#anti hero // lord of the rings

[rewrite-canon]

“[insert character] should have been evil!” let people be good and nice goddamn it.

[zeb-z]

I’ve been thinking about the oath of Fëanor and his sons. The oath is said to be cosmically binding, sure, but what does that mean? Does that mean it’s an impulse? That you feel driven to fulfill the oath? Or does it just mean that the consequences for failing are always looming, and there’s more room for free will? Is the threat of damning yourself the only driving force, or because of the cosmic nature of it does it compel you to complete it?

I think the way it’s left up in the air makes Maedhros that much more compelling - because he’s the most sympathetic out of Fëanor’s sons, he feels remorse and tries desperately to keep peace. But because of the oath he swore, he’s doomed to fight and kill for the silmarils. It’s hard to pin the title of villain on him because he’s sympathetic, he fights back against the worst of what his father has done, he’s a driving force against the Enemy and its evils. It’s definitely hard to pin the title of hero on him because of all the terrible deeds he’s done in the name of his father and the silmarils, the kinslaying, the kidnapping.

It’s clear he follows the oath no matter how much he does not want to. He follows it through and doing so kills him, because he cannot handle the weight of what he’d done, and it was never worth it. But was it his unwavering duty and honor to his word, along with the threat of what would happen if he broke the oath - or was there any cosmic drive to complete the oath due to its nature and the way it was sworn?

If it was always a matter of free will, would having refused the oath been something more honorable in the end? Or would that have doomed Beleriand even earlier than it was, without him there to fight against the Enemy?

[marsconer]

antiheroine and the answer will be an echo are the duality of man

[physalian]

What No one Tells You about Writing Fantasy, #2!

I did this list about 7 annoyances about fantasy, but I write in this genre for a reason! Fantasy knows no bounds, it can encompass all other genres within it. You can write a fantastical murder mystery, fantasy horror, fantasy romance, political drama, slice-of-life, comedy, whatever you’d like!

Whether it’s urban or high fantasy, supernatural or scientific, here’s seven great benefits of writing in this genre:

1. No modern means of communication

Unless you’re writing a world with phones or phone-adjacent devices. Phones and instant communication seriously inhibits the plausibility of dramatic irony and tension when you have to keep coming up with reasons to keep your characters from calling or texting each other everything they know. It’s exhausting, I tell you, and such a relief when phones aren’t a factor.

With that said, without phones, you have complete freedom to design your own magical channels of supernatural FaceTime, as weird and zany as you want. But without instant connections? Your character who knew too much can’t pass on the intel before they die. Your hero team can’t call for backup in their darkest hour. Otherwise easily preventable tragedies and deadly miscommunications are now very real.

2. The Monster Allegory

Fantasy and sci-fi tend to overlap more than they’re set apart, and in that overlap sits the monster allegory. Everything from werewolves to vampires to witches, reapers, demons, angels, goblins, trolls, wraiths, fairies, mermaids, ghosts, to Eldritch horrors and your classic Hollywood cast of mummies, creatures from the black lagoon, and Frankenstein.

Most of the time, the monsters aren’t just monsters, they represent a monstrous aspect of society the author wants to challenge and caricaturize in a fun and entertaining way. Or, the monsters are the good guys and the humans are the real terrors. Or, you’ve got two kinds of monsters to allegory two human sides. Sometimes they represent metaphorical demons, like vampires often representing addiction and werewolves repressed identities.

What all of this boils down to is the hyperbolic nature of science fantasy that allows you to go over-the-top with your metaphor and allegory in a way that a book grounded in reality just can’t.

3. Magic Systems!

Do you love world building? Do you love filling pages upon pages with your cool and unique set of superpowers you want your characters to have? Do you dream about your fight scenes and dramatic slow-mo shots?

Then Fantasy is for you!

There are zero limits to how you want to define your magic system. You can go classic with the familiar archetypes of elemental magic, wizards, sorcerers, and witches. Or you can step off the beaten path and design a whole new funky system of power sets. Best part? Your readers will have an awesome time imagining themselves with those powers, and debating endlessly about how it works.

4. Real-World Politics, who?

Amazon’s Rings of Power was twice-doomed when they only got the rights to adapt the appendices of The Silmarillion and when they decided to inject current political problems into a timeless story written purposefully to be divorced from those politics. You *can* write about human politics, but in fantasy, you don’t have to. You *can* interpret Lord of the Rings to be an allegory about the World Wars, but no matter how hard you argue, it wasn’t written with that intent.

Which means: Even if your story is set in the reality-adjacent fantasy version of 1543, you are free from the following: Racism, homophobia, sexism, religious bigotry, mental health bigotry, gender norms, anti-feminism, toxic masculinity, and more. “But that’s how it was-”

Nope. This is fantasy. You built this world, you decided to keep in the discrimination. Or… You can fill your fantasy world with a rainbow of gays, POCs in power, women in power, men unafraid to be compassionate and caring, a religion that doesn’t foster hate and division, the list goes on. You. Are. Free.

5. Nothing is too “unrealistic”

Both that you will always have people whining about how X would never happen so write the book you want to read, but also because fantasy is fake. Fairies aren’t real. Mermaids aren’t real. There are no rules for how they must be written and that’s how we have so much variety with so much room for interpretation by so many creators. Twilight made how much money writing about vampires that sparkle like diamonds in sunlight and crack like marble?

This is fantasy, it’s supposed to be unrealistic. Yes, your plot should make sense, but don’t be afraid to get weird. Write at least some of your story dependant on those fantasy elements. Write a story that can’t just be told in the real world minus the spectacle. Don’t be afraid to be sincerely fantastical and weird. People love weird. People love loving weird.

6. You are in complete control

But you do still need to research, unfortunately. Unless this is urban fantasy that depends at least a little on the human world, yours is completely your own to govern like a god tweezing weeds from their garden. You get to design your own geography and weather patterns and seasons. Your own countries and kingdoms and politicians. Your epic pre-canon fantasy war and the stakes that it was fought over. Your species, races, and ethnicities.

It’s a shame that a movie like Avatar (2009) set out to be this wholly unique take on aliens with music completely divorced from earthly bonds, new languages and a visually and culturally distinct alien species… and ended up a largely generic blue Pocahontas in space. It forgot that it was fantasy and didn’t go weird enough. They have horses, monkeys, wolves, rhinos, and deer just re-skinned with some extra limbs and colors. It’s pretty but it’s so, so shallow.

It could have become a cult classic like many a positively *weird* 80s off-beat fantasies, and now it just… exists. It makes a whole lot of money but its impact on the cultural zeitgeist is negligible. I’m the only person I know that can name every major character in the movie, and I’m no Avatar obsessor. They had complete creative control, and this is what they did with it. Don’t be Avatar. Take your creative freedom and run.

7. Even if it has been done before, do it again

You can say this about any genre, particularly romance, but fantasy and sci-fi, by the gatekeep-y nature of their fans, can be a lot less forgiving when it comes to claims of “unoriginality”. No one hates Star Wars more than Star Wars fans. Fans of these genres can get… concerningly attached to their favorite stories (mostly because the people who like them had only their fictional heroes to protect them from very real bullies).

