Unremarkablelunacy - Rather Quiet, But Rarely Concise - Tumblr Blog

Oooh, halls that imitate the heavens. The Golden Hall of Noontide. The Corridor of Dusk. The Treasure Chambers of Midnight.

Day 5: Stars Durin's Folk star lamps inspired by their architecture in the books (did you know that they like to carve their pillars in the shape of trees? )

Prompt list:

I know it's been floating around the web (not HER web, no) for a while, but it's still funny

Fëanor unilaterally decides that he is a member of the Fellowship. Attempts to dissuade him or leave him behind fail too.

He spends most of the journey to Moria disagreeing with everyone, especially Gandalf. He doesn't manage to usurp leadership (Aragorn and Frodo only trust Gandalf), but not for lack of trying. Boromir is impressed, and invites him to Gondor.

When he launches himself at the Balrog, Gandalf takes the opportunity to ditch him. "Don't worry about him, he'll be fine." It's truly unfortunate that when the combatants fall into the abyss, the Balrog snags Gandalf as well.

Fëanor refuses to die like this (not metal enough for him), so he manages to crawl his way out of Moria and tracks the Fellowship to Lothlórien. Once there, he demands to be shown immediately to the leaders of the realm.

As soon as Fëanor, Galadriel, and Celeborn set eyes on one another, the whole place explodes.

Fëanor: *waking up in a cold sweat* Mandos I need out and I need out now

Námo: ... why

Fëanor: My grandson gave my hammer to Sauron after taking out all of the gems and making magic rings

Námo: *scrambling* OH SHIT

Fëanor: I KNOW SO LET ME OUT

Námo: still no but OH SHIT

Hello, I really wanted your opinion on how Harry anger and mildly obssesion with goodness balance out

I mean, our boy spared Peter, but strangled Mundungus. He more often then not uses harmless spells, but I genualy think that he's willing to kill someone if the situation asks for it, like you mentioned before

It is kinda contradictory to me, it woud be nice to know you take on it

Okay, so first thing first, as someone who used to have anger issues, I just want to say that being an angry person ≠ being a bad person. Like, how angry you are is completely separate from how good you are. Emotions aren't necessarily tied to your moral compass.

The thing about anger and anger issues is that it's not something you control oftentimes. When you get really angry, like, properly angry, you become a spectator in your own body. You move and act out of anger, but it's not something you chose to do consciously you didn't plan it or decide upon it at any point. It just kinda happens. And it's a lot of really hard work for it not to happen once the issue is there.

As such, it happens that once you calm down, you might regret things you did in that burst of anger, but it's already done.

Harry's anger is shown like this sometimes, like something not fully under his control:

Harry was not aware of releasing George, all he knew was that a second later both of them were sprinting at Malfoy. He had completely forgotten the fact that all the teachers were watching: All he wanted to do was cause Malfoy as much pain as possible. With no time to draw out his wand, he merely drew back the fist clutching the Snitch and sank it as hard as he could into Malfoy’s stomach — “Harry! HARRY! GEORGE! NO!” He could hear girls’ voices screaming, Malfoy yelling, George swearing, a whistle blowing, and the bellowing of the crowd around him, but he did not care, not until somebody in the vicinity yelled “IMPEDIMENTA!” and only when he was knocked over backward by the force of the spell did he abandon the attempt to punch every inch of Malfoy he could reach. . . .

(OotP)

Anger management issues are issues with emotional regulation at the end of the day. The issue is with management, control, and regulation, where your emotions quite literally take over you. That's where phrases like "seeing red" come from. It's that all-encompassing anger that takes over, and that's the only thing you can see.

But Harry's anger isn't always like this. Sometimes his anger just pushes him to act on something he wants anyway, even when calmer:

Hatred rose in Harry such as he had never known before. He flung himself out from behind the fountain and bellowed “Crucio!” Bellatrix screamed. The spell had knocked her off her feet, but she did not writhe and shriek with pain as Neville had — she was already on her feet again, breathless, no longer laughing. Harry dodged behind the golden fountain again — her counterspell hit the head of the handsome wizard, which was blown off and landed twenty feet away, gouging long scratches into the wooden floor. “Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?” she yelled. She had abandoned her baby voice now. “You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain — to enjoy it — righteous anger won’t hurt me for long...”

