#like a person is allowed to dislike a character

[hollowed-theory-hall]

Do you think of Ginny as a “pick me girl”? Some of the things you say in your post makes her come across as that, which is sad since she is a strong female character and there’s so many m|m bloggers who shitting on strong female characters these days.

I don't know if you're just looking for a fight or if you're genuine, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt about this subject once.

Yes, I think Ginny comes off as a bit of a "pick me" which I already wrote about here, which I don't think was intentional on JKR's part. I don't think Ginny was intended to come off the way she did.

Like, Ginny in the early books is just, really boring, in my opinion. and I think Ginny in book 5 had the potential to be an interesting character. She had a good sense of humor and she seemed somewhat in line with the twins (though on the crueler side), but I despise Ginny of books 6 and 7.

Like, all power to you for like Ginny and her romance with Harry. Truly, have fun with your canon pairing, I wish you the best and that you find many fics that portray them just as you like to see them.

But I don't see them that way. I think Ginny is a badly written character, and I think her romance with Harry is similarly badly written. It has nothing to do with gay ships. Trust me, if Harry was written into a compelling romance with a well-written female character, I'd be all over that. But he wasn't.

I mean, hell, I don't even ship Drarry, which is the most popular gay ship for Harry because I don't like Draco much. I think he's written well for what he is in the story, but I just don't vibe with him.

Becouse I don't need an excuse to dislike a character or a pairing. I can give my reasons, I have them, but I'm (and anyone else is) allowed to say I just don't vibe with a character. Even if Ginny was the best-written character in literature (she isn't) and her romance with Harry was perfectly written (it isn't) I could still shit on her as much as I want to, you know why?

Becouse she's fictional.

Fictional characters can't be offended. You can't be mean to a fictional character. Because fictional characters don't have feelings. They're not real.

You can say you personally find it sad people don't like Ginny the way you do, and you can be personally disappointed — but it isn't objectively sad. It isn't sad for Ginny becouse Ginny isn't real and only real people have feelings. It's sad to you, that's your opinion.

I love Harry, he's my favorite and I made it no secret, but I have good irl friends who shit on him in casual conversation and I can laugh with them when they make a funny joke about him even when we disagree, you know why? — we agree to disagree. We know Harry is fictional and that he doesn't care. Because he isn't real, he can't care.

So, for me, it doesn't matter if you shit and hate on fictional characters and fictional relationships as long as you're decent to real people.

You aren't a misogynist for disliking a female fictional character. She's fictional. She isn't real. You would be a misogynist if you mistreated irl women because they're women. In the same vein, you aren't a homophobe for disliking a popular gay ship. You would be a homophobe if you mistreated irl gay people because of their sexuality. You aren't wrong for disliking a fictional character or ship for any reason, even if the reason is just "vibes". You would be a dick if you mistreated irl people because they don't think the same as you about a fictional character or ship.

I personally find it sad that fandom seems to have lost the ability to say "agree to disagree" and move on (if the ability ever existed in the first place). I follow some blogs who shit on HJP himself because they post other stuff I find compelling. I follow blogs that post a lot of Drarry because I like how they write Harry even if I don't really care for Draco. You can like someone and enjoy their writing and be friendly with them even if you don't agree with them on some fictional characters and fictional relationships. And if it really bothers you, you can block and move on as many of us do.

So yeah, I think Ginny comes off as a "pick me." I think she's a badly written character, and you can disagree with me on that, you can think she's a strong female character, but that's your opinion, not an objective truth. And I dislike her for being a badly written character, which, I assure you, is gender-natural.

I also think it's important to remember that at the end of the day, we're all just playing with dolls, and the only feelings that matter are those of real people.

[caparrucia]

I think a line where people get confused in the euphoria of "it's just fiction! So it doesn't matter!" Is where bigotry is still bigotry.

Like, I'm not talking about fan works, per se.

Policing fan works is the dumbest, most ineffective thing in the world. And to pretend that when people talk about fandom being racist or deeply misogynistic, people immediately scapegoat into a discussion about how policing fan works is censorship and bad and awful!

But it's not fan works, really.

It's the community spaces. The words you use.