But Game of Thrones exists because the author likes Lord of the Rings and went “yes, but what if it was an R-rated parade of misery?” Dungeons and Dragons exists because people wanted to roleplay in an LotR-esque world. Legolas and Gimli single-handedly defined what a badass elf and dwarf looks like in high fantasy. And people still gobble up media ripping shamelessly, or even good-naturedly, from this one story.

So on my other list, I argued that the sum of your parts is still original, even if the components aren’t. On this list, I implore you this: It’s not stealing or appropriating to write another Legolas if you love Legolas. Everyone loves Legolas. How many generic buff action heroes do we have and love? How many Hallmark romances tread the same predictable path? Who gives a damn if it’s unoriginal? Just make it entertaining and have something fresh to say in the end (or don’t, that’s fine too), and people will read it.

And when people say “Oh, you mean like Legolas”, take it as a compliment, not an insult. Yes, exactly like Legolas. Here’s my new elf because I adore this other book, now watch him go on a new adventure that I wrote for him.

[medievalandfantasymelee]

THE HOT MEDIEVAL & FANTASY MEN MELEE

FIRST ROUND: 17th Tilt

Hubert Hawkins, The Court Jester (1955) VS. Haldir, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-2003)

Propaganda

Hubert Hawkins, The Court Jester (1955) Portrayed by: Danny Kaye Defeated Opponents: - Saburo Naotora Ichimonji [Ryu Daisuke], Ran (1985)

“he's hot both in “local out of his depth idiot mode” and “over the top romantic hero mode”. he fences like nobody's business. he's the only man of all time to pull off a jester outfit and make it look actually snatched. Danny Kaye needs this, please.”

Haldir, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-2003) Portrayed by: Craig Parker Defeated Opponents: - Robin Hood [Douglas Fairbanks], Robin Hood (1928)

“Long is the crush I have harboured for Haldir. My man. My dude. Literally as close to "just a guy" as any elf has ever gotten and I love that for him. He doesn't make the rules, he just follows them. He's reliable, solid, good humoured. He's one of the few elves in the movies who achieves the true elf vibe of the books, and I know this because I feel a sense of comfort and happiness any time he's on screen. The kind of guy you want to sit and have a draught with in companionable silence. The way he looks down at you. But also the way he looks up at you. Grade A Husband Material; he deserved so much.”

Additional Propaganda Under the Cut

Additional Propaganda

For Hubert Hawkins:

“He sings! He dances! He fences! He wears really tight leggings!”

“We love a hot, funny, good-hearted man who subverts the gendered tropes of the subgenre! He is absolutely shit at sword-fighting! He is great at doing funny voices! ‘Tenderness and kindness can also make a man,’ says the awesome trousers-wearing heroine who works alongside him in the anti-tyrannical resistance, ‘a very rare man.’ She's right and she should say it and I support them both so much. Hubert Hawkins, world's sweetest and funniest surprise regent (who gets the girl.) See also attached photo of him goofing around with drums on set, I love him so much.”

For Haldir:

[prismuffin]

Masterlist 2:

Full Fanfic Masterlist

--

Marvel:

How Peter Parker and Steve Rogers react to their crush asking to play with their hair

Hobie Brown helping trans!male!Reader with dysphoria Hobie Brown reminding ftm!Reader not to overbind Hobie Brown turning into a cat and causing chaos in the SpiderSociety

How Miles Morales acts on a rooftop date with another hero Miles Morales reacting to grieving reader Miles Morales being caught wearing his guy crushes hoodie Miles Morales reacting to his crush suddenly asking him out in the middle of a normal conversation Miles Morales with a younger!sister!reader

Platonic!Miguel O'Hara comforting transmale reader after a breakdown Miguel O'Hara reacting to reader coming out as trans (ftm)

Miles Morales and Hobie Brown (separate) reacting to male!Reader with brain issues Miles Morales and Hobie Brown (separate) reacting to male!Reader getting a good grade on an exam

Pavitr Prabhakar and german!male!Reader bonding by learning about each other's cultures

SpiderTeens reacting to gn reader adopting them all

Stranger Things:

Nothing yet!

The Umbrella Academy:

Nothing yet!

Criminal Minds:

Nothing yet!

Hitman Trilogy:

Nothing yet!

Mission: Impossible:

Ethan Hunt reacting to his son being a part of the syndicate

FarCry 5:

Nothing yet!

Valorant:

Nothing yet!

Detroit Become Human:

Connor helping male!trans!reader with testosterone shots Connor helping gn!Reader calm down from a panic attack Connor with a s/o who's a maladaptive daydreamer Connor with an insomniac s/o Connor with a s/o who's a wild/active sleeper

Our Life Beginnings & Always:

Nothing yet!

Error 143:

Nothing yet!

Sally Face:

Nothing yet!

WatchDogs Trilogy:

Nothing yet!

COD: Modern Warfare2:

John Price dealing with being a sleep talker

Konig reacting to short!male!Reader climbing him like a tree to see something Konig reacting to short!male!Reader being on his shoulders^^Part 2

Ghost, Konig, and Price (separate) reacting to male!Reader with dermatillomania Ghost and Konig (separate) reacting to having to cuddle up to male!Reader for warmth Ghost and Konig waking up to cuddling male!Reader ^^Part 2 Ghost and Konig (separate) having M!Reader be their gay awakening

The Imperfects:

Nothing yet!

Encanto:

Nothing yet!

Girl From Nowhere:

Nothing yet!

Metal Lords:

Nothing yet!

Dc Universe:

Batfam being jealous of the readers pet/animal Batboys reacting to Tim Drake's "bad-boy" boyfriend Taking care of Batboys (seperately) after they got their wisdom teeth removed Batboys reacting to boyfriend!Reader smacking their ass and running away Batboys + Conner & Wally being caught wearing masc!Readers hoodie Batfam reacting to Tim Drakes boyfriend who is the Jokers son ^^Batfam reacting to Tim Drakes boyfriend who is the Jokers son pt2^^ Batboys reacting to getting hard during training with M!Reader Anthro!Batboys having their ears and tail expose their romantic feelings for male!reader Batfam reacting to Tim Drake making a contract with a demon!male!reader BatBoys reacting to them thinking male!reader called them a goodboy

Sugar Daddy!Bruce Wayne accidentally falling for male!sugar-baby!reader Bruce Wayne with an energetic anti-hero husband

Conner Kent accidentally using X-ray vision on trans!male reader

Male!Justice League members reacting to rogue!reader moving out of Gotham and into their city

Jason Todd reacting to male reader falling asleep on him Jason Todd reacting to a gn reader who can't swim Injured!Jason Todd waking up to Reader in his hospital room

Damian Wayne with a child!brother!Reader Damian Wayne being caught wearing his guy crushes hoodie

Dick Grayson reacting to a very cuddly male reader Dick Grayson waking up his cuddly guy crush Dick Grayson reacting to a sad!male!Reader needing cuddles