(OotP)

Even when Harry's calm he thinks Bellatrix deserves torture or death. His anger in the above scene is defined well by Bellatrix. It's righteous anger. It's anger that doesn't push him out of control but propels him to act on something he already wanted to do. It's like an injection of nerves and courage, and not that same out-of-control feeling I mentioned earlier.

Now, Harry's "obsession with goodness" is completely separate from his anger.

What's important to note is what is the definition of good. Good is defined by Harry and the HP books as a whole as good = Just. Good in the HP books and according to Harry, is not some vague idea where everyone deserves mercy, it's a good where everyone gets what they deserve. Bad people have bad things happen to them, and good people have good things happen to them. It's about justice and righteousness.

Quirrell helped Voldemort, so he deserved to die in Harry's opinion.

well, unless you count Quirrell, and he got what he deserved seeing as he was working with Voldemort.

(HBP)

Stan Shunpike was under the imperius. He didn't choose to help Voldemort, he was innocent, so he didn't deserve to die in Harry's opinion.

I saw Stan Shunpike. ... You know, the bloke who was the conductor on the Knight Bus? And I tried to Disarm him instead of — well, he doesn’t know what he’s doing, does he? He must be Imperiused!

(DH)

And it makes sense. I mean, is it good that murderers and rapists go to prison? Absolutely. You need to punish bad deeds to stop bad people from hurting people, how that should be done isn't something I want to get into, but righteousness and justice include punishments for evil acts, and that's good. It's good murderers and other criminals can't just walk around and hurt people without consequences. A good person won't let a bad one hurt others, and for that, said good person needs to be willing to fight, and yes, hurt in self-defense or in defense of others.

And Harry believes in this kind of good. A good that is righteous and just. Harry doesn't think everyone deserves the same treatment. He'll treat you well if you deserve it.

“...It’s time you learned some respect!” “It’s time you earned it.” said Harry

(DH)

Harry's respect and kindness need to be earned. You need to deserve it. His scorn and hate, are similarly earned through your actions and what you say.

That being said, most people don't deserve death in Harry's book. His starting point is that you should be kept alive, and helped, and treated well. You need to actively do something to get on Harry's shitlist. Even Snape only got on Harry's shitlist after Snape mocked and ridiculed Harry in that first potions class.

In the scene with Mundungus, Harry is angry. He doesn't actually think Mundungus deserves death, some punishment, yes, but not death. He stole from Sirius, and he did a horrible thing (for Harry he did an awful disrespect to Sirius whom Harry is still grieving at that point), so the good thing would be him getting his comeuppance. But in that scene, I think there is a bit of this out-of-control anger I mentioned earlier, as I don't think a calm Harry would've strangled him in this way. Harry acted in anger and instinct, he wasn't rationalizing anything in that moment.

And regarding Pettigrew, Harry did want to kill him, he wished for him to die, to be punished, but he:

Was calmer by that point, he wasn't angry anymore so he didn't have the push of anger

He is compassionate. While he wants Peter dead, he doesn't want Lupin and Sirius to become killers because he cares about them, he doesn't want them to have to suffer through killing their ex-freind. But he wouldn't mind if Peter died to the dementors.

He is practical. He wants to bring Peter back to the castle and have him sent to Azkaban — which would allow Sirius to be exonerated. It would serve justice, it would be righteous. As Harry mentioned in the following quote, it'll be what he thinks Peter deserves:

“NO!” Harry yelled. He ran forward, placing himself in front of Pettigrew, facing the wands. “You can’t kill him,” he said breathlessly. “You can’t.” Black and Lupin both looked staggered. “Harry, this piece of vermin is the reason you have no parents,” Black snarled. “This cringing bit of filth would have seen you die too, without turning a hair. You heard him. His own stinking skin meant more to him than your whole family.” “I know,” Harry panted. “We’ll take him up to the castle. We’ll hand him over to the dementors. . . . He can go to Azkaban . . . but don’t kill him.” “Harry!” gasped Pettigrew, and he flung his arms around Harry’s knees. “You — thank you — it’s more than I deserve — thank you —” “Get off me,” Harry spat, throwing Pettigrew’s hands off him in disgust. “I’m not doing this for you. I’m doing it because — I don’t reckon my dad would’ve wanted them to become killers — just for you.” No one moved or made a sound except Pettigrew, whose breath was coming in wheezes as he clutched his chest. Black and Lupin were looking at each other. Then, with one movement, they lowered their wands. “You’re the only person who has the right to decide, Harry,” said Black. “But think . . . think what he did. . . .” “He can go to Azkaban,” Harry repeated. “If anyone deserves that place, he does. . . .”

