, but I saw her "illness" as more an involuntary thing, I wouldn't have thought to blame her, but perhaps if she had endured he wouldn't have had the jealousy or what have you. Still, if he reacted that way, perhaps he was already predisposed to being an "upstart" and would have been the same even if she had been there?
I would place more blame on the father, I mean, he could have waited a while longer to remarry, it's not like he didn't have eternity!:)

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by azalea
Okay, but I saw her "illness" as more an involuntary thing, I wouldn't have thought to blame her, but perhaps if she had endured he wouldn't have had the jealousy or what have you. Still, if he reacted that way, perhaps he was already predisposed to being an "upstart" and would have been the same even if she had been there?
I would place more blame on the father, I mean, he could have waited a while longer to remarry, it's not like he didn't have eternity!:) Feanor's mother did not have an illness. Elves knew no such thing. Feanor's mother made a choice not to continue. She felt drained after his birth, but she could have been healed in Lorien and chose not to be.

[Tar-Elendil]

from The Silmarillion
"The love of Finwë and MÃ*riel was great and glad, for it began in the Blessed Realm in the Days of Bliss. But in the bearing of her son MÃ*riel was consumed in spirit and body; and after his birth she yearned for release from the labour of living. And when she had named him, she said to Finwë: "Never again shall I bear child; for strength that would have nourished the life of many has gone forth into Fëanor.'"
it goes on saying:
"..and he said: "Surely there is healing in Aman? Here all weariness can find rest."
then she went to Lórien and "lay down to sleep; but though she seemed to sleep, her spirit indeed departed from her body, and passed in silence to the Halls of Mandos."

[Radagast The Brown]

originally posted by Tar-ElendilBut even less woes wouldnt have happened if the two trees werent created by yavanna. blame yavanna! not feanor!I think you can't blame Yavanna. You should blame Eru that created Yavanna. :)
now really no one could blame Yavanna. I could blame Feanor that didn't want to give the Valar the Silmarilion, and Melkor that stole them and destroyed the trees.

We can't blame Feanor's mother on something bad she didn't expect from her powers will kill her son and lots of the the Noldor.

[Ñólendil]

I agree it is absurd to blame Yavanna. What she did was good and she did it for good reasons.

But I don't agree that MÃ*riel Þerindë was blameless. Manwë and Mandos and other Valar agreed that MÃ*riel was not blameless. She was tainted in some way, because death is for Elves unnatural. If an Elf craves death and dies willingly it is usually (I would think Lúthien is among the exceptions) because of some taint in the fëa or "soul". The death of MÃ*riel was described as the first sign of the shadow that would fall on the Blessed Land. Finwe even begged MÃ*riel to return, but she never did, really uncaring about his suffering, thinking only of herself. Everything turned out alright in the end for Finwe and MÃ*riel*, but MÃ*riel caused a lot of suffering. She didn't mean to cause everyone grief and it's not entirely her fault there was a problem with her fea, but she was cold and indifferent in the face of a valid plea from one who loved her and from one whom she loved. For all she knew she was dooming Finwe to be forever sundered from her, and alone, because Elves never remarried. Anyway you spin it, we're talking about agony until the End. That is what she should be blamed for, in my proud opinion.

Ultimately, the blame always goes back to Melkor Moriñgotho, the Dark Enemy who planted the first seed of evil in himself, that first seed of evil that spread like wildfire. All evil goes back to him.

*Supposedly when Finwe died they met again and dwelt together in the Halls of Mandos or the House of Vaire, until the end of Time. It is implied in the Peoples of Middle-earth, the Shibboleth of Fëanor, that this did not cause Indis grief.

[Tar-Elendil]

I agree it is absurd to blame Yavanna. What she did was good and she did it for good reasons.
::Tar-Elendil takes out a box of sarcasm and thorws it in your face::
i was being sarcastic:) thought you woulda know for the ":) "

[afro-elf]

edit: error

[Radagast The Brown]

::Tar-Elendil takes out a box of sarcasm and thorws it in your face::
i was being sarcastic:) thought you woulda know for the ":) "Thought so. You did that smile (:)).Still, I was have to do something. You can't blame Yavanna, even not sarcasticly.

[Ñólendil]

Tar-Elendil, thanks for clearing that up. I don't put much in the smileys. I've heard some pretty cooky ideas here before so I really wouldn't be surprized if someone wanted to blame Yavanna for the Fall of the Noldor. Tom Bombadil is, after all, Tulkas, isn't he?

[Tar-Elendil]

lol

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I would agree that all blame lies on Melkor. Feanor may have been proud, but it was the deceit and lies of Melkor that caused all the trouble and Feanor's jealous guarding of the Silmarils and all of Feanor's mistakes.

[Makamu]

I suppose, that you really have to blame Finwe to some extend, because he didn't seem to notice Feanor that much after his marriage with Indis. This in combination with Feanor's pride (which he didn't create out of thin air, by the way. He WAS the greatest of the Nolor) and Melkor's lies caused the downfall of Feanor. And I think, that it was this deadly combination that gave Feanor the reason to forsake Yavanna's wish, because he was blinded by his pride (and later by grief and anger) and thought that the light of the Silmaril was his own creation. After the news of Finwe's death reached Feanor's ears, he paid no heed to the words of Manwe and Eonwe, because he thought them to be just like Melkor

[Tar-Elendil]

melkor went among the noldor and told them lies and then they told other noldo and enlarged the lies and some came to the ears of the sons of finwe (feanor,fingolfin,finarfin). this and blind pride is what caused the later woes of middle-earth. Melkor put the idea that the valar were holding them as prisoners for they wouldnt gain dominion in M-E.

[Radagast The Brown]

I don't agree that the blame fall on Finwe and not on Feanor. If Feanor was an intellegent elf he wasn't believe to these lies in the first place. Of cource, Melkor had a big part of this, but I balme Feanor, not Finwe.

[Tar-Elendil]

i dont blame feanor nor finwe. Morgoth should get the blame

[Blackheart]

Hmm. Free will. that's the whole problem right there.

Feanor's decisions brought tragedy to the Noldor. He willfully rebelled also, shadowing Melkor's rebellion against Eru.

You can debate causal factors all you want, but when you get right down to it, it was Feanor making the decisions. He is a classic tragic figure, you don't get much more "classic" than him.

The best, brightest, most gifted, of all the Noldo, and his tragic flaw is pride. Therin lies the story. Repeated over and over in Tolkien's works. He may have not started out as evil, and he may not have been "evil" as Tolkien ascribes to the forces of darkness (irrevocably evil), but certes he epitomizes the "fall" from grace.

That's something that Melkor, Feanor (and the exiles), and the men of Westernesse all share. They were given gifts surpassing those of their fellows, and in their pride they forsook reason and strayed into darkness.

Good songs, it seems, are dearly bought.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

But I would still say all the blame lies on Morgoth, because without that, true, Feanor would have been proud, but the lies of Melkor are what caused all the problems. And Feanor never trusted Melkor, did he? I think Feanor's pride and vanity can be excused in that case. And if anyone else, I would say Finwe, for marrying Indis and neglecting his son...if only a little. Feanor needed more attention than he got form his parents, considering his personality.
True, his tragic flaw is pride, but his pride would not have gotten out of hand if it weren't for Melkor.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
But I would still say all the blame lies on Morgoth, because without that, true, Feanor would have been proud, but the lies of Melkor are what caused all the problems. And Feanor never trusted Melkor, did he? I think Feanor's pride and vanity can be excused in that case. And if anyone else, I would say Finwe, for marrying Indis and neglecting his son...if only a little. Feanor needed more attention than he got form his parents, considering his personality.
True, his tragic flaw is pride, but his pride would not have gotten out of hand if it weren't for Melkor. I disagree with this. Feanor is what I like to call the"twisted good". However, Feanor was from birth a challange, and I think Morgoth may have built upon that. Feanor was one that could never or would never admit he was wrong, even if he knew in his heart he was. Yes, he was prideful. I don't believe that was Morgoth's doing as much as I believe that Morgoth knew it, and used it to his advantage.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Yes, Feanor was too proud. And Melkor used this to his advantage. But if he had not, then Feanor would not have been the "twisted good," or not as much. Perhaps I sympathise with Feanor more because I am like him in pride (though not in skill!) and I am the older of two children, so I could see how he would be jealous of his younger brothers ;)

[Blackheart]

I disagree that Feanor wouldn't have fallen if Morgoth hadn't been there to tempt him.