Hal Jordan's (Green Lantern) reaction to reader having a lot of lantern rings Hal Jordan (Green Lantern) x recovering!male!Readers Hal Jordan reacting to being bitten by masc!alien!Reader

John Constantine reacting to a food-pusher Reader John Constantine with a werewolf s/o (gn reader) Hungover!John Constantine waking up in a caring Readers bed John Constantine reacting to a male!Reader that reminds him of his younger self ^part 2. John Constantine reacting to similar!male!Reader reading his soul John Constantine being bullied by a cat in a pub John Constantine reacting to a Reader that smokes John Constantine having a demon!Reader be attached to him John Constantine reacting to reader being turned into a baby John Constantine reacting to male!Rader lighting his cigarette with John's

Kid Flash (Wally West) reacting to accidentally courting alien!reader Kid Flash (Wally West) with a night owl boyfriend Kid Flash (Wally West) accidentally petting one of winged!male!Readers arousal zones Kid Flash (Wally West) and winged!male!Reader finally getting together Kid Flash (Wally West) cudding male!naga!Reader Kid Flash (Wally West) with a partner who's part of the BatFamily

Tim Drake reacting to guy crush reader accidentally cuddling him Tim Drake reacting to Rogue!Reader flustering him Tim Drake with a caring and patient boyfriend Tim Drake with a boyfriend who's very physically affectionate

How Superman, Batman, Hal Jordan, The Flash, and John Constantine react to someone handing them the unconscious reader out of the blue How Batman and Superman reacting to their long-term partner being their worst enemy How Batman, Superman, Hal Jordan, and The Flash would react to gn magic user reader using a gun out of nowhere

How Wally West, John Constantine, Hal Jordan, Dick Grayson, and Conner Kent react to falling asleep on their crush (male reader) How Wally West, Dick Grayson, Tim Drake, and Conner Kent taking care of their drunk guy crush How Dick Grayson, Wally West, Tim Drake and Conner Kent react to playing seven minutes in heaven with their guy crush How Dick Grayson, Tim Drake, and John Constantine react to their crush asking to play with their hair How Tim Drake and Damian Wayne react to their crush randomly asking them out in the middle of a conversation (seperate) How Dick Grayson, Jason Todd, Tim Drake, Wally West and Conner Kent (sperately) react to Alien!Panther!Male!Reader cuddling up to them randomly

How Justice League boys react to empathic color!alien reader turning pink around them How Justice League boys react to male!Reader being turned into a cat How the Young Justice League reacts to a male!Reader with an Eating Disorder

—

Back to directory;

[thesecretsofthedivine]

Zodiac Playlist 🌠

Aries

mars - sleeping at last

ride - lana del rey

bathroom - montell fish

fun - troye sivan

fireball - pitbull

stayin' alive - bee gees

god save our young blood - børns

anti-hero - taylor swift

talk that talk - rihanna

clumsy - fergie

Taurus

venus - sleeping at last

breakfast at tiffany's - henry mancini

chanel - frank ocean

kiss it off me - cigarettes after sex

snooze - SZA

want u around - omar apollo

habit - still woozy

peach - kevin abstract

nonsense - sabrina carpenter

talk - hozier

Gemini

mercury - sleeping at last

pov - ariana grande

mood ring baby - field medic

glittr - aldn

running wild - g eazy

island in the sun - weezer

japanese posters - rebounder

master of none - beach house

faerie soirée - melanie martinez

ways to go - grouplove

Cancer

moon - sleeping at last

where did the time go - lord huron

ho hey - the lumineers

my love mine all mine - mitski

idle town - conan gray

k. - cigarettes after sex

italo disco - last dinosaurs

glue song - beabadoobee

sea of love - cat power

fourth of july - sufjan stevens

Leo

sun - sleeping at last

dancing queen - abba

let me blow ya mind - eve, gwen stefani

money - cardi b

literal legend - ayesha erotica

kitty kat - megan thee stallion

carmen - lana del rey

my kind of woman - mac demarco

amber - 311

chemtrails over the country club - lana del rey

Virgo

mercury - sleeping at last

tell me something i don't know - selena gomez

the boat i row - tame impala

girl next door - copperpot

crying in the chapel - elvis presley

iwillbreatheintoyou - bones

down to earth - umi

bambi - clairo

virgo's groove - beyoncé

are you satisfied - marina

Libra

venus - sleeping at last

sweet talk - saint motel

lover - taylor swift

in my head - ariana grande

pink funeral - beach house

fashion - britney manson

normal girl - sza

sit still, look pretty - daya

comfort crowd - conan gray

we fell in love in october - girl in red

Scorpio

mars/pluto - sleeping at last

private - russ

dirty paws - of monsters and men

borderline - tame impala

dead to me - kali uchis

not dead yet - lord huron

i can't handle change - roar

animal - sir chloe

vigilante shit - taylor swift

death - melanie martinez

Sagittarius

jupiter - sleeping at last

here, there and everywhere - the beatles

canyon moon - harry styles

can't sleep - k. flay

sunset chaser - ragamuffs

only if - steve lacy

the balancer's eye - lord huron

youth - troye sivan

cherry bomb - the runaways

bloom later - jesse

Capricorn

saturn - sleeping at last

living on my own - freddie mercury

princess diana - ice spice

high stakes - bryson tiller

therefore i am - billie eilish

successful - ariana grande

i wouldn't ask you - clairo

radio - lana del rey

vienna - billy joel

mastermind - taylor swift

Aquarius

uranus/saturn - sleeping at last

you don't own me - saygrace

better friends - between friends

night fever - bee gees

mortal projections - djo

transparent soul - willow

she moves in her own way - the kooks

dare - gorillaz

hits different - taylor swift

arabella - arctic monkeys

Pisces

jupiter/neptune - sleeping at last

love my way - the psychedelic furs

technicolor beat - oh wonder

made for love - concorde

ivy - frank ocean

my song - labi siffre

ultimately - khai dreams

bella luna - babe rainbow

ride - wave to earth

fishtail - lana del rey

[anetherealpoetess]

a rings of power haladriel spoiler from a certified critic and my humble predictions for the finale:

so here is the full review from the critic, but it opens thus:

Deep into Star Wars: The Last Jedi, shortly after defeating the Supreme Leader’s highly trained elite guards, the anti-hero Kylo Ren extends his hand out to the protagonist Rey and asks her to join him. Together, he says, they can rule the galaxy. He pushes her to confront her greatest fear and assures her that she means the world to him. On the whole, the scene is both epic and intimate. A similar moment occurs late in the second season of The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power as the series’ two most central forces clash in a swordfight. Sauron (Charlie Vickers) reiterates his desire to make Galadriel (Morfydd Clark) the queen of all Middle-earth. There’s nothing he wants more—and he’s willing to do whatever it takes to have her by his side.

on the one hand, okay; we really are repeating the ending of season one. on the other hand, i will always love sauron's obsession with galadriel being so overt a thing. the critic seemed to enjoy the confrontation (a running theme in reviews) but took umbrage with clunky dialogue undercutting the emotions, which ... yeah. the rings of power is intent on being a traditional high fantasy, but it's better when grounded in the modern (like sauron using darvo tactics and language on celebrimbor for chilling effect, rather than the stilted, pseudo-poetic declarations the show often attempts which does undercut the emotion.)

as for my predictions, i fear adar is mortally wounded and returns to galadriel her ring in the hope of helping her defeat sauron. i would love adar to live but fear he's a goner. i would also hope that galadriel keeps the nine rings, and next season is sauron hunting her down to retrieve them, but since the show seems intent on degrading galadriel at every turn, she probably gives up the nine to him during their confrontation (granting the incels permission to spend another two years whining about how everything is her fault) and flees.

i'm not here for the plot though. i am just here for the vibes, the beautiful villains, and sauron's profane and seductive worship of galadriel.