(PoA)

But that good Harry believes in does allow for reform. It allows for forgiveness. Harry is a very forgiving person, he believes people can regret their past actions and change. He doesn't, for the most part, believe people are evil from birth or that someone who did evil would necessarily always be evil. Specifically with Voldemort, Harry feels a connection to him, he understands him and that understanding leads him to deem Voldemort as redeemable. As someone who could be saved. It's sentimentality talking there, as, let's say, I don't see Harry making such offers to Umbridge.

*watching weather reports about tropical storm Milton taking aim at Florida*

Me: Milton...I know that name from somewhere... didn't he write something famous?

Mother: You mean John Milton, the author of Paradise Lost?

Me: That's it! ...Oh no.

Reminds me that random strangers we meet are more likely to be civil, and even helpful, than the vitriolic media culture leads us to fear

something absolutely lovely about especially the first half of fellowship is that the hobbits keep meeting random kind helpful strangers - the elves, bombadil, butterbur, aragorn (also farmer maggot and his wife, though they're not strangers) - until the book solidifies in you the feeling that these are not really instances of random luck, but rather the inherent nature of the world. kind people are everywhere, and no matter where you are, there is surely someone closer than you think that would offer help if you needed it. it's such a beautiful theme across all of LOTR, and it's very sweet to me that it starts from the very beginning of the journey, on such a 'small' (comparatively), everyday scale

Secrets of the Darkest Art: How to Make a Horcrux

So I saw many theories regarding how to make a Horcrux, but none of them really made perfect sense to me, so I decided to give it a crack myself as part of my mission to understand Lord Voldemort/Tom Marvolo Riddle (Which I think I did, big post coming about that at some point, this is but another piece of that puzzle of a man)

So this is my reverse engineering of a ritual to create Horcruxes based on book evidence, my knowledge of real-world alchemy, real-world ancient Greek cults and rituals and linguistic analysis.

How to reverse engineering a dark magical ritual:

The first thing is to define what we know for certain:

The name: "Horcrux"

The creator is an Ancient Greek wizard named Harpo the Foul.

A death is required in the making.

A Horcrux holds a piece of the caster's soul that anchors them to life so they won't die.

I'll actually start with the third point.

How to split a soul?

Both Dumbledore and Slughorn mention murder being required to tear your soul to make a Horcrux, and that never really sat right with me. It magically doesn't make sense and even the canon examples we have for Horcrux murders make this statement iffy.

We have seven examples of murders used to create Horcruxs (thanks to one Tom Riddle being dramatic):

The Diary - Myrtle Warren - killed by a basilisk. Sure, Tom freed the Basilisk, but it hardly seemed targeted at Myrtle specifically and you can argue he didn't actually kill her (more a manslaughter by negligence). He didn't cast the spell, so how come this tore his soul? (I also think Myrtle was an accident and wasn't meant to be killed, but I digress)

The Ring - his father (Tom Riddle Sr) - Avada Kadevra.

The Cup - Hepzibah Smith - she was poisoned by her house elf. Sure, the elf was under the imperious, but it wasn't a first-degree murder, and like with the Basilisk I find it hard to consider this the same as casting a killing curse. Magically those are very different things.

The Locket - Muggle Tramp - Avada Kadevra

The Diadem - Albanian Peasant - Avada Kadevra

Harry Potter - himself - backfired Avada Kadevra

Nagini - Bertha Jorkins - Avada Kadevra

Now, I used the term "magically different" or "magically make sense" what do I mean by that?

Well, besides the fact I'm going to make a full post about how I see magical theory in the Harry Potter Wizarding World, I'll say it takes a lot after occult philosophies from Alchemy that are very old, Slughorn mentions as much in book 6 and there are a few other references to it. I'm just gonna cover the basics required for this theory.