People like that don't need to be tempted, and anyway, even after the lies of Morgoth had been revealed, he went right on acting like an ass.

[Tar-Elendil]

thats because he had been banned from tirion and such. as said earlier his pride got in the way of wisdom many times.

[Blackheart]

Ban or no ban, he wouldn't have changed his behavior, OR recanted.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by Blackheart
I disagree that Feanor wouldn't have fallen if Morgoth hadn't been there to tempt him.

People like that don't need to be tempted, and anyway, even after the lies of Morgoth had been revealed, he went right on acting like an ass.

He wouldn't have had a reason to fall. He still would have been over-proud and arrogant, but then he would have just been a bit of a pompous ass, rather then causing all the trouble that he...caused.

[Elvellon]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf


He wouldn't have had a reason to fall. He still would have been over-proud and arrogant, but then he would have just been a bit of a pompous ass, rather then causing all the trouble that he...caused.

I agree, Feanor was overly proud, and overly emotional, but without Morgoth’s influence there wouldn’t be a falling.

[Elvellon]

Originally posted by afro-elf
I could have forgiven feanor for all things save for dying command he knew that his sons could not win and he doomed them all ( all people of ME) with his dying wish

to doom yourself is one thing but to drag your children and an entire population is unforgiveable

sort of like osama dooming all of afghanistan

it seems tolkien reoccurring sins are pride and greed

A villain? Perhaps, but an understandable one. From the beginning he had a very atypical life (for a ñoldo of Aman). He never knew his mother, since she died shortly after his birth. A unique case among the Aman elves. It is therefore predictable that the young Feanor would became specially attached to his father. Under this light, the coming of Indis into Finwe’s life could be expected to be doubly disruptive to the young Feanor’s life. First, his father now divided his love with her and his new sons; second, and perhaps more importantly, the coming of Indis represented the end of any secret hope Feanor might had of the returning of his mother; how could he avoid to feel some resentment?

Then there were the actions of Morgoth. First he nurtured this resentment of Feanor and the natural pride and ambitions of the ñoldorin princes. On this game Fingolfin fell also, playing according to the desires of the Dark Lord; becoming a rival of Feanor (if Finarfin were older than Fingolfin then perhaps many things would have been different).

Then there was the murder of Finwe, the person that Feanor loved the most. Since that moment it is clear that Feanor, always a very emotional person, becomes totally controlled by is pain and desire of revenge. Of his two brothers only Finarfin remain calm and sensible, Fingolfin falls into bickering with Feanor for control of the Ñoldor. However good his intentions were, his actions created a rift between the Ñoldor and probably spurred Feanor into greater radicalism, perhaps without this he would not have made his dreadful oath.


And what about his actions after this?

The killing at Alqualonde was the unfortunate escalation of a brawl that got out of control when the Ñoldor attempted to rob the ships of the Teleri.
The burning of the ships was the result of the poisoned relations between Feanor and Fingolfin. The distrust between both had gone so far that none could trust the other, even for something so simple as using the ships in turn. Certainly Feanor didn’t predicted that Fingolfin would cross the hellish Helcaraxe, and in the burning of the ships he lost one of his sons…

Then we have the final act. Him spurring his sons to remain faithful to their oath despite that he now believed that there was no hope in it. But we must not forget he was a very emotional man, driven to the brink of irrationality, and even madness. I think that pride was not the only reason for his perseverance. He probably still hoped that, despite what his reason told him, his sons would succeed. Also, he probably could not bring himself to accept that everything that had happened (and that he had done or caused) was in vain.

[Blackheart]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf


He wouldn't have had a reason to fall. He still would have been over-proud and arrogant, but then he would have just been a bit of a pompous ass, rather then causing all the trouble that he...caused.

Doubtful. Morgoth just sped it up. Eventually he would have grown to resent every one and everything around him.

Eventually he would have demanded something from someone who didn't want to give it to him, and being thwarted, he wouldn't accept it.

[Elvellon]

I don’t agree, without Morgoth’s lies and actions (like the murder of Finwe) Feanor’s behaviour would never be so extreme. He would still be overly proud, and likely not very sociable, but hardly would he fall into such a folly. It took the most extreme acts to truly drive him into his madness. Before Morgoth’s influence, Feanor dwelt in Aman for a long time, in reasonable harmony (or at least tolerance) with his brothers and with the Valar.

[Radagast The Brown]

I think that Blackhurt is right. Eventaully he was going to Middle Earth. maybe with less disasters but still...

but then I'm not sure that Fingolfin would go with him and Finwe wasn't dead so... no one could tell what would happen next (except Tolkien his self).

[Jador]

This sounds like it's been a really deep discussion,and I dont know all the points you've been over..(i.e.You'll have to excuse me if this has been said before)

Anyway I think that Feanor only let his pride leed him to actual evil deeds,after he(and others of the Noldor)were heavily influenced by Melkor.Untill he drew a sword on his brother he didn't 'do'anything wrong,and let's remember that it was Melkor who had sown the seeds of discontent and misstrust that led to the forging of weapons in the first place-and not just by Feanor and his followers.
Anyway as we know alot of really bad things happened after that and yes Feanor had a major role in them.But a most important fact is that he died well,and honourably-he died a hero.
He hated Morgoth with a passion-He wasn't evil,He wasn't a villian,he was decieved( for a while)by the master of lies.
But he died a hero...

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by Radagast The Brown
I think that Blackhurt is right. Eventaully he was going to Middle Earth. maybe with less disasters but still...

but then I'm not sure that Fingolfin would go with him and Finwe wasn't dead so... no one could tell what would happen next (except Tolkien his self).

I agree with Elvellon--he may have been arrogant and prideful, but he would not have fallen, at least not have fallen so far as he did, from the lies and actions of Melkor.

And he would not have had a reason to go to Middle Earth if it hadn't been for Melkor.

[Tar-Elendil]

saying feanor would have still been a "villain" even if morgoth's lies had not spread through the noldor is like saying turin would have still done the wrongs that he did without the curse of morgoth or dragon.

[Ñólendil]

Túrin was by nature a goodly person (though carried away by emotion at times, "especially wrath"). Feanáro was not. Well, I suppose everyone's inner nature was good, or I believe so. Feanáro was however corrupt. Túrin was cursed, there is a huge difference.

[Tar-Elendil]

i was merely using that as an example and yea there are drastic differences from feanor and turin.
i was just stating that saying feanor would still have been a 'villain" and done the the things he had if the lies of morgoth hadnt occured would be like saying turin wouldve still done all the bad things he did if he wasnt cursed. In other words. It wouldnt have happened.

[Ñólendil]

Right. I'm attacking your example, to put it bluntly. I'm with them. Without Melkor, there obviously wouldn't be evil, but Curufinwe was not led astray by his lies alone. Whether Melkor was held captive in Aman or not, or whether he was freed, as long as he had ever existed and sown the seeds of evil, Feanáro would have been corrupt. I'm not saying his fall was a foregone conclusion in the beginning of the Music, I'm just trying to say he wasn't some poor nice guy that was victimized by Melkor's lies. He himself was at fault in a way that guys like Túrin and other good people were not.

[Khadrane]

Feanor is demonic. (Not literally. That's just been my "word" for the last week or so.)

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Feanor is not 'demonic.'

Without Melkor he may have been very arrogant and prideful, but he would not have been a 'villain.' He may not have had a lot of friends, but he would not have, for example, pulled a sword on his brother. I believe, anyway. He would not have had a reason to, and he would not have been so angry and paranoid.

[afro-elf]

But he died a hero...

How do you reckon this? Because he died fighting Balrogs?

With his last breathe he cursed his sons ( read that properly) to follow a doom that is unforgivable for a father.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

He held them to their oath, which he could not have freed them from. And he died fighting balrogs, following his oath. I'm not saying he was perfect, or heroic, I just think you're being too harsh in judging him.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Well, Feanor was no hero, but I agree that he held his sons to their oath because he did not have the power to release them from it, an oath that never should have been sworn in the first place. It does seem that the people of the First age were big on swearing oaths though.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf

And he would not have had a reason to go to Middle Earth if it hadn't been for Melkor.

To re-iterate an earlier point, I think he would have find another reason to go to Middle Earth, anyway. It wasn't just for the Silmarils that he went to ME afterall.

With his last breathe he cursed his sons ( read that properly) to follow a doom that is unforgivable for a father.