[elerrinacrownedwithstars]

Galadriel in the Rings of Power: Conclusion

This post is the continuation of my analysis of Galadriel as she is portrayed in the Amazon series The Rings of Power - and why I think it is so very bad. Part 1 focused on the the portrayal of her being a warrior, and the many problems it creates for her character and possibly even for LOTR, whereas part 2 argued that what is supposed to be war trauma is actually just an awful personality. Part 3 focuses on the ways ROP undermines Galadriel's story as a woman, wife, and mother, and part 4 argues that the character we see in ROP does not have the mental capacity or abilities that she should have.

Part 1 x Part 2 x Part 3 x Part 4

This is the final part of the analysis, concluding what was argued in the earlier posts and pointing out some additional observations that aren't strictly about Galadriel.

As before, the tags #anti rop and #anti rings of power will be used for the benefit of those who may want to filter my posts.

8. In conclusion and some additional observations

Galadriel of the Rings of Power is a terrible person and she does not have a single likeable thing about her. The characterisation that has been given to her has nothing to do with the character Tolkien created, erases parts of her story that are specifically about a woman's experiences of motherhood and fellowship between women, and may actively create plot holes for The Lord of the Rings. Galadriel's connections to the Elves of Middle-earth, and her affinity with Doriath that would make her a viable option as a ruler of Sindar and Silvan Elves, are entirely absent. The show creators try to justify their decision by obsessively referring to the few lines about her "Amazon disposition" and "athletic pursuits", although these don't really prove anything beyond the fact that she used to love sports, and ignoring the overwhelming textual evidence of Galadriel's role as a politician, leader, wife and mother. The way a character's story is told and the qualities chosen to represent them also reveal what are the values of the artist/creator: that Galadriel's feminine traits, her learning from another woman and adapting that specific model to her own rulership, the evidence of her being a wife and a mother and powerful all at the same time, are downplayed so that she can adhere to masculine ideals is incredibly telling, and sadly quite misogynistic.

If this character of a wandering warrior was so necessary for the show, this role should have been given to Celebrían, Galadriel's daughter. She is almost a blank canvas with few known details, and would be more believable as a young and temperamental warrior who means well but sometimes blunders it. Her motives and her failures could be explained by a fierce desire to live up to her famous and powerful parents and to rise out of their shadow. Celebrían would be an entirely new character to the audience, but still entirely canonical, and with a very close connection to the well-known and beloved character of Galadriel. For a more intelligent plot than what ROP has come up with, the relationship of Galadriel and Celebrían would provide much content, enabling female representation (the lack of which Tolkien is often reproached for), and even creating an opportunity to discuss the themes of death, immortality and mortality which are so important for Tolkien. Celebrían's love for Elrond would be a great chance to discuss the nature of Half-Elves (often unclear even to the fans of Tolkien), and the dangers that lie in her loving him from the Elvish point of view, as any offspring by him may choose a mortal life (thus allowing references to Arwen and Aragorn). When you really start to think about what the inclusion of Celebrían could have brought to the table, you can't help but sigh at the terrible waste Amazon committed by going the incredibly simplistic route of making Galadriel a very middling action hero. If the show dared to show Galadriel as she is, an ancient Elf already wise and experienced at this point of the history of Middle-earth, then ROP could have established the longevity of Elves and how they witness the ages of the world passing by. This I think would have been more interesting for the viewers of a fantasy show rather than  make Galadriel some "young version" of the one we see in LOTR.

Some of the problems with Galadriel, I will admit, are exaggerated by the show's larger problems, which are in some ways linked: the compression of timeline and the poor handling of the Elven characters.

As we know, the events of the Second Age take place over three thousand years, and there are about 1500 years between the making of the Rings of Power and the Fall of Númenor. However, these things overlap in the show, apparently because the audience would not be committed to a show that changes most of its cast every season?

This is not as good a solution as it seems on paper and it creates problems for the plausibility of characters' actions and the events of the story. I suspect this will become more and more glaring with the Númenor thread, because the show's creators have already shown themselves not to be very good writers. But with the story of Galadriel, the implication now between the first and second seasons is that during a very small amount of time, she will experience a 180 degree change in her personality and become the wise, powerful, dignified Elven queen that we see in The Lord of the Rings. (Apparently she is also supposed to be able to live with - and be forgiven! - the fact that she is indirectly responsible for all the death and horror Sauron will inflict on Middle-earth.)

The show starts with Galadriel obsessively hunting for Sauron - a quest she has been pursuing for the whole of the Second Age. Apparently, she has spent an entire Age, over three thousand years, in this perpetual state of anger, aggression and restlessness. Not only does it make her look an incompetent fool and a complete maniac, but creates a contradiction: she can spend thousands of years in a rage about her brother and whatnot, but then suddenly, in a span of a few years, gives up the personal vendetta and becomes an entirely different person? It also raises serious questions about why would Gil-galad keep such a volatile individual as a high-ranking officer for centuries. Apparently even with the very violent history of the First Age, Elves don't have tools for dealing with war trauma even after centuries have passed, and nobody thought of trying to help this very unstable woman recover and get on with her life. If the show began closer to the start of the Second Age (and nearer to the events that supposedly left ROP!Galadriel so traumatised), and we saw her working through her issues over the course of many years, this characterisation would not be so infuriating - or make her and her superiors look so bad. Moreover, with the passage of time her need for vengeance would start to run cooler and she would let her guard down around the disguised Sauron, making her look less stupid for falling for his deceptions - although it still is seriously out of character for Galadriel to be so easily fooled. It is true that we should have more stories about angry women who make mistakes and are no saintly figures, and these stories should be treated with as much compassion as any male revenge fantasy. However, it is questionable to do this like ROP has done, erasing Galadriel's original story and her agency, removing the meaningful female relationships she has, downplaying her feminine attributes so that she fits a more masculine ideal, and making her motives all about men.