In Alchemy, everything (people, animals, plants, and rocks) is built of three base components:

The Salt - the body - the physical form.

The Sulfur - the soul - the self that holds the divine flame.

The Mercury - the spirit - the life essence that binds the salt and sulfur together.

Now, in Alchemy, the main study is in purifying and combining these different aspects of material. Let's look at a herb, for an example:

If we want to retrieve its salt, we'll dry the herb completely using fire to leave behind a fine light grey ash that represents only the physical form.

If we wanted its mercury we'd distill all liquids from it until we get a purified, clear liquid which in the case of plants would be alcohol (it's why alcohol is referred to as "spirit").

And if we wanted its soul, we would take the remains from the distillation and drying process which would be a kind of oil.

(it can get more complicated with different materials, but this isn't a post about Alchemy)

Now, back to Horcruxs.

So, if we would want to split a soul, Alchemecly, how do we go about it?

Well, we don't. Not really. See a soul can't really be split, as every part of it, every bit of that oil from our random herb represents the entire soul. It's why something like a Horcrux could theoretically work in giving a full life to the diary the way we see in Chamber of Secrets.

Additionally, to work with any material in Alchemy, you are required to purify it first. It means that to get a piece of soul to bind to a diary, you need a pure soul.

Killing someone else won't sever your own soul from the spirit and the body, it's not how this works. Killing someone severs their spirit and therefore splits their body, spirit, and soul. Besides, an Ancient Greek man, like Herpo was, would hardly consider murder as vile as we do today. It wouldn't even cross his mind that any murder (even an indirect one) could harm one's own soul.

No, the only way to "split" a soul is to first sever it from life, disconnecting the bond between soul and body. Essentially, the only way to promise you immortality is to kill yourself.

I know it sounds a little confusing, but, essentially, once the soul is severed from the spirit and body you can split it. Think of the herbal oil, once you have the oil, separate from the rest of the plant parts, you can combine it with new ingredients. You can only work on a specific aspect once you severed it from the other two and as what binds all three together is spirit — life — the only way to do it for a human soul — is death.

But really, how?

Well, here comes the second thing we know about making Horcruxs — that dear Herpo was from Ancient Greece.

In Ancient Greece they had multiple different religious cults, some of which were Chthonic cults. These cults dedicated themselves to death or ditties and heroes associated with death and more importantly — rebirth.

Many of these cults were dedicated to figures like Orpheus, Dionysus, and Persephone, characters in mythology who are known for going through the underworld — through death — and coming back out. These cults were very secretive and not much is known about their practices, but some are.

What is known is that they had rituals where they reenacted a death and then rebirth (usually drinking wine — water of life, was the representation of rebirth).

This created a very clear idea in my head — to split a soul, you'll have to ritualistically, magically kill yourself, severe a piece of your soul, and then revive yourself with a water of life — a potion.

This potion is never mentioned, but I believe it exists due to these Chthonic cult rituals and how they were structured. Not only that, but the Greek underworld did have a river known for being incredibly painful to drink, literally made of fire, but being able to bring the dead back - The Phlegethon River.

Note: Lethe River Water (the river in the Greek Underworld that makes the drinker forget) is a canon ingredient in a Forgetfulness Potion.

So what is the dead body for?

Well, congratulations, you killed yourself to retrieve a sliver of your soul and revived yourself so you won't stay dead. You found an item you can keep secure to tie that sliver of soul, too. Now, how would you bind then? After all, the only thing meant to bind a human soul to a body is a human spirit - a human life... you get where I'm going with this.

This is why Tom didn't have to be the one to do the deed. As long as he had a recently deceased corpse to harvest the life from to use to bind his newly split soul and the item of his choice.

It explains why nothing was missing from the bodies. Myrtle and the Riddles were investigated by the Ministry of Magic. One would assume the Aurors would've noticed if any corpse was missing a hand due to the killer eating it (as other Horcrux theories suggest).

Not only was nothing missing from the body, the soul was intact. Myrtle became a ghost after death, a ghost is quite literally, just the soul, no body, no spirit.