And I have to agree with EG here; I think you're being overly harsh upon Feanor. He was prideful, but he wasn't overtly evil.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

He went to ME because of the Silmarils, and because he was angry with the Valar. His rebellion against the Valar was caused mostly by his rage at Melkor, and that Melkor was once a Valar. So why would have gone to ME otherwise?

He was not evil, far from it, I think. He just let his pride and emotions guide him when he should not have.

[afro-elf]

I agree that he held his sons to their oath because he did not have the power to release them from it


I am curious about that. If he had said that ,seeing all was doomed to fail, "I bid thee not to continue this mad quest. I was wrong. My sons do not pursue the jewels any further. My love for you is greater than that of venegence or pride. though we have forsaken Valinor. We can a least return to the light as best we can. Pursue not Morgoth from this day forth. Resist is lies and power and perhaps you and our people will be spared from the folly I woud doom them to. I ask thee what is the greater sin, to follow a path that you know is wrong because you spoke with a wrathful tongue or turn from a path in humility for you erred. Forgive me my sons and by what ever power I have I set you free and take your sins and that of my followers unto me"


This may have been better than even Earendil for Feanor the was the mover and shaker. Not to say that there would not have been war with Morgoth but it would have been of a different nature instead of be driven by venegnece it would be driven by the need for redeemption.

[afro-elf]

And I have to agree with EG here; I think you're being overly harsh upon Feanor. He was prideful, but he wasn't overtly evil.

To me, it is like a palestinian father on his dying bed telling his sons at whatever the cost attack israel to the very end, full well knowing that they can not ever hope to succeed.

Fathers creating suicide/homocide bombers of their childern to me is unforgivable.

The kinslaying and the burning of the ships are not acts I would call good. I think Feanor was tainted. Just like Anakin.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf

To me, it is like a palestinian father on his dying bed telling his sons at whatever the cost attack israel to the very end, full well knowing that they can not ever hope to succeed.

No. Not the same at all. They had already sworn the damned oath, in front of the Valar no less. To abscond from it after his death at the hands of the Balrog would have just brought about more evil.

The kinslaying and the burning of the ships are not acts I would call good. I think Feanor was tainted. Just like Anakin.

Yes. In this I would agree. BUT, tainted due to his over-emotional, prideful ways, NOT because of some inherent evil within him.

[afro-elf]

Also I would say that his self centeredness was unparalelled say Morgoth.

He drove an entire nation and his children to doom for is own reasons. I would not call that good.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Also I would say that his self centeredness was unparalelled say Morgoth.

He drove an entire nation and his children to doom for is own reasons. I would not call that good.

Tsk. He was not the only factor.

[afro-elf]

No. Not the same at all. They had already sworn the damned oath, in front of the Valar no less. To abscond from it after his death at the hands of the Balrog would have just brought about more evil.


How would it bring more evil? To use a christian/moslem example. If I swear an oath before God in to pursue some mad quest that will doom a nation and then I repent. How does that bring about more evil?

[afro-elf]

Tsk. He was not the only factor.

If it were not for him they would not have forsaken Aman

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by afro-elf


If it were not for him they would not have forsaken Aman But then we could say that if it were not for Morgoth bringing lies between the Noldor and poisoning their minds against the Valar, none of this would have happened.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf
He went to ME because of the Silmarils, and because he was angry with the Valar. His rebellion against the Valar was caused mostly by his rage at Melkor, and that Melkor was once a Valar. So why would have gone to ME otherwise?


YES, but who made the Silmarils? If he hadn't made them, his so-called "taint" would have manifested in other ways. Perhaps unveiling a resentment towards the Valar in Valinor... this could have caused Feanor to stage a rebellion of sorts.

If it were not for him they would not have forsaken Aman

And if it weren't for Melkor...

And if it weren't for Eru...


Cyclic reasoning at best.

[afro-elf]

Bop thanks for the challenge I haven't had this much fun since the anti-theist thread.

You Jar Jar lovin, Christian, goddess of sheep of third rate wool:p :p :p :D :D

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

But they chose to go with him and forsake Aman.

I would also agree that he was tainted, but I agree with BoP. He was too driven by his pride and his emotions, but he was not inherently evil.

He held his sons to an oath they swore in front of the Valar. And what would have happened if he had released them from their oath?

[afro-elf]

But then we could say that if it were not for Morgoth bringing lies between the Noldor and poisoning their minds against the Valar, none of this would have happened.

Cyclic reasoning at best.

Yet it WAS his personal choices that doomed them and i don't see how repentence would have caused more evil.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Bop thanks for the challenge I haven't had this much fun since the anti-theist thread.

You Jar Jar lovin, Christian, goddess of sheep of third rate wool:p :p :p :D :D

Why don't you bring your nubian third rate a$$ over here and say that?

And Jar Jar rules. :p

Later edit: Oh, and Christian?!
*Scandalised look*

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf


Yet it WAS his personal choices that doomed them and i don't see how repentence would have caused more evil.

Yes. But an oath was sworn before the valar. To break your word on an oath... well...

Later edit: And you could almost argue that by keeping the oath instead of reneging, that he was biding by what little "good" was in him...


BoP: Kicking Nubian a$$ since the event of flatulence.

[afro-elf]

Why don't you bring your nubian third rate a$$ over here and say that?

Hey My Nubian a$$ is top notch.

and to through you off i as use my subtle arts to hit the libidious parts of your mind

Look there's an CHAIR


Does anyone think that unrestrained pride is a taint.


But they chose to go with him and forsake Aman. t

hey were swayed by his prodigious talents

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by afro-elf


Yet it WAS his personal choices that doomed them and i don't see how repentence would have caused more evil. Was it not their choice to follow him willingly? Remember, not all the Noldor went to Middle-earth, and not all that did go followed Feanor. Also, the Oath of Feanor did not doom the nation of the Noldor. All were wrapped up in the Doom of Mandos though, but they did not realize that.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Look there's an CHAIR

WHERE?! :eek:

Does anyone think that unrestrained pride is a taint.

Pride brings up an interesting question. Why did Eru grant him the so-called talents to be prideful about? He must have forseen the events that logically follow giving a male such a big head...

[afro-elf]

And you could almost argue that by keeping the oath instead of reneging, that he was biding by what little "good" was in him...



I don't know about that. That is really pushing it. I don't see the Valar or Eru punishing Him or the Noldar for repenting. That would be cruel. perhaps a pentence of some kind. But I think that would have been the greatest act of kindness I ME. If they had repented and were for forgiven.


BUT still what GREATER evil would have arisen?

Oh that was KICKING, I that was something else:D



Was it not their choice to follow him willingly? Remember, not all the Noldor went to Middle-earth, and not all that did go followed Feanor. Also, the Oath of Feanor did not doom the nation of the Noldor. All were wrapped up in the Doom of Mandos though, but they did not realize that.


We ARE starting to go in cirlces here.

I stick to the repentence and feanor is an !@#$%^&*

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
I don't know about that. That is really pushing it. I don't see the Valar or Eru punishing Him or the Noldar for repenting. That would be cruel. perhaps a pentence of some kind. But I think that would have been the greatest act of kindness I ME. If they had repented and were for forgiven.


Yes, but the first sin had already been commited in the "garden of eden" (CALL ME A CHRISTIAN WILL YOU, YOU NUBIAN SON OF A BOOGER?!), with the burning of the ships (not just any ships, but the finest fleet to ever be built - akin to the silmarils), plus the spilling of blood in Valinor. That oath is as binding as the events that followed. If he repented the oath, then those people really would have died in vain.

We ARE starting to go in cirlces here.

And I have to say here that the Noldor willingly followed him. It was not just Feanor's charisma that caused this "rebellion".

[afro-elf]

Pride brings up an interesting question. Why did Eru grant him the so-called talents to be prideful about? He must have forseen the events that logically follow giving a male such a big head...


AAAARRRGGGGHHH!!! Theology has come run for your lives!:eek: :eek: :eek:


OSSE directly served Morgoth and was forgiven.

It seems that Tolkien considered pride to be the chief sin in his world.

As for theology well that's always precarious ground for logic.

I guess you would have formed the simarils into 3 great chairs and would have lead the sheep far afield.

[afro-elf]

If he repented the oath, then those people really would have died in vain.

Who would have died in vain? The Teleri or the Feanoreans or both?


But repentence would have stop future pain and suffereing in all those First Age wars.