Listen, that female character you hate? She's not real. She doesn't have feelings. But every femme person in your periphery is, so everytime you go on a ran about what a "rancid bitch" she is? The misogyny is real. The character is fake but the people around you are real. Your insistence to couch your dislike in bigotry is what is suspect. You're 100% allowed to dislike things and have personal preferences! That is not up for debate! But the words you use to communicate that matter, and they betray things you've internalized.

The conversation (and frustration!) about brown and Black characters being sidelined in fandom, even in the rare cases when they're pivotal in the source material are not about any one individual person, but rather the racist undertone that permeates the space.

Fictional characters aren't real, their feelings aren't real. You can hate them or love them or sexualize them to your heart content. They're dolls!

But if you bring in your own bigotry into the game of dolls and people call you for it, don't pretend people are saying playing with dolls is itself the problem. They want to play with the dolls too! They'd just want to do so without the slurs. And the ambient bigotry implying they're neither wanted nor welcome in the space.

[reginamillls]

Eddie hate is exhausting tbh, would love not to see it

[relaxxattack]

trying to go through the psycholonials tag why are you people saying the art is ugly and bad what the hell. did you actually read the whole thing or were you turned off by the Pixels on the first page

“it’s not as imaginative or interesting as anything in mspa” what the hell are you talking about.

do you understand how hard it is to get these colors to look this gorgeous together. do you even try to be immersed in zhens mental state (which is quite obviously what the art is evoking especially for characters like percy or the cops).

i would argue that not only is the juxtaposition of this style incredibly whimsical and fun as hell but actually some of it’s more technically advanced than art in homestuck

look at this guy! look at the level of rendering and shadow! how are you thinking this is ugly!

[ganondoodle]

okay, bc i have seen this argument alot now (and it also seems to be the view point of aonuma himself..) is that "zelda cant do everything link does bc whats the point then"

and i take personal offense on that bc its a stupid argument (in. my. very. personal. opinion.- not judging people for liking it. its a ME thing)

whats the point? its that its her. its still a different character, different in story, background, personality, but i WANT to play zelda and she can do everything link does, why does she have to be so restricted and be bend over backwards to find some new way to make her 'useful' when link gets to do basically everything no questions asked (the only thing thats hers is like .. sealing power and sacrificial maiden, which i find a little underwhelming to say the least), if theres no point to it why are there always modders that model swap link with someone else, and in that case it has even less impact bc its an artificial model swap with no changes to the story (which can and should still be different when its the vanilla game with a different protagonist... its still a different character), clearly theres joy in just the model being a different one- and that isnt even to mention the story possibilities, since, again, its stil a different character

if we ever (never ... i know who we are talking about here) get to play as ganondorf i want to him to be just as versatile and active as link is, if we got a point and click adventure game for him instead bc 'whats the point' id be disappointed too- you can find any sort of excuse/explanation for zelda to be singled out but the fact remains it tracks with how female characters are often treated, and that hits a very sore spot for me

i guess i am unfortunately one of those annoying people that want to see female characters be treated exactly the same as male characters, possibly bc i am myself afab but identify as agender and have a deeply personal dislike for anything 'traditional' feminine bc i cannot and never will be able to truly live as myself in real life, it influences all of my work, my work is as just as much as my opinion on this, very personal

and in line with my point about modding, i see theres joy in just beign able to play as her even if its like this, i get that, i also get it for the creative aspect (though that mechanic worries me even more for the future bc it really seems to be the path now that -freedom = good, linear anything = bad-) it is a different idea and its not like i cant see that value- im not trying be "right" either, just bc i have that opinion doesnt mean i need everyone to agree, its a very personal thing, if you like it good for you! not for me though, and i think both of that is equally valid

i just personally wish she was allowed to be just like link, fight just like him but be different bc its still her and not him in the end- to be physically/playstyle like jsut like him, but you know ... as her, i dont think shed stop being zelda if she could wield a sword just like him

i dont really know how to get my point/feelings across, i dont want to step too much into personal stuff nor spam people with something that ultimately doesnt interest me alot, im just saddened by it really

(EDIT: bc i forgot to add this on here again; this isnt as much of a problem as it might sound like here, just the main topic i wanted to talk about; why im so uninterested in it is MAINLY bc i dont trust them to write anything interesting/care about lore anymore after totk, im always on the more pessimistic side that thinks its most likely worse than id hope and i know even the past games arent perfect or super interestingly written, but now its much more just a general distrust, together with everything like the price ... im just much less hopeful and cant get excited until i see more of it, like im waiting for the game to get out and reveal that its just as much of a mess and money i regret spending- kind of fear)

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

Still blows my mind the disparity between the Eng and the JP localization of Sonic Frontiers

So in the og English Tails expresses that he needs to part ways from Sonic so he can grow into a hero on his own, right? That he can't grow by being with him?

