#FAIR WARNING THIS IS SOOOOO LLOOONNNGG

[vardasvapors]

@berrysphase replied to your post:                   berrysphase replied to your post:                ...                

   So, perhaps oddly, I agree with your statement about the wholesale stuff as concerns the greater legendarium, but not LOTR?  In LOTR, considered within its own boundaries, I come away with the deeply uncomfortable sense that the restoration of Gondor’s kingship, the mystic strength in the true line of Elendil, the high and fading virtues of Numenor (transmitted in the germline), are all unquestioned good.  

   but in the greater legendarium all these things are complicated and much more nuanced, especially the colonialism issue re Numenor.  

   eventually there are topics I just can’t think too hard about (especially in-world Valar-related morality questions and the infernal question of Numenor and how far its colonialism is ‘justified’) or it all falls apart and I have to go lie down – I mean, there’s a lot of quicksand    

   I guess what I am saying is *hands* it would be very illuminating and interesting to hear about one of your lines! because to me they are either not clear, or only clear if I carefully avoid looking at them    

OH YEAH THAT IS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE. I think that would definitely qualify as a line -- in my opinion, LOTR is undermined as a story if Aragorn’s reign is Actually A Bad Thing, because the alternative-subplot that springs into existence under that reading is....uh....I guess “boring pointlessness tacked onto to a story that’s actually about Frodo etc” is a good way of putting it. But otoh the, like, Actual Lines of Dialogue The Characters Say in support of said Aragorn subplot are also.....what’s a better way of saying ‘irredeemably racist’? So it’s not like just “ignore it! it’s fantasy!” or some shit, but it IS one of those things that for me (though other people might feel totally differently) is much more satisfying to reconcile, rather than wholesale resist or overturn.

Anyway this might be making a mountain out of a molehill-sized solution, but I’m too tired to edit myself down in length so:

(uh.....before the cut....heads up i wrote this at top speed without testing for argumentative rigorousness/accuracy so.....fair warning)

Actually I think this is a much more easily fanwankable problem than some? Mostly because, imo, Aragorn’s character arc and the moral worth of his arc already HAS two alternative justifications right in canon! One is prophetic, and essentially is a 90%-blind prediction of the sequence of events that makes up the plot of LOTR. “either you will become greater than any of your ancestors since Elendil or fall into darkness with all your kin,” says Ivorwen and Elrond and Gandalf. The other is the whole Heir of Isildur renewal of the ~pure bloodline of kings bullshit, which doesn’t lend a single whit to the legitimacy of Aragorn as a person or to the readers opinion of him -- but it matters a lot to the in-universe Dunedain characters of Arnor and Gondor, including Aragorn himself. It’s the whole justification for them ushering him through the loophole and onto the throne. So I’d say, if you want to read Aragorn’s reign and arc as worthwhile - which I do too, because otherwise that subplot of LOTR is a vastly inferior and duller story at best, if not a complete and utter waste of time at worst - one could always go for the idea that the reason it has worth doesn’t need to be the same reason - the True Numenorean King stuff - that the characters of LOTR think it has worth.

Like, the first step is, LOTR’s timespan is so short. REALLY short. Substantively, one could just..pick another 6 month timespan in the legendarium, any 6 month timespan that overlaps a major political shift. or a 120 year timespan too, if you’re thinking Aragorn’s whole reign, in the Silmarillion. in the Akallabeth. in the unfinished tales. LOTR is a blip, time-wise -- it’s a personal story that intersects with the Silm-tier stuff for a brief, if pivotal, skip of time, and incorporates the brief, hindsight-less impressions of the people alive at that moment of time right into the reader’s POV, in a way that the Silm doesn’t do.

So when taking into account how limited the timeline and POV of LOTR characters are, comparatively speaking, I think of Aragorn’s crowning and the restoration of the line as not “inherently good,” but good because it happened to be the right thing at that one period of time.