I'm still failing to so see how repentence would have been worse.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
AAAARRRGGGGHHH!!! Theology has come run for your lives!:eek: :eek: :eek:

Quit tarring me with that brush, you nubian fiend. That's not the droid I was looking for.

I just meant, why give Feanor the skills in the first place to enable such power? Some of it was free will granted, (if you believe that there is such thing as free will), BUT he was DESIGNED. His flaws are Eru's flaws.

It seems that Tolkien considered pride to be the chief sin in his world.

Yes. Morgoth being the Father of Pride... :rolleyes:

As for theology well that's always precarious ground for logic.

Indeed it is. But when in Rome...

I guess you would have formed the simarils into 3 great chairs and would have lead the sheep far afield.

I majored in "leading fools astray" 101. :p

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Feanor was not evil, he just had his faults, same as everyone else. He just let his faults cause a LOT of trouble. He's still not a 'villain.'

Again, what precisely would have happened if they had repented? First, both the Teleri and the Noldor would have died in vain. . .

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Who would have died in vain? The Teleri or the Feanoreans or both?

Both. :rolleyes:


But repentence would have stop future pain and suffereing in all those First Age wars.

Would it have? I doubt it. Remember a lot of the rifts were not caused by the oath, but by the spilling of blood.

I'm still failing to so see how repentence would have been worse.

He swore an oath. Morgoth had the Silmarils. 'Nuff said. You want that they should have left the Silmarils in HIS keeping?!

[afro-elf]

And I have to say here that the Noldor willingly followed him. It was not just Feanor's charisma that caused this "rebellion".

Could that have been held under the power of his voice? Ala Saruman?

( gotta reread the Sil again)



I just meant, why give Feanor the skills in the first place to enable such power? Some of it was free will granted, (if you believe that there is such thing as free will), BUT he was DESIGNED. His flaws are Eru's flaws.

Its the if Eru was good, all knowing, and all powerful how/why did he blah blah blah...

I'm tired of that battle. I need reprieve from it.I majored in "leading fools astray" 101.

Yes master. We are the sheep of the Beard.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Maybe Eru knew what was going to happen all along and didn't stop it because that is just what is supposed to happen. Depressing thought, eh? :D

[BeardofPants]

Maybe Eru knew what was going to happen all along and didn't stop it because that is just what is supposed to happen. Depressing thought, eh?

Well, when you create free will, you create all sorts of arena amusements...

Could that have been held under the power of his voice? Ala Saruman?

I don't think so...
He was charasmatic, but that's about as far as I'd swing it.

Its the if Eru was good, all knowing, and all powerful how/why did he blah blah blah...

I'm tired of that battle. I need reprieve from it.

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

[afro-elf]

What is it with them dying in vain.

If someone is murdered and you repent what does that have to do with someone dying in vain.


I don't follow the logic here. If you did a bad deed how is continuing along that path justifying anything.


So if Anakin repented his slaying of the sand people how does that make the death in vain? Its better for him to continue down the path to the dark side?

He swore an oath. Morgoth had the Silmarils. 'Nuff said. You want that they should have left the Silmarils in HIS keeping?!

The Valar thought otherswise

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
What is it with them dying in vain.

If someone is murdered and you repent what does that have to do with someone dying in vain.

I just threw that in for fun.
The point is that regardless of whether he repented the oath or not, the damage was done, and the "seeds of mistrust sown."

The Valar thought otherswise

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

[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? :p

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? :eek: ) 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 :eek:

[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? :p :mad:

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? :p

[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. :rolleyes:

I think we have truce


Oh? So you admit I'm right then? :p

[Andúril]

BoP:
Cute all over.All over? ;)

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Anduril
All over? ;)

Well... apart from the hairy toes. :rolleyes:

[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? :eek:

[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.

[afro-elf]

How can purposely abandoning your kin on the grinding ice AND burning the ships afterwards.


Do you know how long he left them to tread to ME?
27 YEARS on the grinding ice.

That was intentional NOT a momentary lapse of reason.

[Blackheart]

Yes. I think having to go out of the way just to extend excuses to Feanor for his behavior sort of confirms the fact that he's a villian.

You don't really need contorted ethics to excuse people who aren't villians.

[BeardofPants]

No. He wasn't irredeemably evil. For a start, his motives were completely different from Hitler and Morgoth. He was not after domination, nor subjucation: he was filfulling that damned oath of his.

Yes, the kin-slaying and the burning of the ships was a horrid act, BUT at that point it was due to an irrationality, not an inherent evil-ness. Remember that his mother put all that power into him, and then he put all that power into the silmarils. Somewhere in that transaction, something went horribly wrong, and rendered him a few sandwiches short of a picnic. This doesn't make him evil. Or even villainous.

[Captain Stern]

Originaly posted by Afro-elf: How can purposely abandoning your kin on the grinding ice AND burning the ships afterwards.

Do you know how long he left them to tread to ME?
27 YEARS on the grinding ice.

That was intentional NOT a momentary lapse of reason.

I don't think Feanor expected them to attempt the crossing to Middle Earth. If you'll read the book again, it's quite clear that it was his hope that Fingolfin and his host return to Valinor in shame, I'm sure you'll agree that Feanor would get a kick out of that ;)

Moving on, I don't think that saying 'Feanor let his pride take over' is very appropriate. That would suggest that Feanor knew that he had no chance of reclaiming the silmarils and destroying Morgoth, and that he carried on regardless because of his pride. That simply wasn't the case, Feanor fully believed he could do these things, it wasn't untill he lay dying staring at the slopes of Thangorodrim that he realised he wasn't invincible.

Originally posted by Beard of Pants: Remember that his mother put all that power into him

I don't think it says anywhere that that is the reason why Feanor was so great, though I do realise Elf women could do such a thing. If it was that easy to breed greatness, then wouldn't there be many elves as great as Feanor? That's too simple and too mundane an explanation considering the mythical nature of Tolkien's world in my oppinion.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Captain Stern


That's too simple and too mundane an explanation considering the mythical nature of Tolkien's world in my oppinion.

Okay, yeah. Probably. Blame the mid-morning, I just woke up, and my eyes are crusty... :rolleyes:

However, she certainly did something different, because she crawled off and died from it. This coming from a woman that was supposedly of an immortal race.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Alright, he did not let his pride take over, but he did not stop to think rationally and therefore believed in his cause, and believed he could reclaim the Silmarils. Which is actully another way of saying he was overprideful.

Since when does pride alone make a villain? He made mistakes, he did not believe Fingolfin would attempt to cross the grinding ice, the kinslaying was. . .okay, that part was truly horrible, but he was not stopping to think. On the other hand, Morgoth, and Hitler, thought out their plans. They knew what they were doing. Feanor never once planned on slaying the Teleri.

[Captain Stern]

However, she certainly did something different, because she crawled off and died from it.

I don't think she had much of a choice in the matter. Giving birth to one such as Feanor certainly took its toll on Miriel, and she chose not to fight very hard to live after the ordeal.

[Tar-Elendil]

she chose to leave the world. she chose to die.
she could have found healing in Lorien but she chose not to.

[Captain Stern]

Originally posted by Eruviel Greenleaf: Alright, he did not let his pride take over, but he did not stop to think rationally and therefore believed in his cause, and believed he could reclaim the Silmarils. Which is actully another way of saying he was overprideful.

The thing is, Feanor had never been humbled. There was no elf in the Blessed Realm that could match him in any feat, and he knew for certain that he surpassed even the Valar in certain things (namely craftmanship) while other things remained untested between himself and the Ainur. He had certainly never fought a Vala or a Maia, so he had no idea of his limits. To such an individual, wouldn't pride be an alien concept? (Rhetorical question)

So in conclusion, I'd say he was certainly rash (to the extreme) and over-confident in his abilities, but not neccessarily prideful.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

True, he did not have much competition for 'greatest' in many things. You are right, he was never tested to the extent of his abilities (until he met the balrogs. . .) but would that not be a source of pride?

Anyway, yes, he was extremely rash and over-confident. Does that make him a villain? I think not.