But like. The director of the game, who worked with Ian Flynn, worked on the JP localization and it's like. You're telling me that when they localized that scene for the Japanese audience

That it was about Tails learning that there are things only he can do? That instead of concluding that he needs to part ways from Sonic and become a hero, he just comes to realizes the ways in which he and Sonic fill each other's gaps? He learns that he already is on equal footing with Sonic. The two of them are just heroes who save people in different ways?

[rewritingcanon]

no girl tell us what you think about jegulily!! im so here for it (tone is weird but I mean that genuinely, I don't ship them so I'm not here to be weird)

dw bae ur tone is fine ! (i’ve been waiting for an ask like this 💀) i think jegulily is... yeah its…. like usually as long as its legal idgaf as long as shippers portray their characters right but regulus fans are literally incapable 😭🙏 WHY WOULD U PAIR A MUGGLEBORN AND A BLOOD SUPREMACIST IM SO DONE WITH DIS FANDOMMMM!! that actually goes for a lot of lily ships like bartylily as well (no clue where that came from either but it’s equally as stupid lmfao).

and jegulily just feels like shoving in lily because people feel bad for ditching her, or shoving in regulus because some people like jily and jegulus and want them (for some reason) to coincide even though it makes zeroooo sense for it to. like, idk if i said this with jegulus before (i yap sm on this account i forget what i say), but like it, jegulily can be done well if a realistic dynamic is taken into account, but the marauders fandom is allergic to nuance and so just chalks up everything regulus does and believes to his neglectful homelife. hes not all-bad, sure, i do feel bad for him, but im nowhere close to shipping him with a woman whos part of the people hes trying to eradicate, or with her man who purposefully went against all pureblood tradition (which is such a large part of james’ character— he is a pureblood that chooses to be seperate from that culture hellooooo plz wake uppppp).

marauders fandom has a chronic “i can fix him” mentality when it comes to wizard neo nazis, i have never understood it. but thats a topic for another day.

jegulily should be filled with envy, toxicity and prejudice stop nerfing it to be some fluffy feel-good polyamorous stable marriage where they raise harry together. yall are looking over the potential. this ship has blood and guts in it plz act like it or else idk what to say 😭 if it doesnt end with at least one of them getting murdered i dont want it.

[silkywishes]

i think maybe somewhere there is something in between "you're not allowed to voice negative opinions on any part of D20's story bc it's all improv!!" which feels like a blanket excuse to bulldoze over any and all opinions you dislike, and "disparaging the cast and crew bc these fictional characters didn't get treated like actual irl human beings"

[doctorodyssey]

i cannot believe there are people who don't care about/hate eddie

[icewindandboringhorror]

I have a big google doc thing where I keep track of media and stuff (putting everything in loosely ranked categories), which is mostly just for my own reference so I know what tv shows I've already seen before, etc. and I never really look back through it, typically just a quick "okay, watched two movie in the past 8 months, need to quickly slap them somewhere in the lists. okay. done. save document. exit". But today I was actually reading through some of the old notes and there are like... MULTIPLE places where my comment is basically "It would have been good if it were about elves" or "I wish there was a fantasy show made in this same style" or "It's well made, but I just keep thinking about how I would like it more if everyone was an elf or was in old 1700s costumes" or etc like...... lol.... Most biased media ranking system on earth blatantly made by someone with an extremely hyperspecific range of narrow interests. It'd be like if a food reviewer only had 5 foods they actually liked, so they'd just go to a pizza place and be like "eh, the pizza was okay, but I just think it would be better if it was cereal instead. :/ ...2 out of 10"

[thevalleyisjolly]

I think part of what troubles me about the opinion that Maglor and Maedhros were the “best” people to raise Elrond and Elros is that many (though not all) such interpretations often refer to fanon interpretations as if they were canon.  Which there’s nothing wrong with enjoying fanon!  But when popular fanon starts being treated as a definitive canon and subsequently starts being used as a lens for textual interpretation and engagement (and in some extreme cases, an excuse for bashing other characters), that’s when it gets a little eyebrow-raising. 

