#i get so many 'tolkien's denethor is a bad person but in a more complicated intriguing way than people think' responses

[anghraine]

I posted this quote nearly ten years ago and never get tired of periodically reblogging the reminder of what JRR Tolkien's Denethor is actually like.

Denethor and the palantír

The breaking strain of Denethor’s confrontation of Sauron must be distinguished from the general strain of using the Stone. The latter Denethor thought he could endure (and not without reason) …

It may be noted that the effects were different. Saruman fell under the domination of Sauron and desired his victory, or no longer opposed it. Denethor remained steadfast in his rejection of Sauron, but was made to believe that his victory was inevitable, and so fell into despair. The reasons for this difference were no doubt that in the first place Denethor was a man of great strength of will, and maintained the integrity of his personality until the final blow of the (apparently) mortal wound of his only surviving son. He was proud, but this was by no means merely personal: he loved Gondor and its people, and deemed himself appointed by destiny to lead them in this desperate time. And in the second place the Anor-stone was his by right, and nothing but expediency was against his use of it in his grave anxieties. He must have guessed that the Ithil-stone was in evil hands, and risked contact with it, trusting his strength. His trust was not entirely unjustified. Sauron failed to dominate him.

—Unfinished Tales, “The Palantíri”

I’ve been meaning to (re?)post this for awhile. While the essay didn’t exactly alter how I see Denethor, since this is pretty much how I read him in LOTR, it did really cement that view and shape my conception of what he’s meant to be.

[cafeleningrad]

morally gray character... apart from many younger target demographic spheres watering the complication of recognizing the right choice and struggle along the way, if not following the ethical way to the the right decision, from a conflicted Boromir to Han Solo, guy who's a bit rude but charming rogue with a heart of gold who's just a bit too cool to state out right that he's there fore the right reasons....

once out of a simple didactic territory, every more fleshed out character will get entwined with the complications of morality, either with own principles, expectations of others, choice, lack of information or maturity, social expectation, being down on luck or also shaking up the reader's preconception if things they consider "right" are actually "right". Yes sure, in a "will you save the world form the big Spaghetti monster scenario", choices are easy. Either the world end or not. Once it gets beyond such simplified conflicts, simple "X good, Y bad" morality itself might not be the biggest friction of a plot anymore if the story wants to be honest about all the variety of human experiences. Such can't be reduced by two labels. Maybe some people are in life situations in which choices aren't easy, at some point losses have to be dealt with, and life isn't a zero sum game of karma points.

Even take a simple sitcom like the Office. None is a particular scummy person but even in a very dramatized way very close to people you would find in the office. Nice girl who's so insecure she gets engaged to a not so great guy and breaks off the engagement way too late to out without appearing like a coward or with a bit of little spine but for her it's step for growth. Or a narcissistic boss who crosses way too many boundaries to appear or liked but does by time make the right calls to protect his employees. Or the usually nice and harmless costumer service employee who talks way too much much about sopas and celebrities - she means no harm, she will help you no questions asked, but it can be annoying. In the end they aren't bad people but they're not always great either. The measurement isn't morality here but how to best deal with different personalities. I think the show was this successful because it hit close to reality in the experience that some coworkers are all living their own little lives, and they aren't well meaning yet not always easy to compromise with out own life style.

Going into more deeper territory in literature you won't often have grand heroes who go after a big bad one, and all conflict is ended. Even though many copycats of Tolkien's retraced the outlines of Middle Earth - legendary swords, three main species (elves, dwarves, humans) living in conflict but fighting against one Dark Lord, and like a central intelligence, all evil dies immediately with him - Tolkien himself might have had one big bad but the harm Sauron caused lives on after him. The Shire is damaged, Theoden fell into depression with or without Sauron's help, Grima just aided the process, and the relationship within Denethor's family is complicated by favouritism before the Ring surfaces as source of conflict. Even with a central bad guy, Tolkien did not overlook how pre-affected characters can be entering a central situation, and how certain events aren't easy to deal with.