[Captain Stern]

I never said I thought he was a villain ;)

I'll certainly get back to with my oppinion on that, once I've gathered my thoughts :)

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by Captain Stern
I never said I thought he was a villain ;)

I'll certainly get back to with my oppinion on that, once I've gathered my thoughts :)

I never said you did think so...I just added that on there for all those people who think he is ;)

I await your opinion :D

[Sister Golden Hair]

Like I said before, I think a good term for Feanor is the "twisted good". To describe and debate his virtues, along with his draw backs could be quite a challenge. afro-elf, I think you are being a bit hard on the character, but there are many things to consider with this one. A little research might go along way for both pro and con and the in-between.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

"Twisted good." It works, I think, in his case :)

*goes to finish Sil. and read it again, due to SGH's suggestion about research*

[afro-elf]

If Feanor was a leader of a nation today, I think that he would be guilty by the world court.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by afro-elf
If Feanor was a leader of a nation today, I think that he would be guilty by the world court.

If Feanor was a leader of a nation today, things would have gone quite differently. I still believe you are being too harsh in your judgement of him. He had his problems, he made his mistakes, but he was not evil.

[BeardofPants]

If Feanor was a leader of a nation today, I think that he would be guilty by the world court.

Absolutely. However. Would this make him evil? Consider: America has been tried, and found guilty of this as well. Does this make the American state evil? No.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Does this make the American state evil? No.
That's debatable ;)

[afro-elf]

I'm him not his nation. Do you consider Milosovietch (sp?) to a god guy?


My only point being here is that Feanor was not a GOOD guy. That's all I've been trying to say.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Well, Feanor wasn't perfect, that's for sure. But I wouldn't condemn him to the label of 'villain,' for his mistakes. No one is without mistakes, he just made too many of them. That doesn't mean he was not good at heart.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
I'm him not his nation. Do you consider Milosovietch (sp?) to a god guy?

No. Ask a silly question. :rolleyes:


My only point being here is that Feanor was not a GOOD guy. That's all I've been trying to say.

Lets be picky shall we?

You've been saying that he is evil. A villain. In no previous argument have you been saying that he is merely, "not a good guy". This statement I DO agree with. He wasn't a good guy. BUT he's not a completely evil guy either. Which is what you HAVE been saying.

[afro-elf]

I don't think Feanor expected them to attempt the crossing to Middle Earth. If you'll read the book again, it's quite clear that it was his hope that Fingolfin and his host return to Valinor in shame, I'm sure you'll agree that Feanor would get a kick out of that

I reread the passage and it still does not allievate from the task. It was done out of malice.

The words used by Tolkien at the kinslaying "wickedly killed" and of the burning of the ships " betrayal"

He's murderous, trecherous, mego-manic. I don't find him to me a noble character.

The attributes that I would use to descibe a good person seem to be QUITE lacking in him.

[afro-elf]

Sorry that should have been:


I meant him not his nation do you consider SM a GOOD guy

I said VILLIAN. I don't THINK i EVER said EVIL.


Denethor is a villian, 1/2 the sons of Feanor are villians, the dunlandings were villians, the haradrim were villians but are they evil no.


IF you can SHOW were I said evil i will recant

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I think we need a definition of 'villain' that we all agree to. What exactly do you mean by 'villain,' A-E? Because I'm thinking we have different definitions.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
IF you can SHOW were I said evil i will recant

Nope. Too lazy. :p

And you probably didn't. Maybe it was someone else... :rolleyes:

[afro-elf]

In the first dictionary I grabbed it says: a person who is guilty of or capable of great wickedness

That to me describes Feanor.

[BeardofPants]

Quoted by afro-elf
How would it bring more evil? To use a christian/moslem example. If I swear an oath before God in to pursue some mad quest that will doom a nation and then I repent. How does that bring about more evil?

Okay. You implied evil in this statement.

You also called him a @#$@##%#@ or something or other... :D

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I would say a villain is a person guilty or capable of great wickedness, who comitted said wickedness with malicious intent. Most of what Feanor did was not with malicious intent. I'd say the one thing that would really count is the burning of the ships at Losgar, and I think I he did that thinking Fingolfin would return to Valinor. I don't think he wanted to cause the deaths of so many of his kinsmen.

[afro-elf]

Okay. You implied evil in this statement.

an evil action


I don't think he wanted to cause the deaths of so many of his kinsmen.


Many had died even before he sailed away. There is no reason to think that more would not.

You also called him a @#$@##%#@ or something or other...


I called you a christian too :D :p

* quickly points to a chair and clandestinely slips away*

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Many had died even before he sailed away. There is no reason to think that more would not.


He never wanted all those people to die, or at least I believe he did not. And he was not thinking rationally, not thinking about the many more deaths he would cause. The case of a distracted moment--er, many moments, does not make someone a villain.

[BeardofPants]

[an evil action

Which implies an evil subject...



I called you a christian too

You geriatric nubian! :p

* quickly points to a chair and clandestinely slips away*

Would you STOP that?!

*Points out Thai girl and runs away*

[afro-elf]

He never wanted all those people to die, or at least I believe he did not. And he was not thinking rationally, not thinking about the many more deaths he would cause. The case of a distracted moment--er, many moments, does not make someone a villain

He intentionally burned the ships as an act of betrayal. Tolkien used that word not me. He was well aware of what he was doing. He was not in a fit of rage. It was a cold hearted decision.

Which implies an evil subject

Not. Maglor and Maedhos committed evil acts but I think they are the most noble of the sons of Feanor for they did many good things. Feanor and his others sons that start with the letter C are ignoble for the most part.


Turin, Daeron, Thingol, also did some fairly foul things but I would not say they are evil subjects.

Eol was also tainted .

I;ll trap us both a thai girl in a chair with marmite ( what the hell is that anyway)

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Not. Maglor and Maedhos committed evil acts but I think they are the most noble of the sons of Feanor for they did many good things. Feanor and his others sons that start with the letter C are ignoble for the most part.

Okay. I concede your point, Mr logical typo inflictor.

Upon reflection, it was the evil Blackheart that mentioned the "e" word...

... marmite ( what the hell is that anyway)

It's a yeast spread. No. Really. It is.

[afro-elf]

It's a yeast spread. No. Really. It is. :eek: :eek: :eek:

[Blackheart]

Because he is evil. Lets not beat around the bush here. He broke a ban on weapons, he threatened his brother with a sword, he took an oath which he knew would sunder his allegience, he knew that the task would be dangerous so he determined to lead away his nation, both to fulfil his own selfish ends AND diminish the glory of Aman, He murdered his kinsmen (or at least incited it) He betrayed and abandoned his kinsman to suffer for decades in a hostile environment, causing many of their deaths, and in the very end he was unrepentant about the magnitude of his own stupidity, and cursed his own sons to follow the path to destruction.

Most of the horrible things he did were directed at his OWN KIN. Now just what the hell do you think an individual like that would do to you, if you had something he wanted? Or if you even irritated him.

And you don't think he's evil? Well hell! In that case, invite me over for lunch!

[Sister Golden Hair]

The Silmarillion does not say that it was Feanor's hope that Fingolfin and his people would return to Aman in shame. It just states the two obvious choices that Fingolfin and his people had after the burning of the ships and that was to return to Aman in shame, or to attempt the crossing if the Ice, and crossing the Ice was the choice that Fingolfin made, not Feanor. The Sil says something like: (Now Fingolfin wished more than ever to come by some way to Middle-earth and meet Feanoragain.) Feanor was not a good guy, but I would like to point out that Fingolfin was not blameless in the fate of the Noldor, and was capable of being prideful as well.

[afro-elf]

The Silmarillion does not say that it was Feanor's hope that Fingolfin and his people would return to Aman in shame.

In the flight of the Noldor it says SOMETHING like:

feanor lauaghed as one fey" none and none, no ship will be sent back. let those who curse me curse me still. what I have left behind is naught but useless baggage and no loss. Let them whine their way back to the cages of the noldor"

it seems to me that he wanted them to turn back in shame.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Considering his attitude, I don't think he really cared what they did.

[afro-elf]

Sounds good to me.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I still say he wasn't evil. He did some pretty horrible things, but I don't think he planned out carefully how to cause a lot of trouble and death. He followed his feelings and his pride, and he got a bit...okay, very. . .out of control, one might say, and he had a few moments which might be considered pretty evil except that he didn't really want to cause death and destruction, he merely had his goals and was going to (in his mind) reach them. I'm not saying he was good, per se, but I don't think he was evil, either.

And I still don't think he thought Fingolfin would actually cross over to Middle Earth. He may not have really cared what they did, but I'm sure he didn't want so many of them to die...or would not have if he had stopped to think about it. Which he never did.