I definitely think that...even the text, not just my headcanon, very strongly implies that the reason Aragorn’s king bid turned out successfully is because he lived most of his adult life with that prophecy over his head, and therefore practiced all his life to become an actually genuinely good king -- the whole bloodline/heirship stuff is just kind of...justification, in terms of personal/family/numenorean honor, and political plausible deniability -- Aragorn’s sincerely-felt path and reasoning to get there that isn’t just “either you’ll become king or everyone is doomed, because the future says so!” + “here’s a legal loophole to become king!”

And, I think, the in-universe reason the people of Gondor supported Aragorn becoming king is partly because coincidentally Denethor and Boromir were dead and Faramir didn’t reject him; partly because he had the bloodline loophole excuse; and partly (mostly) because everyone was so impressed with how he helped save the world.

But the reason Aragorn managed to wind up in a position to help save the world, and make the right choices to help save the world, is mostly that he was the type of brave and selfless and sincere person who would sacrifice his dream in order to rescue Merry and Pippin, or sacrifice his life to get Sauron to attack him and disregard Frodo and Sam. The sort of person who understands how much worth his people have, who knows what is deckchair-rearranging and what is a beam of true hope be it ever so slender, who accepts the sheer smallness and simplicity of what he needs to do for the greater good, and who respects and can influence his people enough to insist that they accept and understand all of this as well. Which are, like, actually good qualities in a king!

And the whole reason he became such a good person is....because he strove to be so, and because the people around him believed in him and helped him become so, and because of his and their own personal desire to restore the kingship and glory of his people. Uh. sorry. I already just said that.

It’s a circular thing. The myopic tribal hereditary reasons the characters/narrative assigns bloodline-related worth and authority to Aragorn have jack shit to do with the actual reasons he has real moral worth and earned authority, but his own priorities and desires that led to him developing that worth and authority are myopic and tribal and hereditary too.

So I think this specifically isn’t a case of “either Aragorn’s kingship is good because it is a restoration of the line of Elendil, or it isn’t good because the restoration of the line of Elendil is a morally vacuous cause.” It’s a case of causal connections that are really important but are far more circumstantial than the characters (or the narrative) acknowledges -- people interpret the restoration of the kingship as something Racially And Normatively Appropriate and Special And Right, which...is a) lmao plz, but also b) the Numenoreans and the line of Isildur specifically DO have evidence-based racially-based advantages. It’s just that those advantages don’t confer any inherent worth of any kind --- Aragorn’s bloodline just happened, in this case, to be SUPER USEFUL, because it’s ancient fairy-tale magic that lets him do SUPER USEFUL things in the context of weaponizing Middle Earth’s lingering scraps of fairy tale magic against Middle Earth’s lingering scrap of fairy tale horror. It lets him troll Sauron with a palantir that he could properly use -- due the fact that the Palantir DOES operate on ridiculous ancient morally vacuous bloodline-magic. Or lets him make the oathbreaker ghosts help him out with the corsairs, because the oathbreaker ghosts too, are ancient lingering equally morally vacuous Soulbinding Promise Magic. The whole concept of the Restoration of the Line of Elendil IS, of course, a morally vacuous cause on its own, as anything other than an in-universe stamp of political legitimacy -- but it appears to also have been an essential in-universe motivation and tool for getting the characters into the places they needed to be, in order for the intricately-woven web of events that make up LOTR to come out in the wash the way it did.

For the in-universe characters, saying that there’s something Inherently Good about the renewal of the line of kings and stuff is actually just....it’s only important to them. It’s this stopgap period, post-Ring-Destruction: re-righting the boat and kind of having this adjustment period of fairy-tale magic to kind of ease people from the pre-ring destruction world where there are dark lords and elves, to the post-ring-destruction world. Everyone in-universe goes “rah rah this isn’t just good because circumstances lined up in such a way so that it was good, as prophesied, it’s Totally Also Inherently Good independent of circumstances.” And it isn’t. At all. But it makes sense why they think that, and want to think that, and why the real explanation would not be sufficient for them. The idea that Aragorn’s one and only world-saving action was distracting Sauron from his destroyers, and that the only reason Sauron was destroyed was because of three hobbits and a mixed handful of coincidence and grace swirling together in an Augustinian whirlpool, is not a super crowdpleasing national myth.