Or even without big impacts, I think good romances are the most honest when it comes to complicated relationships. Recently I read Miss Smilla's fine sense for Snow. The central bad guys enact Danish colonialsm in Greenland for their own purposes. The story is told from the central perspective of protagonist Smilla Jaspersen. Although a deeply layered protagonist hiding their vulnerability under multiple defensive layers, like sarcasm, trying to do everything alone, resourcefulness, she does also sabotage herself for deeper connections, treating people who wish to help and support her coldly. The judgement if the reader likes her is left to each reader themselves but without her character being marked by trauma of being uprooted, colonial pressure, not so healthy coping mechanisms, and a certain comfort in misery, the motives of inability of communication, ice, snow, and the quiet but kind relationship to the murder victim would not work at all. In fact, if Smilla wasn't oen to dissect everything around her, even human connections, her scientific conclusions driving the plot wouldn't be believable. Maybe an even quieter, calm story would the movie Past Lives. It's a simple romance that two characters held affection for each other but they never get together. It's a simple story. One character is more invested in the other, than the other character in them but that's a situation without much blame. That's how it is, it hurts, sometimes do find each other in situations which are not as simple as expected. The potential for a deeper romance hangs in the air, perhaps it would be terrible if she left her husband but that moral dilemma never arises. The story isn't about adultery and the reasons behind it but letting desires and visions go.

All in all, the way that current fiction discussions are held overlook the potential to tell stories which aren't didactic. Yeah, of courses stories can have a stance on dark themes of adultery, abuse, breaking free of bad sitautions etc. . But already at step 1 people are arguing if such topics should even exist in fiction. In my opinion, if stories pass step 1 and directly tap into the complications of certain issues, the story can create be cathartic about confronting maybe not the greatest points in life but also understanding for people who don't do well, if not the chance to do better. Or simply telling about stories which don't want to tell me that "thing X is bad actually". Even strories for adults tend to treat their target demographic as if they were 5 years old.

[middle-earth-mythopoeia]

On Fingon rescuing Maedhros and why it’s so touching 

Long before, in the bliss of Valinor, before Melkor was unchained, or lies came between them, Fingon had been close in friendship with Maedhros; and though he knew not yet that Maedhros had not forgotten him at the burning of the ships, the thought of their ancient friendship stung his heart.

I cannot stop thinking about this scene even though I read it for the first time about 15 years ago. It’s one of the most moving scenes in the Silmarillion, and that’s saying a lot. I know it’s been talked to death, but there’s a reason for that; I think it stands out among other similar stories in the history of Middle-earth. There are many rescues in Tolkien’s works, and all of them are examples of selflessness and bravery, but there are key differences that make Fingon’s rescue of Maedhros unlike anything else.

Most of the time, when one character rescues another, it’s because their relationship is already strong, and the goodness of the person being saved is not in question: Finrod fighting the werewolf to save Beren, and Lúthien freeing Beren from Tol-in-Gaurhoth; Beleg rescuing Túrin from the Orcs; Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli setting out to save Merry and Pippin from the Uruk-hai; Sam rescuing Frodo from the tower of Cirith Ungol; Gandalf and Pippin saving Faramir from Denethor; Gandalf and the Eagles rescuing Frodo and Sam from Mount Doom. Of course, I’m sure that Gandalf would have saved Sméagol too, had he lived—which is important. There are probably other examples I’m not thinking of.

In other cases, such as Glorfindel saving Frodo, the characters don’t know each other before the rescue, but there is no doubt of the goodness of the person being saved and the necessity of saving them. 

Fingon and Maedhros are different. 

“The thought of their ancient friendship” implies that Fingon’s friendship with Maedhros is a thing of the past when he sets out to rescue him from Thangorodrim. Fingon almost certainly believes that Maedhros deserted him and his family, forcing them to either turn back to Valinor (to beg the Valar to pardon them despite the Doom of Mandos), or cross the seemingly impassable Helcaraxë—and cross it they do, with many deaths. Just the memory of their friendship hurt because Fingon believed that Maedhros betrayed him. But what does he do as soon as he finds out Maedhros has been captured? He goes to rescue him, alone. “Justly renowned” indeed.