[BeardofPants]

e·vil Pronunciation Key (vl)
adj. e·vil·er, e·vil·est

1. Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
2. Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet.
3. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens.
4. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation.
5. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper.


n.

1. The quality of being morally bad or wrong; wickedness.
2. That which causes harm, misfortune, or destruction: a leader's power to do both good and evil.
3. An evil force, power, or personification.
4. Something that is a cause or source of suffering, injury, or destruction: the social evils of poverty and injustice.


Okay, looking up the definition of "evil" it appears that Feanor DOES fit the bill... dammit.

But I STILL say that he wasn't on par with Morgoth or Hitler. Nor was he completely irredeemable. I think the possibility of redemption WAS there.

[Wayfarer]

Feanor was a pretty nasty guy, and certainly I would call him evil, but was he a villain?

I would say no. In a literary sense, he's more an antihero. He's one of the main protagonists, but he's flawed, and rather unheroic.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Okay. Thanks for the definition, BoP.

Here's my conclusion, from the evidence presented. . .

Feanor was very much flawed, mostly by his pride and tendency to follow only his emotions, especially anger and jealousy, and he did things that were certainly evil. BUT, he was not irredeamable, and certainly not anywhere near where Morgoth or Hitler or any of the other 'super-villains,' historical, real, or fictional. So basically I agree with BeardofPants.

[Blackheart]

Ha! He was evil! Don't tell me I don't know evil when I see it!

He comes to the meetings!

As for irredeemable, well there was hope even for poor Smeagol. Next you're going to be telling me he wasn't evil, he was just a poor misunderstood victim.

:rolleyes:

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Blackheart
Next you're going to be telling me he wasn't evil, he was just a poor misunderstood victim.

:rolleyes:

Yeah, yeah. :rolleyes:

And he was a poor misunderstood victim. :p

[Blackheart]

He was a poor misunderstood evil little canibalistic bastard you mean. :p

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Blackheart
He was a poor misunderstood evil little canibalistic bastard you mean. :p I don't think he was a canibal was he?:D

[afro-elf]

Maybe he just needed to get in touch with his inner child.

[Blackheart]

Cannibal. :mad:

He would have eaten Bilbo.

Supposedly hobbits were a type of man.

He did eat babies. Unless you discount the statement about the slipping in through windows to rob cradles.

Close enough for me.

[afro-elf]

maybe he ate his inner child

[BeardofPants]

He was a poor misunderstood evil little canibalistic bastard you mean. :p

And what's wrong with that? :p

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Gollum had been horribly corrupted by the Ring. It was the Ring, not Gollum himself...wait, he did kill his cousin...I suppose he just was a misunderstood, neglected child, eh? :rolleyes: :)

[Gemini]

Maybe he just wasnt hugged enough as a child, eh? :rolleyes:

I think he was just corrupted by the ring. BLAME IT ON THE RINGS MAKER!!! not on the rings bearer :D

[Blackheart]

Err, with that line of reasoning, I can blame the manufacturer of Alcohol any time I get in a car drunk and run over a child...

[Gemini]

that you could. And I could also blame ADHD on caffine. But I dont, so I wont. We arent talking about Alcohol though (and I hope you havent run over any little children lately!) :rolleyes:

[Blackheart]

The point is, when you begin to blame an individual's behavior on a substance or influence, you have removed responsibility from that individual.

And doing so makes it a viable excuse for any similar situation.

Therefore Sauron is a complete innocent, because he was seduced and corrupted by Melkor.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Gemini
(and I hope you havent run over any little children lately!) :rolleyes:

Ah dammit! :( :p

He's got a point, you know...

... Better fling some mud at the cocky bugger! :rolleyes:

[Blackheart]

Mud?

Mud flinging women and a cocky bastard?

What have I gotten myself into? :eek:

I can see it now, I was corrupted by the influence of the mudflinging women... :rolleyes:

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

How about this?

Gollum/Smeagol was far from being without blame for his actions, but much was either the combined effect of the Ring, and therefore Sauron, or just the Ring, and therefore Sauron. So he's not pure and innocent excepting the corruption of the Ring, but it's not all his fault either. Just partly.

I'll fling mud at people! :D

[Sister Golden Hair]

Hey guys, this is the Silmarillion forum, and the thread is about Feanor. Let's get back on topic.:)

[Blackheart]

Gee, you could say the same thing about morgoth and sauron.

It relates back to Feanor anyway. Being "corrupted" doesn't absolve someone of responsibility for their actions.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Blackheart
Being "corrupted" doesn't absolve someone of responsibility for their actions.

No, being "corrupted" doesn't absolve Feanor (et al) of his responsibility. BUT, corruption IS a good excuse to pass the buck, or at least share the blame with someone.:rolleyes: Anyone want to corrupt me? :p

And just to reiterate, NO I do not think that Feanor is a villain. A corrupted evil bugger maybe, but not a villain. It's not like he had any world domination plans... really. :rolleyes:

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I would agree with corrupted bugger, but I would take the evil out. Evil implies villain.

[BeardofPants]

...but I would take the evil out. Evil implies villain.

2. That which causes harm, misfortune, or destruction: a leader's power to do both good and evil.

Someone who is of an evil leaning, does not necessarily have to be a villain. I'm basing my classification of Feanor's evil mainly on the above definition.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Okay, second definition then. Reminds me of studying for the SAT's :rolleyes:

[Willow Oran]

I never liked Feanor as a character but I wouldn't call him evil. I think he's extremely corrupted, homicidally insane, overly prideful, and a general nusiance to everybody around him. But if he had repented I think the valar would have forgiven him. He was not evil to the point of being irredeemable, however, it would have taken a long time before he had completely atoned for all the bad things he did. As for the oath he and his sons swore. He might not have had the power to release them from it. But he could have made them swear a stronger oath to repent of their previous oath. Then they would have had to break the first one in order to avoid being oath breakers. That idea probably makes about as much sense as adopting a cat in order to keep other cats out of the garden does, but it's sort of feasible.

[Ñólendil]

I never liked Feanor as a character but I wouldn't call him evil. I think he's extremely corrupted, homicidally insane, overly prideful, and a general nusiance to everybody around him.

I would define that as evil. Not completely evil (can anyone be completely evil, that began untainted?), but evil nonetheless: morally corrupt to an extreme degree

[Sister Golden Hair]

Feanor was not evil. Feanor was obssessed.

From the Peoples of Middle-earth:

Feanor loved his mother dearly, except in obstinancy their characters were widely different. He was not gentle. He was proud and hot tempered, and opposition to his will he met not with the quiet steadfastness of his mother but with fierce resentment. He was restless in mind and body, though like Miriel he could become wholly absorbed in work of the finest skill of hand, but he left many things unfinished. Feanaro was his mother-name, which Miriel gave him in recognition of his impetuous charater (it meant 'spirit of fire'). While she lived she did much with gentle counsel to soften and restrain him. Her death was a lasting grief to Feanor, and both directly and by its further consequences a main cause of his later disastrous influence on the history of the Noldor.

[Archbob the Elder]

Feanor was not evil, but his pride destroyed him and many of the Nolder.

[Ñólendil]

One may be evil and obsessed at the same time. The spirit of Faenor was in fact so evil that Manwe withheld his judgement of the man after his death and passed on his grave case to the One. Faenor was a corrupt person, spiritually. There's no two ways about it. He was not always so, but noone is.

[Sister Golden Hair]

From the Peoples of Middle-earth:

Feanor loved his mother dearly, except in obstinancy their characters were widely different. He was not gentle. He was proud and hot tempered, and opposition to his will he met not with the quiet steadfastness of his mother but with fierce resentment. He was restless in mind and body, though like Miriel he could become wholly absorbed in work of the finest skill of hand, but he left many things unfinished. Feanaro was his mother-name, which Miriel gave him in recognition of his impetuous charater (it meant 'spirit of fire'). While she lived she did much with gentle counsel to soften and restrain him. Her death was a lasting grief to Feanor, and both directly and by its further consequences a main cause of his later disastrous influence on the history of the Noldor.

[Blackheart]

Sigh.

If my mommy died on me, some evil bastard stole my toys and whacked my dad and I resolved to quest until I got some justice it's one thing.

If I then however use my skills to trick and pervert people into helping me, because of my own selfish ends, and for spite, then that approaches evil.

If I maroon the malcontents, putting them at risk, and perhaps even hoping they will die, that's evil.

If I then bequeth my sins to my children, and allow them no absolution, that's pretty hideous.