So the only thing that was taken from Tom's victims was their life, quite literally at that.

Is that all? Can we make a Horcrux now?

Not really. See, when analyzing spells in Harry Potter, one thing super important to note is their name.

Avada Kadevra - is a reference to an Aramaic healing spell "Abracadabra" pronounced in Aramaic as: "Avra Kadebra" and meaning "I will create as commanded". Merged with the Latin word "cadaver" meaning "corpse" to create -> "I will create dead bodies as commanded"

Or Wingardium Laviosa - is a cross of the English word "wing", the Latin word "arduus" (meaning "high, tall, lofty, steep, proudly elevated"), or "arduum" (meaning "steep place, the steep" and the Latin word "levo" (meaning to "raise, lift up"). So together the spell means -> "lift high up".

So, it's pretty clear spells, their names, and incantations are very self-explanatory. So a Horcrux should be no different.

I've seen some attempts at translating the name Horcrux. Unfortunately, these attempts treated the name as Latin, modern Greek, or Old English. Herpo, was Ancient Greek, though, so I went and translated a few possible meanings from Ancient Greek (Classical Greek and Homeric Greek are what I looked at):

ὅρκος (orkus, pronounced "hor-kus") - an oath, the object by which one swears, bound by oath (still used in modern Greek).

κρόκες (crukes, pronounced "cru-kes") - saffron-colored (blood red in Greek), crocus flower. The crocus flower symbolizes both death (the saffron that is the spice) and rebirth (the golden crocus which brings renewal and joy) because Demeter wears them when Persephone returns from the underworld in myth.

So what we have is a spell called "binding oath of death and rebirth" which all around sounds fitting.

There might also be a "made in blood" tucked at the end due to the association of κρόκες with the color of blood.

But why does it matter?

Well, now with this name, I expect the binding between the spirit from the victim, the split soul, and the item would be done in a sort of oath - an orkus.

The association with blood gives us another hint. Blood is the part of the human body most representative of life. Therefore, in Alchemy, your blood is your spirit. So it'll make sense that your own blood would be used in the binding process or more correctly in the process of turning another person's spirit into your own. Making the thread to bind the body (item) and the soul piece your own. As it also refers to just a red firey color, it can indicate the Phlagatton potion I hypothesize should be part of the ritual due to how Chthonic rituals usually went, as the Phlagaton river is made of fire.

So we have a general idea of how to make a Horcrux. You need an item of your choice to bind your soul to. You need a life (spirit) harvested from a human that you transformed into being your own using your blood. And you need a piece of your own soul, which you get by killing yourself and then reviving yourself. And you finish it off by binding it all together with an oath.

But how could you make one accidentally?

So, everyone knows Voldemort succeeded in somehow making a Horcrux accidentally, something a lot of theories I saw don't account for. Becouse whatever process you need to go to to make a Horcrux, Voldemort went through all of it the night he died the first time and marked Harry.

All the steps for my method of making a Horcrux were met that night.

The item in qustion is baby Harry, nothing interesting there.

The soul sliver was split the way it always is — through death. Voldemort died, killed by his own killing curse and that is what splits his soul.

The life or spirit that then binds his soul to Harry isn't Lily's spirit or James'; it's his own spirit that acts as a binder between Harry and Voldemort’s split soul. Because the spirit was already his, there was no need to transform it by blood so the additional ritual wasn't necessary.

Step-by-step guide to making Horcruxes:

I'm not going to actually give the full step-by-step least a budging dark lord is looking for this information. I do have notes about exact incantations and even the full recipe and instructions for the Phlagaton potion I'm going to mention. These instructions won't be here since they are more in the realm of speculation and headcanon. This is just the overview of the ritual based on canon information and the occult philosophy I mentioned above. (edit: the full step-by-step headcanon with my potion recipe and everything does appear in the reblogs)

Step 1 - Life and Blood

Get access to a recently deceased human and extract their Mercury (Spirit or Life Essence).

Submerge the retrieved life essence with your own blood on a new moon (life and vitality). (7 drops of blood will probably do)

Step 2 - Water of Fire

To complete the cycle of death and rebirth you’ll need the Phlegeton Water potion to return you to life at the end of the cycle.