This ties with the show's handling of Elven characters. In ROP, Elves are essentially enhanced humans, who can do cool stunts and don't die of old age. Outwardly, they are not even noticeably different from humans, except by their ears. The Elven characters are not ageless or beautiful and the actor of Arondir is maybe the only one who looks the part. That the Elves (particularly those who saw the light of the Trees) lack the Otherness that would set them apart as a different race makes the world of ROP!Middle-earth lose much of its depth, wonder and magic. The worldbuilding of the script seems to lack any consideration of what the psychology of these immortal characters would be, and how they are different from Men. At the end of the Second Age, Elven societies of Middle-earth are already old, they have seen much loss and sorrow, and so the tone of their mentality should be reflecting more of this. Tolkien makes it very clear that with age, the wisdom and sadness of the Elves grows greater. That the Elves are just enhanced humans, not distinctly different from Men by their physical or psychological qualities also poses problems over the Fall of Númenor and the hubris that leads to it - although at this point, I have lost any hope I might have had that this show's creators possess the ability to effectively discuss such a complex theme.

This compression of time and poor handling of the Elves will cause troubles for the character of Galadriel, or so I guess. Earlier I already pointed out the change that she will apparently go through during the events of the show. If the aim of the story is to show how Galadriel became the wise, otherworldly sorceress and queen that we see in LOTR, then this change will happen in an extremely short time, and it ignores the fact that Galadriel always was these things, though perhaps to a lesser degree. This is simply poor writing and unbelievable, and it rather gives the impression that the creative team has not given much thought to worldbuilding - and that they really believe that for Galadriel to be relatable to the audience is to make her suit the idea of a "strong woman with a sword". This is a trend you see a lot in popular media, but if you are adapting a timeless story like Tolkien's legendarium, then you should not be too eager to add in your own agenda or trends that don't suit the original story or are actively detrimental to it. Same goes for how the Númenóreans' prejudices against Elves seems like some attempt to discuss contemporary US politics and much less a discussion of human hubris and the Fall of Man. As I have argued in my posts, ROP!Galadriel is not an improvement: the way Tolkien wrote her is infinitely more complex, compelling and powerful.

The show may be pretty to look at at some points and apparently many people even find it entertaining. But if we settle for "good enough" and "entertaining enough", then that gives leave to companies like Amazon to keep on producing mediocre films and shows that do not contain the complexity of the original, and keep turning already rich female characters into bland action figures. It's not a good thing if the best you can say about a show based on complex source material is that it "looks stunning" or it's "entertaining". The inevitable outcome is that after a few bland seasons, the show will get cancelled and everyone will be unhappy. Just look at what happened with The Witcher Whereas the first few seasons of Game of Thrones proved that if you truly commit to the world, its characters and the plot, you can bring forth something that is compelling and widely liked both by those who were book fans first and people who are introduced to the story by the show. Yes, I'm aware of the problems that even the first seasons of GOT had and I'm by no means a fan of it, and I also know that GOT had entire detailed books while Amazon had little more than a timeline; whether it's a good idea to develop a show based just on that is another question entirely, but the point is that with care and good writing you can succeed with a fantasy TV show. (Even GOT works as a warning example: when you depart from the writer's vision too much and begin to think of your own writing as improvement, you're going to fail and leave a lot of people disgruntled.) For those of us who have long loved Galadriel, this character who is feminine and flawed and powerful, the way ROP has decided to portray her is just incredibly disappointing. 

It seems fitting to end this series with Sam's description of Galadriel:

"Beautiful she is, sir! Lovely! Sometimes like a great tree in flower, sometimes like a white daffadowndilly, small and slender like. Hard as di'monds, soft as moonlight. Warm as sunlight, cold as frost in the stars. Proud and far-off as a snow-mountain, and as merry as any lass I ever saw with daisies in her hair in spring-time. … But perhaps you could call her perilous because she’s so strong in herself. You, you could dash yourself to pieces on her, like a ship on a rock, or drown yourself, like a Hobbit in a river. But neither rock nor river would be to blame."

[hanzajesthanza]

my attempts to avoid thoughts of geralt's hanza continue to fail, as sapkowski talks about them in front of my face.

(from manuscript, on the subject of the hero and the quest):

On this expedition, the Hero (Simple or King) is accompanied by others who are stereotypical-canonical fantasy characters, in other words - clichés:

Wizard-Mentor (the aforementioned MERLIN, Obi-wan Kenobi, Gandalf, Allanon, Belgarath, Sephrenia or Moiraine, who supports the hero with advice and help); Faithful Servant (in the case of the King, literally, in the case of the Simple, rather a childhood friend, Sam Gamgee. He serves the plot to recite wise folk maxims and prove that the simple people are the most morally healthy; or to save the ass of his master/friend where magic and a sharp sword will not help, and common sense and a strong, faithful arm will suffice). Good Knight (charismatic LANCELOT, always loyal and ready to fight, sometimes with some dark secret in his life); Worse Knight (always with some dark secret in his life, ambitious like Boromir, in the clutches of Evil, secretly collaborates with Evil, regrets betrayal, undergoes catharsis, perishes); Trickster - Conniver (see LOKI in "Materia Magiczna"**), cheerful, but can cause trouble, which attracts like a magnet; Damsel in Distress, who is saved from danger on the way and included in the team. Usually a princess in disguise. For several volumes of the cycle she does not like the Hero, in the last she becomes his wife.

* Type A = Percival, a hero who does not have power and is searching it, and Type B = King Arthur, a hero who has lost his power and wants to regain it. in other words, Type A = Reynevan and Type B = Geralt :)

** another chapter of the book, "Materia magica, or the Little Magical Alphabetical Lexicon," it's a glossary of various myth and legend. in loki's entry, he recounts some myths of loki and equivalates him with other figures across various traditions: Odysseus, Pryderi, Bricriu, Mordred, Alyosha Popovich, Coyote, Anansi, Maui). then he lists a few fantasy/spec fic characters he categorizes as trickers: Cugel (Dying Earth), Kickaha (World of Tiers), Coyote (Coyote Blue), Peter Lake (Winter's Tale), Moonglum (Elric of Melniboné), Nifft and Haldar (Nifft the Lean), Random (Chronicles of Amber), Saruman (Lord of the Rings), Shimrod (Lyonesse), Silk (The Belgariad and The Malloreon), Gray Mouser (Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser), Talen (The Elenium).

my thoughts:

pretty obvious assignments here, for the most part.

regis is the Wizard-Mentor, but, as he soon loses his mystique, his intellectual, philosophizing manner becomes mundane and irritating than providing magical provenance. he advises incessantly, answering questions before they're asked, giving guidance when no one asked. he only appears to be omniscient, and the others may think he's so smart because he's hundreds of years older than them, but is really just a guy, a middle aged man with a troubled youth which he learned from. his advice is not magically guided and for this reason is fallable, mortal, human. maybe the cliché is also played with in that he's a vampire, not a wizard, sorcerer, or priest, "‘I see.’ The poet sighed. ‘Is Regis a sorcerer?’ ‘No. No, not a sorcerer.’" ... as vampires are typically evil and regis is decidedly a force of good. (on this topic, @wampirzielarz once compared-contrasted gandalf and regis and it was super interesting :))

dandelion is a combination of the Faithful Servant and the Trickster. he's geralt's best friend, and doesn't fight alongside him with sword but his presence is necessary to our hero for moral support, that all makes the first part an obvious assignment... and... sapkowski lists a wide variety of tricksters of various moral alignments, but amongst them are some heroes and some best friends of heroes (and anti-heroes). and asides from being geralt's closest friend, dandelion is, after all, a rascal, who uses words and good looks to get what he wants from people. "a cynic, a lecher, a womanizer and a liar." (also, because i think szarlej also fits this double-definition as well, i won't hesitate to give them to dandelion, as they serve pretty similar functions alongside their respective heroes).