And then, the period after he becomes king DOES imo involve like, a bunch of colonial-reminiscent shit that kind of plays into the people’s expectations and view of themselves -- the racial superiority and suggestions of imperialism-flavored actions regarding all the vague mentions throughout the early 4th age timeline of quelling rebellions in various corners of the world (though imo these are not as conclusive or devoid of wiggle-room as some people interpret them). And I REALLY DISLIKE THIS PART because I’m perennially like...yo, what a massive wasted opportunity there Tolkien...because the irony of Aragorn the hereditary king in exile being restored in such a roundabout way that has so little to do with his heirship is a plotline that would be SO MUCH BETTER to acknowledge and focus on than the bald OMG Heir Of Isildur The True King With Pure Ancestry Has Come!!! thing that happens in canon with only a tiny bit of wink-winking about how much dumb luck it actually was. It would have made a really wonderful story!

In fact, I occasionally do wonder -- from the Appendices and the Prologue of LOTR, the supposed “real” “historical” book which the in-universe character of “JRR Tolkien: Not An Author, Only A Translator” translated, is purported to be a copy of a copy of the Red Book of Westmarch that was edited and translated by the scribe Findegil of Gondor, as copied from Pippin’s copy, of Bilbo, Frodo, and Sam’s copy. And one can imagine it’s not too big a stretch that Frodo and Sam might have been more on-the-money regarding Aragorn and the whole kingship restoration plotline in their original story, but Findegil obscured their insights a bit -- even just from good-faith well-intended biased interpretation due to his understanding of Gondor’s renewal histories.

But still....even with all the undertones and overtones of the restoration of old colonial stuff -- does that mean restoration of old colonial shit in perpetuity? I don’t think THAT’S a necessary extrapolation. For one, imo there’s no testament of proportionality. Elements of recurrences of old colonial shit seem to have been present! -- but for how long, how impactful or destructive, compared to how much tables-turning revolutionary awesome genuine improvement stuff, given everything Sauron had been doing? I mean could be shittier than anything like is often is IRL, but this is as outsode of RL as you get. So. A drop amid a flood? Could be. Who knows? Not much is specified, but not much is precluded either. You can fill in that 120 year gap with almost anything. If someone wanted to fill it with some fantasy of a historical-fiction Realpolitik aesthetic, instead of actually making up something new from the unlimited amount of creative potential conferred by an ahistorical post-dark-lord fantasy setting, that’s legit, but it’s still just conjecture.

Going back up 5 paragraphs to when I thought this was going to be a short answer (LOL) -- 120 years is both very long AND very short -- i.e., 120 years is a nose-to-the-ground view vis-a-vis Silmarillion times, but otoh vis-a-vis RL timelines, there’s just so much TIME and room for....i mean 120 years ago today was 1897? Before World War I? How vastly has world and domestic policy has changed since then? Or like...pick from your choice of other 120 year periods in pre-modern history too, if that’s not a good comparison. Even if there isn’t much concrete reliable evidence, there’s still a lot of room, even before Aragorn’s death - but even more room after it! - for the people of the Reunited Kingdom to potentially, if you so choose, have their day in the sun comforting themselves about how great they are and how their ancestral royal line is restored, and then just slowly move on, change, grow, progress, decide some of their earlier ideas were dumb, reverse themselves in various political and foreign policy arenas (like they had already started to do in some cases during the LOTR timeline), quietly purge themselves of their racist bullshit  -- over the course of a few generations, as is the way of mortal realms. And most importantly, to finally let go of the past, because they’ve been able to taste the satisfaction of a fairy tale, and have come through it, and their children’s children have now lived to see a time where they don’t need it.

(This assumes that The New Shadow is non-canon. Which. HELL YES. It is  fucking non-canon, because it’s stupid and even Tolkien thought it was depressing and mean-spirited, which is seriously saying something.)