I don't care what the arguments for extenuating circumstances are, both his actions and his motivations fall under the heading of evil.

[Sister Golden Hair]

I think prideful, warped, and misguided are more fiting then evil.

[Blackheart]

That just tells us how he is.

Unfortunately, it tells us nothing about his actions.

His actions are what count. I could kill you all out of love, but does that matter one whit?

[Ñólendil]

Thank you, Xandre.

[Urksnik the Sleek]

I would say that Feanor was proud, greedy, and selfish, all characteristics which caused his ultimate corruption.
You could blame Morgoth for attacking the trees and destroying their light, but he didn't stop Feanor from surrendering the silmarils to Yavanna to heal the trees. That was purely Feanor's own decision. He placed love of objects above love of people.
there is also the factor the Feanor never trusted Morgoth, but was still influenced sufficiently by his lies that his actions were, to an extent based on those lies.
I would say that while influcenced by Morgoth, Feanor was ultimately responsible for his own downfall, and to a large extent the downfall of the Noldor.

[Nilvasaien]

Urksnik the Sleek posted:

"I would say that Feanor was proud, greedy, and selfish, all characteristics which caused his ultimate corruption.
You could blame Morgoth for attacking the trees and destroying their light, but he didn't stop Feanor from surrendering the silmarils to Yavanna to heal the trees. That was purely Feanor's own decision. He placed love of objects above love of people.
there is also the factor the Feanor never trusted Morgoth, but was still influenced sufficiently by his lies that his actions were, to an extent based on those lies.
I would say that while influcenced by Morgoth, Feanor was ultimately responsible for his own downfall, and to a large extent the downfall of the Noldor."

Very well stated; I couldn't agree more. I think Melkor and Feanor were much more alike in character than either would care to admit. Both wanted to be their "father's" one-and-only. Both put their own selfish wants and needs before that of the greater good. And both were ultimately undone by their deeds.

[Christiana]

the Sim:

...Finwe,nor from his heart;and of all whom he loved had ever the chief share of his thought.

and:...for none of the Eldalie ever hated Melkor more than Feanor son of Finwe,who first named him Morogoth;and snared though he was in the webs of Melkor's malice against the Valar he held no converse with him and took no counsel with him.

[Blackheart]

Just because he never took counsel (but where did he learn to forge swords one wonders) doesn't mean he didn't fall whole heartedly into being manipulated.

Besides. Actions speak louder than words, and his actions were quite plainly evil on several occasions.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Selfish and prideful, perhaps. Certainly leading to ill. But evil?

[Ñólendil]

I think so. Definitely wicked. Selfish, prideful, bitter, malicious, fell, fey and corrupt.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

I wouldn't agree to evil and corrupt. But I should look up the definitions of the words. To me evil would imply having motives besides being far too prideful, selfish and bitter. And he did have good cause for his bitterness. And pride...I mean, he did make the Silmarils, after all...

[afro-elf]

Think if he had done his deeds to you. How would you feel?

[BeardofPants]

Were his actions of an evil nature? Undoubtedly. Look up the definition in the dictionary, and tell me you can't apply it to him. Remember the kinslaying, and the oath that he bound his children to. However, I don't think that he is a villain. Not in the true sense of the word. Now Morgoth was a villain. Saruman was a villain. Sauron was a villain. What did they have in common? Domination, and subjucation. Was this Feanors ambition? Not as far as I can see.

[Blackheart]

Err- yes. Feanor definatly had an urge to dominate. Remember the urge for power, and the desire for realms in middle earth?

It's a likely factor in the burning of the ships.

Villain. Evil.

Bang the gavel.

[afro-elf]

Are those the only criteria for a villian?

vil·lain Pronunciation Key (vln)
n.
A wicked or evil person; a scoundrel.
A dramatic or fictional character who is typically at odds with the hero.
(also vln, v-ln) Variant of villein.
Something said to be the cause of particular trouble or an evil: poverty, the villain in the increase of crime.
Obsolete. A peasant regarded as vile and brutish.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Okay...first definition, perhaps. Second? Definitely not.

[afro-elf]

BoP

Nice to see you fired up again.

[Blackheart]

Hey- isn't Melkor the hero? :confused:

[BeardofPants]

Right so it's settled then. Feanor. Evil. Eol. Misguided.

[Eruviel Greenleaf]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Right so it's settled then. Feanor. Evil. Eol. Misguided.

I don't think it's settled...

Feanor. Evil. (fine, I agree. Maybe that's why I liked him...(see sig. :D)) Eol. Evil.

[afro-elf]

They both would have serverd jail time.

Well, maybe not. If they were famous they probably would have gotten off.

[BeardofPants]

Well, it's not that simple.

Feanor is guilty of an evil action or two -- I don't necessarily think that this makes him an evil person.

And as far as I am concerned, comparing Feanor to Eol is like comparing apples and oranges.

[Artanis]

I think Feanor and Eol both became possessed. Feanor with his love for the Silmarils, Eol with his hate against the Noldor. Neither of them were in origin wicked.

And as far as I am concerned, comparing Feanor to Eol is like comparing apples and oranges.
Why? They were both Elves. They both had their freedom to choose between good and evil actions.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Well, it's not that simple.

Feanor is guilty of an evil action or two -- I don't necessarily think that this makes him an evil person.

And as far as I am concerned, comparing Feanor to Eol is like comparing apples and oranges. I have to agree with this. You know, neither one of these guys was Morgoth. Now that is evil.

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Artanis
Why? They were both Elves. They both had their freedom to choose between good and evil actions.

Lets see. How many people did Eol kill? And how many did Feanor kill? .... Oath? Kinslaying? :rolleyes:

[Artanis]

Oh I see. I misunderstood. :) I was thinking of logical comparativeness, you were thinking of the gravity of their evil actions.

But I agree with you and SGH. Feanor was responsible for evil deeds, but ne wasn't an evil person.

[afro-elf]

ARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BeardofPants]

Yep, they're all coming over to the dark side, A-E. :p

[Artanis]

Originally posted by afro-elf
ARRRGGGHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, I love you when you're angry, A-E! Very cute! :p

[Christiana]

sheesh what a load of spammers u guys are!:eek: :D i think Feanor was a snobby brat,but not a villian.

[BeardofPants]

Christiana, if you can't tell when a debate is going on, as opposed to spam, then buy a blasted dictionary. :rolleyes:

[Blackheart]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I have to agree with this. You know, neither one of these guys was Morgoth. Now that is evil.

Hey now! I was just.. err- I mean- he was just ... misunderstood...

I mean you wanted free will and all didn't you? :confused:

[BeardofPants]

No. We had it thrust upon us. :rolleyes:

[Blackheart]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
No. We had it thrust upon us. :rolleyes:

*leafs through manual*

Noooo....

Right here on pade 3278 it says that you can give up your free will to me at any time.

:D

[Christiana]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Christiana, if you can't tell when a debate is going on, as opposed to spam, then buy a blasted dictionary. :rolleyes:



*sighs*sarcasm

[BeardofPants]

Sure it was, honey. So are your sarcasm alarms going off yet? :rolleyes:

Anyway, back to topic... any takers?

Feanor was capable of evil actions: Does this necessarily transcend into him into an evil character?

[Sween]

Wars a messy business and one of the truths of life is we sometimes have to do great evil to bring about good? And sometimes doing what is good involves been evil.

Theres nothing wrong with having a few flaws it what makes us human (yes i know hes an elf) and to good you also have to be able to do evil and be ruthless and just not nice.

[Beruthiel]

I liked Feanor. At least he stood up for his own beliefs. (However tainted they were. ) He was so talented.... I especially like the descriptions of him as a spirit of fire. VERY cool. :cool:

[Blackheart]

Why yes, Feanor was a spirit of fire....

Saaaaayyyy... so was Melkor.

Do you think...

:D

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Blackheart
Why yes, Feanor was a spirit of fire....

Saaaaayyyy... so was Melkor.

Do you think...