milva is the Good Knight, "always loyal and ready to fight" describes her perfectly, and her 'dark secret' was her pregnancy and plans for abortion. (though, the attribution of lancelot... well, maybe this is why some keen eyes saw a potential in yenva). anyhow, the playfulness with the cliché comes from the fact that she's a woman, which is supposed to be surprising that the hero's strongest ally is a woman. i think the "charismatic" attribute is also supposed to be played with here, as milva is simple and not too well-spoken, only so in her cursing. in other words, she's a peasant woman, and not a born-and-bred nobleman. also, for her gender, she is a play on another trope sapkowski mentions a couple of pages later, but i can't go into it now because it's too funny.

cahir is the Worse Knight, though perhaps in reverse, for all of his associations with Evil was in the past and shed like sports colors when he changed teams. he has no betrayal, "I will never betray you, witcher," all of his ‘betrayal’ was before he was even allied with the hero. but of course, for these sins, he "undergoes catharsis, perishes".

the Damsel in Distress is evidentially angouleme, being "saved from danger on the way and included in the team." the rebuking of the cliché, of course, is that geralt is "genuinely angry, genuinely confused, genuinely embarrassed" when she offers her "gratitude" to him. also, that she is no princess in disguise, just an ordinary girl, though she is confused for the princess they're after (who also happens to be another play on the damsel in distress cliché). and again, like milva, i think angouleme is related to another specifically female character cliché sapkowski calls out; but i'll save it for another post.

[drakaripykiros130ac]

Green stans complaining that the show is pro-Black never ceases to amuse me, considering how the writers are doing their best to make the Greens somewhat sympathetic. If anything, the Greens are the ones being “whitewashed” and it’s pretty evident.

In the book, the Greens are portrayed as cartoonishly evil. Alicent is literally the “evil stepmother” who purposely seduced Viserys so she would be Queen (speculated she was sleeping with him even before Aemma died). She is the ring leader of the Greens, knows exactly what she is doing and purposely let her husband’s body to rot while she made plans to stage a coup and crown her own son. Otto has no ulterior motive for doing what he does: he is a pure opportunist who schemes just like a villain from the time Jaehaerys I is King. Aegon is implied to be a r*pist. He is constantly sexually harassing servant girls and is just a despicable human being. As for Aemond…he is pure evil. He has no redeeming qualities. Period.

What the writers of the show try to portray: Alicent constantly acting the victim and preaching the Faith when she does despicable things (plotting, lying, stalking, gossiping), Aegon is a sad little boy who r*pes servant girls because he doesn’t get any attention/love from Mommy and Daddy, Aemond “accidentally” killed Lucerys, Crispin “accidentally” killed Lord Beesbury. I wouldn’t be surprised if everything the greens do starting season 2 will also be “accidents”. Oh, and they decided to make Helaena a “dreamer” just to give her character some purpose since she is completely useless in the book. And even her being a “dreamer” is pointless. She is repeating things that nobody in the show listens to and as most viewers have read the book, we already know what she says. It’s not some great mystery.

I mean, this is just ridiculous.

The show is pro-Black according to them although the writers did a lot of things that weren’t in the book which make the Blacks look bad: Viserys ripping Aemma open for the baby, Daemon killing Rhea Royce, Rhaenys clearly showing some resentment towards Rhaenyra because she is jealous that she never got to be the Queen and Rhaenyra is (I have to say that I really dislike how they are portraying Rhaenys in the show, compared to how she is in the book) and Rhaenyra’s first three sons being confirmed bastards (although it was left ambiguous in the book) not only through hair color but skin color as well.

If anything, I should be angry that the writers of the show are cutting the greens A LOT of slack.

GRRM is literally Team Black and very anti-green. If the Blacks still look better in the show despite everything, it’s because they are supposed to be the ones in the right. The anti-heroes. I mean, GRRM didn’t write the book to portray the “badness” of both sides in an equal manner (despite what many Green stans like to believe). You’re going to argue with the writer of the actual book?

[jasminewalkerauthor]

Trope chats: Hero's journey

The Hero's Journey, a narrative structure first articulated by Joseph Campbell, has left an indelible mark on literature, becoming a fundamental template for countless stories across cultures and epochs. This essay explores the use of the Hero's Journey, its pitfalls, evolution, and its enduring appeal, shedding light on its profound impact on storytelling.

The Hero's Journey is a monomyth, a universal template found in myths, legends, and epic tales across diverse cultures. It typically consists of stages such as the Call to Adventure, Crossing the Threshold, Tests and Trials, the Abyss, Transformation, Atonement, and the Return. Protagonists embark on a transformative journey, facing challenges, meeting mentors, and ultimately emerging changed, having attained wisdom or growth.

The Hero's Journey serves as a scaffolding for many literary works, providing a reliable and relatable structure that resonates with audiences. Iconic characters like Frodo Baggins in "The Lord of the Rings" and Luke Skywalker in "Star Wars" follow the Hero's Journey, creating an accessible and familiar narrative arc. This structure helps writers create compelling stories that tap into universal themes of struggle, self-discovery, and triumph.

While the Hero's Journey offers a powerful storytelling tool, its formulaic application can lead to predictability and cliché. When writers adhere too closely to the prescribed stages, narratives may become formulaic and lose their freshness. Additionally, the structure may not suit every story or genre, risking a lack of innovation and diversity in narrative approaches.

The Hero's Journey has evolved over time, adapting to cultural shifts and reflecting changing perspectives on heroism. Modern reinterpretations, such as anti-heroes or flawed protagonists, challenge the traditional mold. The evolution also extends to the diversification of heroes, with stories featuring protagonists from various backgrounds, genders, and perspectives, broadening the narrative landscape.

The enduring appeal of the Hero's Journey lies in its ability to resonate with the human experience. Audiences connect with protagonists facing challenges, overcoming adversity, and undergoing personal growth. The journey mirrors life's struggles and triumphs, providing a narrative framework that speaks to the universal desire for self-discovery and transformation. The familiarity of the Hero's Journey contributes to its timeless allure, offering a narrative roadmap that resonates across cultures and generations.

The Hero's Journey stands as a testament to the power of archetypal storytelling. Its widespread use in literature underscores its ability to capture the essence of the human experience. While the pitfalls of formulaic application exist, the evolution of the Hero's Journey showcases its adaptability and enduring relevance. As storytellers continue to innovate and explore new narrative territories, the Hero's Journey remains a steadfast companion on the literary odyssey, inviting audiences to embark on transformative adventures across the vast landscape of human imagination.