So in this post, I’m going to examine some of the more common fanon beliefs and headcanons around Maglor and Maedhros as parental figures/guardians to Elros and Elrond.  The point is not to debunk them and say that you cannot interpret the texts this way or enjoy them as a fan reading.  Indeed, if there was no textual or analytical basis for these headcanons altogether, they would not exist.  Neither is this meant to bash anyone.  Rather, I’d like to show that many of the assumptions we hold are nowhere near as solid or definitive as they sometimes seem to be, and that there is in fact room for a plurality of different headcanons and readings to coexist without elevating one over the other.

1. Maedhros and Maglor were both involved in Elros and Elrond’s upbringing.

As the wealth of Kidnap Fam content demonstrates, this is a very common headcanon.  However, let’s look at what the Silmarillion says.  Bolding is mine for emphasis.

For Maglor took pity upon Elros and Elrond, and he cherished them, and love grew after between them, as little might be thought; but Maglor’s heart was sick and weary with the burden of the dreadful oath. (”Of the Voyage of Eärendil”)

Nowhere is Maedhros mentioned.  He is mentioned in the version of the story included in The Fall of Gondolin, where the passage instead reads:

For Maidros took pity on Elrond, and he cherished him, and love grew after between them, as little might be thought; but Maidros’ heart was sick and weary with the burden of the dreadful oath. (”The Conclusion of the Quenta Nolodrinwa”)

Christopher Tolkien’s commentary directly interjects after this to observe that the passage was rewritten to be the version in the published Silmarillion, which is an interesting distinction to make when the entire version of the story it comes from is very different from the one in the Silmarillion; it is also worth noting that apart from changing which Son of Fëanor it was, Tolkien kept this passage nearly verbatim in the Silmarillion.

Maedhros is also mentioned in the preceding chapter, in Tolkien’s sketch of the mythology, with the line:

Their [Eärendel and Elwing] son Elrond who is part mortal and part elven, a child, was saved however by Maidros. (”The Conclusion of the Sketch of the Mythology”)

So yes, there was once a version of the story in which Maedhros was the one who spared Elrond (Elros did not yet exist, at least not as Elrond’s brother, at this point in Tolkien’s thinking).  This version of the story differs quite significantly from the published version in the Silmarillion; as Christopher Tolkien comments, the Silmarils were of much less significance and had differing fates (Beren and Lúthien’s Silmaril was lost in the Sea after Elwing threw it in, Maglor threw another into a fiery pit, and the third was taken from Morgoth’s crown and launched into the outer darkness by Eärendil).  Also notably, Eärendil does not intercede on behalf of Middle-earth before the Valar.

Of course, being a Tolkien fan pretty much entails picking and choosing which bits of the Legendarium you like.  If you want to take Tolkien’s original thinking that it was Maedhros rather than Maglor who cherished Elrond and Elros, and mix that with the more common version of events in the Silmarillion, go wild.  You can say that the narrator is unreliable, that it makes logical sense for Maedhros to be involved, or that it’s simply more fun to imagine domestic shenanigans with the last two Sons of Fëanor.  But there’s a difference between blending versions of the story as your own personal headcanon, and asserting that headcanon as the one true fanon.

It is also interesting to observe that at no point are both brothers mentioned in relation to Elrond and Elros; it is either Maglor or Maedhros.  The version in The Fall of Gondolin has Maglor sitting by the Sea and singing in regret after the Third Kinslaying while Maidros saves Elrond; in the Silmarillion, it is only Maglor who takes pity on Elrond and Elros.

2. No one else cared about Elros and Elrond; only Maedhros and Maglor did.

Very explicitly in The Silmarillion, “Great was the sorrow of Eärendil and Elwing for the ruin of the havens of Sirion, and the captivity of their sons, and they feared that they would be slain...” (”Of the Voyage of Eärendil”).  But we also read:

Too late the ships of Círdan and Gil-galad the High King came hasting to the aid of the Elves of Sirion; and Elwing was gone, and her sons.  Then such few of that people as did not perish in the assault joined themselves to Gil-galad, and went with him to Balar; and they told that Elros and Elrond were taken captive, but Elwing with the Silmaril upon her breast had cast herself into the sea. (”Of the Voyage of Eärendil”)

Again, bolding is mine for emphasis.