As you brew the potion, it must be brewed in a dark room, preferably underground to remind as much of the underworld as possible.

While brewing the potion one must be in the mindset of the Phlegeton, must be willing to go through agony to achieve eternal life and imbue these thoughts in their potion. (In alchemy, when working, it is believed you imbue your work with your thoughts during the Alchemical process. As an Alchemical process affects both the material being worked and the Alchemist themselves)

Likley Ingrediants:

Saffron spice

Golden crocus flower juice

Pomegranate juice

Step 3 - The Ritual Preparation

Set up your space so none of the components may escape the ritual space and so the ritual will not be interfered with.

Make sure the spirit you retrieved is within reach.

Make sure the item you desire will hold the Horcrux will be within reach as well.

Coax the spirit into the item and prepare it to tie your soul to the next step.

Step 4 - Death and Rebirth

To create a thread of your soul to tie to the ritual, you must die figuratively. Go through death to return stronger from the underworld.

Once you feel like death has reached you and your soul is separated you should heal your soul and finish the cycle, bringing you out of death and back to life by drinking the Phlegeton potion.

After the pain subsides you will feel healthier than before, stronger than before, and you’ll have an additional thread of sulfur (soul) in your chest to be pulled out and placed into the Horcrux.

The split-off soul should, on its own, try to search for life and a body to be bound to. If it doesn't, coax it out yourself and bind it to the Horcrux with the spirit you made in step 1.

Step 5 - Oath of Life

The connection between the body (the item), soul, and spirit is still unstable, if most likely strong enough to hold.

Swear the oath of life to finalize the bond between you, the Horcrux, and the soul thread together to ward off death.

I'll end with this note I made regarding Horcruxes when I started working on this theory:

I don't know what all goes into the process of making a Horcrux but I don't believe a person who truly likes themselves and doesn't want to inflict pain on themselves could make a Horcrux. Tearing up your soul is an act of arrogance above nature, sure, thinking you deserve to change the laws of the world and be the exception is part of it, but it's also an act of self-hatred. You need to hate yourself enough to be willing to kill yourself, hurt yourself, and tear yourself up in the most unnatural ways — hence why so few can do so, let alone more than once.

And Tom Riddle does seem to have that exact mix of arrogance, spite, and low self-esteem that would allow it.

On the authenticity of movie Faramir

Faramir is one of my favorite characters in the Lord of the Rings. So, when I first saw The Two Towers, I remember being outraged when he appears to claim the Ring. In the books, he stands out for his steadfast determination not to do so, and for helping Frodo and Sam once he learns about the Quest. Jackson's Faramir seemed like a critical misunderstanding of Tolkien's.

More recently, I realized that this isn't the case. We can probably blame the cutting of some of Faramir's scenes for the fact that his character arc isn't as thoroughly sketched, but there are a few key lines that do, in fact, show us the truth. First, in a voice-over, Galadriel tells Elrond/the audience that "the young captain of Gondor has but to extend his hand, take the Ring for his own--and the world will fall."

When we reach the critical scene, and Faramir confronts Frodo about the Ring, he faces the temptation to claim it. And it is here, as in the book, that Faramir passes the test--not later in Osgiliath, where he decides to release Frodo and company (he passes a different test there). Faramir doesn't claim it for himself, as Boromir did ("It could be mine. It should be mine. Give it to me!). Instead, he says, "the Ring will go to Gondor."

...He says he's claiming it for Gondor, which makes sense: both he and his brother are devoted to protecting the kingdom and its people. However, I think Faramir is misleading himself here, because he doesn't truly believe that the Ring will save Gondor*. Boromir did--but both he and Faramir are basing that belief on Denethor's assertions.

This leads into the real struggle for Faramir's character: how his actions right now will affect his relationship with his father. The issue is much clearer in the flashback of Osgiliath. Denethor tasks Boromir with the journey to Rivendell (I will refrain from enumerating book/movie differences here--I'd like to, but I'll restrain myself), and when both his sons protest, he shuts them down. "I trust this mission only to your brother," he says. "The one who will not fail me." He implies that Faramir is worthless to him because he is less capable (he isn't), and less devoted to his father's wishes.