:D No, that's what his name meant.:p

[Christiana]

he had a "fiery spirit" That doesnt make him a "spirit of fire":rolleyes:

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Christiana
he had a "fiery spirit" That doesnt make him a "spirit of fire":rolleyes: Exactly. And because of his firey spirit, his mother named him Feanor, which meant "spirit of fire"

[BeardofPants]

I see somebody's trying to stir up the crap again. ;)

Let's try this one more time. Feanor not evil. Morgoth evil. :p

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
I see somebody's trying to stir up the crap again. ;)

Let's try this one more time. Feanor not evil. Morgoth evil. :p Who me? Not me. You must be joking. I would never do that. I'm not that EVIL.:p :D

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I'm not that EVIL.:p :D

Are you sure you're not just a tiny bit villainous? :D

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by BeardofPants


Are you sure you're not just a tiny bit villainous? :D Hecks no. I am a total angel.;)

[Jador]

JEEZZE!!! I was gonna post an opinion in here but its just like getting caught in a crossfire.....:eek:

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Jador
JEEZZE!!! I was gonna post an opinion in here but its just like getting caught in a crossfire.....:eek: Ah c'mon now. Just having a little fun. I'll be good.:)

[Jador]

You sound just like Feanor! Ohh Yeah lets have a bit of fun guys,and go back to middle earth,all we have to do is slaughter yhe Telerie on the way..Then betray our kinsman...Ohh c'mon itll be a laugh!!!!
Sorry,just venting a bit of anger of my own...:D

Actually Feanor was awesome,the Jesus of the Elves!

[Sister Golden Hair]

Thanks Jador. I think I've just been insulted.:mad: :p :D

[BeardofPants]

Well, if you ARE like Feanor, then at the very least, it proves you're not evil.... just misunderstood. :p

[Sister Golden Hair]

That's it, misunderstood.;)

[Sister Golden Hair]

Ok, I just had a terrible thought that we are off topic and possibly spaming. Not me of course, but seriously we should get back on topic boys and girls. My fault, I know.:eek:

[Christiana]

tut tut tut.an admin spamming.*shakes finger*j/k! :D ;)

[Beruthiel]

I know you're all debating about Feanor being a spirit of "Fire" like a Balrog, but I don't think it's the same thing.
Tolkien writes that Elves are different from Men in that they have long lifespans, but their life forces slowly consume them from within, like a flame burning them from the inside out.

Right. Now here are the quotes about Feanor's spirit:

Feanor was the mightiest in skill of word and of hand, more learned than his brothers; his spirit burned as a flame.

Perhaps this refers to those who are like shining stars, as we say today - they are candles with flames at both ends, burning brighter than the rest of us, even though it may be for a shorter time.

But in the bearing of her son Miriel was consumed in spirit and body; and after his birth she yearned for release from the labour of living. And when she had named him, she said to Finwe: 'Never again shall I bear child; for strength that nourished the life of many has gone forth into Feanor.'

Okkaaaay... does that suggest that he has the life spirit and strength of many?

All his love he gave thereafter to his son; and Feanor grew swiftly, as if a secret fire were kindled within him.

That almost suggests that he had already the spirit and the fire of the Silmarils within him, even before he had created them.


For Feanor was driven by the fire of his own heart only,

Right, now it's a fire of the heart, like ambition.

And finally:

Then he died; but he had neither burial nor tomb, for so fiery was his spirit that as it sped his body fell to ash, and was borne away like smoke; and his likeness has never again appeared in Arda, neither has his spirit left the halls of Mandos.

Wow. So at least we know he did not reincarnate. It's interesting to note that Feanor is really the only Elf described as such.
So is he a spirit of fire, or are we talking totally metaphorically? Then how do we explain his death? What do you think?

[BeardofPants]

Well, we weren't really talking about that. BH brought it up to **** stir, and then we all went OT.

The actual debate that we're haggling over, is whether or not Feanor was evil. There is a camp that says, yes he was an evil blackguarde, so stop deluding yourselves. And then there are the ones who are right (namely me and a bunch of other people ;)), who are postulating that while Feanor commited some evil actions, this doesn't necessarily make him an evil person. He was just misunderstood. :p

[Beruthiel]

I think Feanor was greedy. I think that if he had not been spoiled by his father, he might have been a tenderer-hearted person. Perhaps that fire that blazed within him forced him to act brashly. THe fell words of Morgoth swayed him even though he saw thru his disguise. But by then it was too late. Acts had been done against his family, there were words spoken that were not thought about beforehand - fate also took part in this. It was a series of bad moves, all timed perfectly to guide poor Feanor into the trap of The Curse.

So I think he might have handled things a bit better, but I do not see that it would have caused a great change in the outcome of the Kinslaying.

[Blackheart]

Pffft.

You guys know that Melkor was the good guy.

Here were the nasty ol Valar locking all the elves up in Aman, so that they'd be overprotected wimpy Nancy elfs reading poetry and baking buns.

And It obviously offended Melkor's sensibilities, so he devised a plan to rescue some of them...

That whole thing with the Silmarils was just a misunderstanding, and anyway, you can't make an omelet without crushing a few heads... err eggs. I mean eggs...

[Christiana]

we all no an orcs standpoint.:D

[Blackheart]

Shhh. I'm in disguise

[Sheeana]

Hey, *bump* Feanor was just misunderstood - who's with me? :D :p

[Attalus]

AAARGH, an earlier Feanor debate, just when we had a stake through the heart of the earlier one. OK, I'll state my reactions after looking through this thread:
1. The difference between an evil person, man or elf, and a man or elf that does evil is an entirely false dichotomy. There is no such thing as a totally evil individual, as C.S. Lewis proved, or they would have no good qualities, such as intelligence, will, etc.
2. JRRT was a Roman Catholic, and that Church regards Pride as the worst of all sins. Period. Pride is the farthest thing from a good quality that you can get, and is not an excuse for evil actions, but rather the chief cause of them.
3. A villain is a character in a literary work that does evil things.
4. Feanor was directly and indirectly responsible for many evil actions, the Kinslaying, the abandonment of his brother's host, etc. He was therefore evil and a villain. Not in Melkor's or Sauron's league, but quite in Saruman's, I think.

[Arien the Maia]

Originally posted by Sheeana
Hey, *bump* Feanor was just misunderstood - who's with me? :D :p

Me!:)

[Attalus]

*beats head on computer desk*

[Blackheart]

Don't worry about it. He was a villain. He's sitting right here next to me in the villain's club.

Females don't want him to be a villain because they think he's cute, but you know how they are, they almost always wind up picking the wrong guy......

[Artanis]

Hehe - Blackheart you're wrong. We think he's cute because he's a villain. If that's what he is. :D

[Blackheart]

Bah. If that were so then all the women would think that I was cute, instead of merely ruggedly handsome...

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Blackheart
Don't worry about it. He was a villain. He's sitting right here next to me in the villain's club.

Females don't want him to be a villain because they think he's cute, but you know how they are, they almost always wind up picking the wrong guy......
That is soooooo not true. Feanor is a villian and he is evil. He is not cute. Finrod, now that's an Elf who's hot. *fans self with folder from her desk*

[Artanis]

Ruggedly handsome is also yummy. :D

Fëanor was not a villain to begin with, but he became one. You misled him, Blackheart. :D

[Blackheart]

:eek:

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Ruinel
Finrod, now that's an Elf who's hot. *fans self with folder from her desk* Finrod is boooooring. I'm more into the fierce type. :D

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Blackheart
:eek: Why so shocked Blackheart?. :D

[Blackheart]

I have to keep better track of my tentacles....

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Artanis


Fëanor was not a villain to begin with, but he became one. You misled him, Blackheart. :D "He was not evil to begin with. Even Sauron was not so." - Gandalf

[Sheeana]

Ah, so there you go then. You'll be agreeing with me then, on the misunderstood thing? :p

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Sheeana
Ah, so there you go then. You'll be agreeing with me then, on the misunderstood thing? :p Not in this life! If there is anything I cannot accuse Fëanor of, it is being misunderstood.

[Anglorfin]

In most stories the villian is the one that mostly follows his own wild passions with little regard to other people. But also great inventors, revolutionaries, and heroes have constantly gone against the grain and persisted in their own passions. I guess it all depends on where you stand. It's just a pity that Feanor's firey spirit was consuming itself with anger more than anything else at the end.

[Artanis]

Originally posted by Anglorfin
It's just a pity that Feanor's firey spirit was consuming itself with anger more than anything else at the end. Yes, it's a pity. Great potential, but directed and used the wrong way.

Attalus, are you comparing Fëanor to Sauron? :eek:

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Artanis

Attalus, are you comparing Fëanor to Sauron? :eek: Only in that they both caused much misery and death. On a rating thread on another Forum, we ended up rating Fëanor a Level 4 villain, with Sauron and Morgoth being Level 5, IIRC.