What we see in the Silm version of the story is that 1) when Sirion was attacked, Círdan and Gil-galad raced to help but were too late, 2) a very large percentage of the population of Sirion died in the Kinslaying, and 3) those who survived reported that Elros and Elrond had been taken captive.  That’s it. 

True, there is no mention of any rescue attempts or negotiations, but there also isn’t mention of anything else because at this point, the narrative returns to Eärendil.  Which makes sense, because the voyage of Eärendil is the whole entire point of the chapter, and arguably the climax of the version of the narrative that’s in The Silmarillion.  It’s not “Of the Captivity of Elros and Elrond,” or “Of the Third Kinslaying,” the main focal point of the story is Eärendil sailing to Aman and pleading for all the people of Middle-earth.

There’s also another version of this story in The Fall of Gondolin, where we read:

...but the folk of Sirion perished or fled away, or departed of need to join the people of Maidros, who claimed now the lordship of all the Elves of the Hither Lands. (”The Conclusion of the Quenta Noldorwa”)

In this version, the survivors do not go to Gil-Galad, but either flee or join Maedhros who now claims lordship of all the Elves.  If you go by this story, then there really is very little possibility of a rescue, since 1) Maedhros is now the most powerful lord among the Elves and claims authority over all who are left, where would they even go if they got away, and 2) it would therefore be a betrayal to stand against or attack one’s lord.  It also opens up the possibility that Elrond (this is the version without Elros) had other survivors of Sirion around him while he was a captive, and was therefore not alone.

What all this means though is that we can headcanon whatever we like regarding what happens in Beleriand during this time, but we really don’t have enough information to definitively say what did or did not happen.  And what information we do have in The Silmarillion at least suggests that Círdan and Gil-galad cared about the people of Sirion and tried to help them, and also that the people of Sirion were not in great shape to be mounting any sort of attack on Maedhros and Maglor.

Also, just because someone who survives a horrifically traumatic mass murder which killed nearly everyone they knew does not immediately go out and fight for the well-being of other survivors, it does not therefore mean that they don’t care about them or that they care less than the perpetrators.

3. Maglor raised Elros and Elrond to adulthood.

This is another one of those instances where the absence of evidence does not make a positive.  We don’t actually know for certain how long Elros and Elrond were with Maglor.  In the early letter where Elros and Elrond are found in a cave, it is implied there that they were left there by the sons of Fëanor after they were taken captive, and later found by other, unspecified Elves.  In another version, in The Fall of Gondolin, it reads:

Yet not all would forsake the Outer Lands where they had long suffered and long dwelt; and some lingered many an Age in the West and North, and especially in the western isles.  And among these were Maglor as has been told; and with him Elrond Half-elven, who after went among mortal Men again... (”The Conclusion of the Quenta Nolodrinwa”)

This is also the version of the story where Elros does not exist and it is “from [Elrond] alone the blood of the Firstborn and the seed divine of Valinor have come among Mankind” (”The Conclusion of the Quenta Nolodrinwa”). 

Then there’s also this which Elrond says in Fellowship of the Ring:

Thereupon Elrond paused a while and sighed. ‘I remember well the splendour of their banners,’ he said. ‘It recalled to me the glory of the Elder Days and the hosts of Beleriand, so many great princes and captains were assembled. And yet not so many, nor so fair, as when Thangorodrim was broken, and the Elves deemed that evil was ended for ever, and it was not so.’ (”The Council of Elrond”)

What we see is that Elrond, at least, witnessed the end of the War of Wrath, including the breaking of Thangorodrim.  Then there is this passage from the Silmarillion:

Of the march of the host of the Valar to the north of Middle-earth little is said in any tale; for among them went none of those Elves who had dwelt and suffered in the Hither Lands, and who made the histories of those days that still are known; and tidings of these things they only learned long afterwards from their kinsfolk in Aman. (”Of the Voyage of Eärendil”)