Denethor is partly correct: Faramir will not put his father's orders above his own moral standards, or before the well-being of Gondor. However, he deeply desires his father's regard. He struggles to choose between them until the danger of the Ring is made quite clear. In the movie, Sam angrily reveals that Boromir died because "he tried to take the Ring from Frodo, after swearing an oath to protect him; he tried to kill him! The Ring drove your brother mad!" Almost immediately after this, Frodo starts acting possessed, nearly gets nabbed by the Nazgûl, and almost kills Sam.

Faramir witnesses all of this. He hears how the Ring warped his noble, stalwart brother into a murderous traitor, and gets a bonus demonstration! After that, he (and we) can picture the Ring in the hands of Denethor. Considering Denethor's character, it's terrifying to imagine how his actions in the Return of the King would be compounded by the One Ring.

It's clear now that the Ring absolutely must not go to Gondor. After saving Frodo, Faramir makes what, for him, was the more difficult choice: to countermand his father's will. He lets the Ring go. When the consequences are highlighted--his father may demand his life in forfeit--he accepts them (with a little hesitation...though I think 'my father, who is ill-tempered and likely insane now, may literally kill me for not doing what he wanted' is grounds for queasiness from anyone). Once his goals are set and his mind is made up, he stands steadfast by his decisions.

Considering that, I see now that movie!Faramir is much more true to Tolkien's Faramir than I originally gave him credit for.

As for the fallout in The Return of the King, book!Denethor doesn't actually command a pointless, suicidal charge from Faramir and his soldiers. He does hit him with the customary disdain and comparisons to Boromir, with the latter now colored by bitterness and grief (which appears in another deleted/extended edition scene, I think).

It's tragic how Denethor and his sons struggle to understand and support each other, and to manage their weighty obligations. Denethor's inflexibility and pride (exacerbated by Gondor's dire circumstances) leads one son to his destruction, and alienates the other. Thanks to Faramir, Denethor never obtains the Ring, but Sauron finds another way to undermine him (the palantír). He destroys himself in the end, and nearly takes his remaining son with him.

If you're especially fond of Faramir, Boromir, or Denethor (or if you too want to whack him energetically with a staff), I suggest having a look at the analyses of the characters by Megan N. Fontenot. She talks about how the characters evolved as Tolkien wrote the Lord of the Rings. For example, it seems that at one point, Boromir (and Gandalf) were the only Fellowship members who weren't hobbits (good luck with that)!

*In an extra/extended edition scene, while Faramir regards him uneasily, Frodo assures Faramir that "the Ring will not save Gondor--it has only the power to destroy." At that point, he's still undecided about taking the Ring to Gondor. In the book, however, Faramir asserts that he "would not take [Isildur's Bane], if it lay by the highway. Not were Minas Tirith falling in ruin and I alone could save her, so, using the weapon of the Dark Lord for her good and my glory." When he learns that the weapon Frodo carries is the Ring, he is briefly tempted, but knowing and respecting the inherent peril, he rejects it.

Book!Faramir is more secure in his own identity and values, and less tormented than movie!Faramir by his father's annoyance that he isn't an obedient tool.

I was looking through the timeline for something else, and just-- you mean to tell me there's a ninety year gap between Celebrimbor going "wait shit we've been had", and the war actually starting? Somehow I've never noticed that, somehow I'd convinced myself the time was shorter

That actually changes a lot of how I've been imagining it! Like, ninety years is plenty of time to actually sit down together and plan things. The attack didn't come with barely the time to prepare enough to send a warning to allies and send the Rings away. Everyone must've seen it coming way off, enough to actually prepare armies, prepare their cities and strongholds, and their people, for sieges and battles. (I wonder how many civilians in Eregion took that as their chance to get somewhere away, or at least send their children away, while they had the time to do it somewhat on their own terms, choose what things to bring with them, etc. And how many thought that surely Eregion was strong enough to stand, surely it would be fine if they stayed here, in the home that was so dear to them. It might suck for a while, but it'd be fine, right? In the end, surely Eregion would survive, surely they wouldn't have to leave... right?)

And Sauron still wiped Eregion out like nothing! And then proceeded to drive the rest of the elves into a really tight corner, and come damn near to wiping them out, before the Númenorean army got there to help!