Even before the burning of the ships, Fingon’s friendship with Maedhros was strained by the rift between their fathers, and “lies came between them.” Fëanor drew his sword and threatened Fingolfin, and then Maedhros sided with him by following him into exile, which must have hurt Fingon. It’s not clear if they had a chance to speak to each other face to face until after the Darkening of Valinor. They were both present in Tirion during the Oath and the debate that followed, but I think there was too much happening for them to resolve anything, if they spoke at all. And then the Kinslaying was unfolding, and Fëanor deserted Fingolfin’s host in Araman. So, even if Fingon and Maedhros had a chance to speak during Fëanor’s exile or the flight of the Noldor, there were years of estrangement that they did not have a chance to fully heal before the burning of the ships.

After all of this, the rescue really says something about both their characters: Fingon’s selflessness, steadfastness, bravery, and refusal to condemn others, and Maedhros’ ability to inspire that loyalty, even when their friendship was at the breaking point. Maedhros had more in common with Nerdanel than with Fëanor, more of her gentleness and patience, and I think Fingon knew him for who he really was. He saw the good in Maedhros when Maedhros probably didn’t even see it himself. Despite everything that had happened, despite their estrangement, Fingon decided without a moment’s hesitation that Maedhros was worth risking his own life for. And it’s impossible to overstate the sheer bravery of going to Angband alone to rescue someone.

From Maedhros’ perspective, everything has been going from bad to worse. There is a seemingly unsolvable rift among his family, he becomes estranged from his best friend (partly due to his own actions), the Two Trees are killed, Finwë is murdered (both a personal loss and a major complication for the political situation), the Silmarils are stolen (symbolizing everything the Noldor have lost), he swears the Oath—believing it is righteous—and then he sees how destructive and wrong the path is that Fëanor is leading him down, both through the Kinslaying and the burning of the ships. I think that by the time Maedhros is watching the ships burn he regrets many of his actions, but it’s too late. And then it gets worse: he loses his father (complicated though their relationship must be at this point, I don’t think Maedhros wanted Fëanor to die), and then he is captured and tortured. How did Maedhros feel, when he heard Fingon’s song? Because after such terrible things had happened, in which he himself took part, the fact that a former friend came to his rescue had to seem nearly unbelievable.

But Fingon is also a Kinslayer; he joined the battle without knowing how it started, but he still has innocent blood on his hands. That Fingon, a Kinslayer, begs for mercy for another Kinslayer, is just another thing that makes the rescue so touching. Fingon doesn’t pray to Manwë to save Maedhros: he prays to Manwë to give Maedhros a painless death. And the result is eucatastrophe: the rescue is possible after all.

And Fingon’s refusal to condemn Maedhros—instead, his decision to march into Morgoth’s domain to rescue him—allows for things still greater to unfold, like the healing of the strife among the Noldor. It’s significant that Fingon’s rescue—and Maedhros’ abdication of the crown to Fingolfin—heals the rift between their houses, and that would not have happened if Fingon had not cared about his former friend so much. It says that when you show others mercy, whether they deserve it or not, good things will come of it. And ultimately, it’s not just the people who are unequivocally good who deserve saving. 

I’ve encountered a point of view (which I consider both abhorrent and antithetical to the themes of Tolkien’s writing) that Fingon should have killed Maedhros to somehow prevent the Second and Third Kinslayings. It’s true that Maedhros went on to do truly terrible deeds. But Fingon could not have foreseen them, and it’s not right to punish someone for something they have not yet done. Maedhros, as a result of being saved, did many good deeds as well: relinquishing the crown to Fingolfin, holding and defending one of the most dangerous areas in Eastern Beleriand, and creating the Union of Maedhros, among other things. I think Gandalf’s words about Sméagol are relevant:

Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. 

Like Frodo’s mercy towards Sméagol, I think that Fingon’s mercy towards Maedhros was the right thing. Frodo’s pity towards Sméagol probably came, in part, from his ability to see how much they had in common as Ringbearers. And likewise I think that Fingon, regretting his actions at Alqualondë, still felt pity for Maedhros because he understood that they were not so different.