[misrepresentedmorallygrey]

PROPAGANDA

Jason Todd

Jason is as someone else put it succinctly "a mass-murdering terrorist and tax-evader". He does evil, the story constantly condemns him as evil and sinful and thuggish and stupid and uneducated and overemotional. He does have a lower and more selective kill count than Luke Skywalker, John Wick, Disney Mulan, etc. So you got part of the fandom writing an annoying flood of fan fiction about him being a warm soft nice guy skipping through the daisies with his fam (hey have fun, guys). Then you got another side picking out the worst ex-canon comics for him (while they ignore the worst ex-canon comics for their own fave characters i.e. "my fave only did evil because of a mind-control potion, but Jason always chooses to be evil even though the story and the writer himself said he was crazy and broken and suffering from magic insanity")... and accuse him of being a cop (he is a cop-hating cop-killing terrorist murderer criminal thuggy thug thug constantly being hunted by law enforcement in a world bursting to the brim with actual copaganda while the heroes regularly cooperate with police—so many anti-fans are misusing the term copaganda because they hate this fictional character to the point they want to train people to be blind to actual copaganda). Jason is absolutely a villain—and he returned to his hometown when it was a battlefield with hundreds killed in the latest conflict, ruled over by a child-killing torture-enthusiast. War is always wrong and evil, and Jason was raised to be a soldier in that war—and when the promises of justice and safety never came true, he decided to seize power through murder. Jason is evil. He is inarguably a lesser evil than what usually plagues the town. Innocent people are alive because he got his hands dirty. He is such an asshole. People like him should not exist. He shot a 10-year-old in the chest, and nobody not even the 10-year-old cared the next day because it really wasn't a big deal. He was kidnapped by a billionaire with a taste for young boys, and it's literally not a big deal. His crimesagainst fashion are unforgivable tho.

Batman's adopted son and second Robin that got killed by the Joker and came bag to enact a revenge plan by becoming a Gotham drug lord. He had a duffel bag of 8 decapitated heads at some point and planted a bomb on the Batmobile and then got his throat slit by Batman to save the Joker. He stole his older adoptive brother's (first Robin) identity and blew up a high school but he forbade Gotham's drug rings from selling to children and actually became an anti-hero in Gotham and killed the people Batman wouldn't (rapists, drug lords, etc.). He attacked his little adoptive brother (third Robin) and beat him to a bloody pulp. He also slept with Batman's baby mama. He raised a fucked up Superman clone with kindness. He has lead teams of Outlaws on multiple occasions that love him. He's on good terms with many (not all) of Gotham's vigilantes.

Listen. I love the guy, I love him dearly, but I feel like people these days are trying to make him like completely justified in everything he did?? And like you can see where he’s coming from, sure, but my man did absolutely beat Tim Drake, a teen, half to death for the crime of being Robin. He’s morally gray! He had decapitated heads in duffle bags! Let my guy be morally gray please stop woobifying him

Jason Todd is regularly stripped of his autonomy in fandom to make him more palatable and “redeemable”. They attribute his legitimate trauma, annger, and pain driven actions to “pit madness” a side effect of the way he was resurrected. Not only that but so many people don’t even know what he actually does when he comes back, it’s like a shitty game of telephone where each person tells the next a slightly altered version of his return and at the end everyone thinks that Jason hates the kid who took up the Robin mantle after him and wants to kill him and that he is mad at Bruce for no reason and all Bruce needs to do is tell Jason that he is loved (despite Jason having a lot of evidence to the contrary) and everything will be all better. His values and beliefs and convictions are treated as invalid and his trauma is something he needs to just get over because it’s inconvenient and harmful to everyone else and doesn’t he know that everyone else was also traumatized by his death?

vigilante who kills people • traumatized as hell • has trouble differentiating between good deeds and selfishness • shot his little brother on the spine • tried to kill his other two brothers • operates under the belief that controlling evil is the only way to help innocents • has an immesurable love for the people of Gotham and really wants them to be happy and safe!! • please for the love of god fandom stop talking about him as if the bad things hes done are forgiveable AND as if the good things he's done don't matter

Gonna be honest even canon misinterprets him. There's no winning. All you need to know about DC universe is that multiple different writers have had a go at writing him and every time he is wildly different which is maybe why people interpret him very differently?? Canon interprets him in a he did everything wrong way a lot of times and fanon interprets him in a he did nothing wrong way because he is blorbo to many, when he is very much someone who did a lot of shit wrong but also had a lot going on, while thats still not an excuse for like, a lot of maiming and murder, and (usually) later in the timeline he is less trigger happy and has evened out from villain to morally grey, his whole "redemption" to being morally grey is usually up to fan interpretation whether or not they're chill with letting him keep murdering bad people or they say no murder in general, and whether or not bats is chill with the whole he keeps murdering people thing since he has a staunch no murder stance. Also!! a lot of people in fanon write in the whole pit insanity thing as a way to excuse a lot of the things he did while in his full on villain era, and like,,, i don't think that was canon??? like i straight up think the whole pit madness thing was made up but a lot of DC canon is wibbly wobbly already so its hard to say. hope this wasn't too word salady but i hope you understand that whenever you are consuming any piece of media, canon or fanon, with this man in it you have literally no idea what you are stumbling into you, you are playing fucking spin the wheel, which flavour of Jason Todd are we reading about today. I will say though, canon does objectively treat him like dogshit and only really brings him back every now and then as a punching bag for Batsy whenever they want to have edgy emo abusive dad bruce wayne because comic writers think found family is for chumps and so is being a good parent and actively resist it with every ounce of their soul :/ so I understand why fanon strays so far away, it's just that fanon also can't seem to agree on the degree of morally grey he is?? idk someone save Jason it's the worst custody battle of the century between canon and fanon.

Miguel O'Hara

he is dj internalized homophobia. he is so so sick in the head

[marvelstars]

Tolkien LOTR vs George Lucas STAR WARS

Disclaimer: talking with mutuals about Tolkien and Lucas this came up and wanted to share.

I believe both Tolkien and Lucas were anti imperialism(represented by the ring/empire respectively) and anti war but their takes is completely different because they lived different times.

Tolkien story of the lost kings who died for nothing seeking power represents pretty well the story of the first World War in which the imperial powers of Europe became excited over their new hability to put ot test weapons and made a local conflict into an all out war between countries exploiting the nationalism of the people to push them towards war, the tirednes and dissapointment over fighting a war for men who only wanted power is excelently interpreted in the Lord of the Rings in which the only solution is to destroy the ring and try to live peacefully with each other and support honest work and protect lives the best way you can, with wise kings and wise elves who care about people and it´s well being. That´s what I see Tolkien going for, he also tackles the idea that no matter how noble or peaceful like Fredo or Bilbo we could be, power still can corrupts us if we expend enough time around it. Power can corrupt everybody and the best we can do is try to not make it the most important thing in our lifes like Aragorn did when he became King.