Like, that's... kinda scary to think about. Like not that Sauron isn't a serious threat anyway, but there is a difference between taking someone near completely by surprise with a swift attack and so wiping them out, and wiping someone out who knew you'd be attacking and had decades to prepare

Fukushima Japan

🤣🤣🤣

Catgûl in the Shire 🎃 🍃🍂

In King Ludwig II’s defense, if I had basically infinite discretionary funds, was accountable to absolutely no one, and was king of a country full of picturesque landscapes, you couldn’t stop me from building myself a big gay fairytale castle on a mountaintop either.

Reblogging again

crack au where in the beginning of book 3 when sirius comes to see harry in dog form he just...follows him onto the Knight Bus. and Harry's like 'well this is weird' but his life is weird. so whatever. and then the whole rest of the summer the dog just stays with him. since other people can see the dog he figures it's definitely not a Grim. And the dog seems pretty friendly. and well behaved. and he kinda likes. so harry's just shrugs and is like 'well this might as well happen' and when he meets up with his friends he tells them apparently he has a pet dog now.

can't decide if that would mean that book 3 still happens the same way as in canon or if peter takes one look at sirius and ditches and ron's always confused about why Scabbers ran away OR if Sirius eats Scabbers and consequently voldemort doesn't return and Harry has a very chill rest of his time at Hogwarts (except for the bit where he inevitably discovers that his dog is actually not a dog).

Harry Potter and his life of crime

Harry Potter and the year he killed a man with his touch

Harry Potter and the year they brewed a potion and committed identity theft

Harry Potter and the year he helped a supposed mass murder escape

Harry Potter and the year he (unwillingly) helped raise a dark lord

Harry Potter and the year he broke into the magical government

Harry Potter and the year he stalked and almost killed a classmate

Harry Potter and the year he broke into the magical bank and killed a dark lord (not at the same time)

tell me where is Celeborn i have much desire to see him in The Rings of Power

Wulgaria 'Celtic Tree of Life' Gowns [x][x]

Galadriel: Celebrimbor, this Annatar character's claims don't add up. He's using his charm and his knowledge to manipulate you. Celeborn: There's only one thing to do with honey-tongued, two-faced outsiders. Throw him out the window. Galadriel: That's...a bit excessive. Celeborn: Toss the dwarves out too. I don't know why you keep dealing with them. You can never trust a dwarf, you know. Celebrimbor: And *that* is why you have trouble making friends, Celeborn. You are too suspicious. You need to embrace new opportunities. Be more open-minded! Galadriel: Yes, but within reason. You worry me, Celebrimbor. Celebrimbor: *sparkling with creative ambition* *not listening*

I wish they had brought Celeborn in somewhere, but I can see where the story elements he would bring (resentment and distrust of outsiders, for example) might conflict with other key plot threads, such as the relationship the show builds between Durin IV and Elrond. The bigger issue, though, is that he doesn't fit into the character arc created for Galadriel.

In tRoP, the goal of finding Sauron and avenging her family is the compass of Galadriel 's life: she doesn't understand how to live without that purpose driving her. With no one to effectively counterbalance her, she's more vulnerable to Sauron's manipulations, and unwittingly facilitates his return.

In my opinion, tRoP Galadriel seems more like Gil-Galad's headstrong and impetuous niece than his father's cousin. However, if the show had included Celeborn alongside a wiser Galadriel, I would have loved to see the two of them opposing Sauron in Eregion.

Galadriel: Celebrimbor, this Annatar guy is using his charm and his knowledge to manipulate you.

Celeborn: I've seen enough two-faced strangers. Throw this one out the window.

"but Celeborn would add nothing to the plot and would be boring" "he's just galadriel's boring husband" "Celeborn would make Galadriel less interesting she should just marry-"

i am now begging you to please read a book

tracking down all of the passages that Charlie likely used for inspiration for his Sauron is genuinely the gift that keeps on giving bc Tolkien saying that Sauron is 'evil, and therefore stupid' is genuinely one of the funniest things I've ever read about Sauron.

But yes, I'll be posting more book experts. And if anyone wants me to track things down for other characters, lmk ☺️

NGC 3147, Galaxy Rose