Lucas wasn´t a soldier like Tolkien so he is much more idealist than him, he grew up and became excited over the protests for the war of Vietnam in the US and the consequences of WWII with the creation of the atomic bomb. So Star Wars battle in the OT isn´t just about greedy people trying to get power by any mean neccesary, the first trilogy is about a fair war fought agaisnt the imperial power who offered peace in exchange of freedom, which is another face imperialism can take and the death star(atomic bomb) is the one weapon they believe can “end all resistance” "end all wars" but they are wrong because just like in a New Hope, the Death Star only makes other people more nervous about it´s use and most will seek how to oppose it with similar means or with different kinds of resistence.

Star Wars presents the problematic dilema of war not being good on itself but becoming neccesary when your opponent will not engage in dialogue by any other means, so just like in LOTR the kingdoms have to join to form a military, the rebel alliance is there to fight the Empire.

The Jedi Order in the OT represents the old order, estatus quo that the Empire defeated to put their own Order, they are not evil by any means but by presenting a “ends justifices the means” philosophy by lying to Luke and forgetting about Anakin´s humanity and existence in exchange of dehumanizing him and seeing him only as a machine like Obi-Wan did, this doesn´t bring them the victory, mostly their plan gets revealed and rejected by Luke, the main hero of the OT, the fandom may have a very different take on the Jedi but Lucas definitely didn´t write the Jedi as flawless beings but as a tragic order that after the zenit of their power fell along with Anakin, literally and espiritually too. Otherwise Lucas would not talk about Anakin being a victim of the system who lost his mind trying to do the right thing, he wasn´t just part of the Republic but also part of the Jedi Order.

Luke, while dealing with his own feelings of anger, need for revenge for his murdered family and wish for freedom along with his friends, also learns humility by losing his first fight with Vader but also empathy, he has feel the darkness inside himself, he was told his father wasn´t always like that and he has felt Vader´s twisted love for him so he humanizes his enemy instead of dehumanizing him and seeks to save him from the darkside, because this has become the only way to defeat Vader and the Emperor while they are together and also because Luke wants Vader to be his father just as much as Vader wants Luke to be his Son.

So in the end family is the thing that saves the universe in Star Wars just like friendship, care, empathy and appreciation of the simple and beautiful things saved the people of LOTR. The Jedi imo in the PT and OT were not evil, they had their own wisdom and brought good things to the story like honor and duty but they were wrong to try to force Luke agaisn´t his father, they were wrong for keeping Anakin away from his family and they were wrong to forget love in exchange of duty.

This is also why I believe Luke doesn´t just brings back Anakin from the darkside, he did the same with the Jedi Order, he became the kind of Jedi Anakin always dreamed to be, with enough freedom to act with kindness, love and caring as well as honor and duty, a more balanced Jedi Order.

So it´s a complete shame disney missed the memo and makes more merchandise of the Jedi because they are more marketable forgetting the deep message of the story. Luke in the Mandalorian and ST isn´t ROTJ Luke, but a badly done PT Jedi style of Luke and that´s a complete tragedy imo because it misses the main message of the story, that you don´t have to reject love and family to support ideals and do your duty. They make you whole not less the person you are.

[thediktatortot]

I really implore fans of media (whatever media it is you enjoy) to understand why a story is told in the way it's told. Even bad stories have a structure and a meaning and if you know the basis of how stories are structured and how the characters fit into that structure, the more you're going to be able to understand the story and better enjoy the characters as a whole.

What is an Antagonist? An opponent, villain or Rival.

The Villain is a person whose intentions are morally corrupt or anti-human and most off deliberately harmful to those around them.

(ie. Thanos from Avengers, Billy and Stu from Scream, Henry from Stranger Things)

The Anti-Villain is a person who commits corrupt, unjust or morally wrong actions in the belief that they are doing the right thing.

(ie. Magneto from X-Men, Killmonger from Black Panther, Jason Carver from Stranger Things)

The False Antagonist is a person who's viewed by the audience or the characters as a antagonist, but through the story shows themselves to have been falsely labeled as an antagonist or a villain.

(ie. Severus Snape from Harry Potter, Alexei and Billy Hargrove from Stranger Things)

The Hidden Antagonist is a person who's intentions are not shown to be corrupt until later in the story, leading the audience and the characters into a false sense of security.

(ie. Senator Palpatine from Star Wars, Agatha Harkness from Wandavision, Ernesto de la Cruz from Coco)

The Inanimate Antagonist is a non-human force that can be anything from the weather to an illness or an object like a meteor or a car.

The Inner Antagonist is when the main character is their own Antagonist, fighting against themselves through the story.

(ie. Drug use, mental or physical illness, change in morals, desires vs needs)

The Hero Antagonist is a person who's intentions and morals are not corrupt, but they act against the Protagonist in the story.

(ie. The Roadrunner from Looney Tunes, Carl Hanratty from Catch Me If You Can, The Parents of Stranger Things)

No Antagonists is a type of story where there is no direct force working against the Protagonist. This can often be shown as someone living day to day life or there is an unclear singular force working against them.

Stories can often have and most often do, have multiple Antagonists. Some stories use these different types of forces to put even more pressure on a Protagonist and to give depth to the stories they are writing. Often times, nothing is cut and dry when it comes to a persons intentions in a piece of media, but knowing what sort of force they are within the story they are written in can help you understand the Protagonists journey on a even deeper level.

What is a Protagonist? A lead character, hero or heroine of a narrative.

The Hero Protagonist is a person who's goals are often viewed as courageous, admirable or charitable in nature and often requires a sacrifice or change in order to achieve their goals.

(ie. Captain America from Avengers, Superman from DC Comics, Frodo Baggens from Lord Of The Rings)

The Anti Hero is a person who's actions or morals may be honorable or good, but their actions go against those morals due to necessity or irresponsibility but in the end the audience is rooting for them to win.

(ie. Deadpool from Marvel Comics, Batman from DC Comics, Kali from Stranger Things)

The Tragic Hero is a Hero Protagonist that throughout their journey are corrupted by either surrounding forces or by a fatal flaw within their own character, leading them to fall from the Hero status they once held.

(ie. Anakin Skywalker from Star Wars, Jason Todd from DC Comics)

The Passive Protagonist is a person who's actions are not the leading force of the story, the driving actions of their journey are controlled and moved by other characters and forces in the story.

(ie. Forrest Gump from Forrest Gump, Karl Childers from Sling Blade, Will Byers from Stranger Things)

The Villain Protagonist is a character who is still the focus of the story, but they are not necessarily being cheered to win. These types of characters are often a window into the darker side of life whether we sympathize with them in the end or not.

(ie. Dexter from Dexter, Gru from Despicable Me, Loki from Loki, Walter White from Breaking Bad)

The Protagonist itself does not automatically mean the character is a good person and it's important to remember that when reading or writing. A protagonist is simply the Main Character, the person who the story's focus is about and people themselves are deep and involved people with lives that are different from every other person around them even in small ways.

Understanding a characters role in their story is important for understanding the character on a base level.

I highly recommend watching other videos from that channel and other media analysis channels as the more you know on how to understand a story, the more you will get out of the stories you entertain yourself with or create.