In most versions of the story, the Elves who lived in Beleriand took part in the major conflicts of the War of Wrath.  Men do -“And such few as were left of the three houses of the Elf-friends, Fathers of Men, fought upon the part of the Valar...” (”Of the Voyage of Eärendil”)- but very clearly no Elves.  So Maedhros and Maglor did not participate in or witness the main battles of the War of Wrath, but according to Lord of the Rings (which I would argue holds the “most canonical” status over every other text in the Legendarium) Elrond was there to remember firsthand, if not take part in, major events in the War, suggesting that they were no longer together at that point (which does not preclude Elrond returning to them afterwards, though it would be a very tight timetable with the Fourth Kinslaying).

Returning to the original point, Elros and Elrond could very well have stayed with Maglor until they were grown, even up to and beyond the Choice.  They could equally have left Maglor and Maedhros at any point, or Maglor could have left them with their other kin.  Tolkien changed his mind a lot about the details of the end of the First Age!  There are a good number of different canons, to say nothing of opportunities for different headcanons. 

4. Elros and Elrond turned out to be great people which is all down to Maglor (and Maedhros)’s childrearing (and therefore they were the best possible people to raise them).

Hear the sound of that old familiar bell ringing again?  Absence of evidence one way does not mean that another way is automatically true!  We actually don’t have any information at all about how Maglor brought them up, only that emotionally, there was some element of mutual love in the relationship.  We don’t know for certain how long Elros and Elrond were with Maglor (a few months? a few years? all the way to adulthood?) and we don’t know how or what sort of things Maglor taught them or to what degree they absorbed those lessons.

Yes, Elros and Elrond became great people.  But there is simply too great a gap of information to correlate (either positively or negatively) all their future deeds and character to Maglor (and/or Maedhros)’s upbringing.  Not to mention, people are not only the products of the people who raised them.  So many people influence us on a daily basis, from friends to coworkers to enemies.  While Maglor (and Maedhros) doubtless did have an influence on how E&E grew up and who they became, it seems a little reductive to credit them as the defining factor in Elros and Elrond’s morality or greatness, when both of them (E&E) lived very long lives for their respective fates and met many people and experienced many things.

Narrative Analysis: What’s this about themes?

Textual analysis aside, there’s one other factor which I think is missing in a lot of these discussions, which is genre.  The Legendarium is full of tragedy.  Good people make bad decisions, or suffer (often unjustly) the consequences of another person’s decisions.  People are placed in terrible situations where there is no “good” or “right” decision, where anything they choose has tragic consequences.  Sometimes people make decisions believing that it is justified or for good, only to discover that it was very much the opposite.  Sometimes people know that what they are choosing will hurt them or others, but for one or many reasons, they do it anyways.

The point being that many of the characters Tolkien wrote are purposefully nuanced and tragic.  Yes, there’s a Dark Lord and some very terrifying spiders who are unequivocally evil, but otherwise, nearly every character is some shade of grey.  Characters make decisions with both positive and negative consequences; they exist simultaneously as figures of both heroism and antagonism.  In short, they’re complex!  That’s why they’re so compelling and enjoyable!

So why set up a dichotomy of “So and so is better than so and so”?  Rather than pitting the sons of Fëanor as “the best” in comparison to other characters, why not embrace the complexity of the narrative? 

In order to save the entire world, Eärendil and Elwing had to leave their young children forever.  They could have decided to go back and try to rescue their children, and in doing so they would have also doomed the entire world.  Whatever they chose, someone would suffer for it.  It’s a question that we see explored a lot in fiction but which most of us will never have to confront ourselves: if you were in a position where you had to choose between your loved ones and the fate of the world, which would you choose?

Maglor, a character who has acted almost exclusively as a follower throughout most of the narrative, for once realized the consequences of his actions and, crucially, took active responsibility by caring for and cherishing the children he kidnapped.  It does not absolve him of responsibility for the Kinslayings because children are not tools to redeem the adult figures in their lives, and in any case, it is a fruitless pursuit to attempt to moralize fictional characters existing in a very particular setting and narrative.  However, it is a significant moment in his character arc, especially as we afterwards see him begin to openly contradict and disagree with Maedhros, multiple times within the same chapter after being a relatively silent follower throughout the narrative.  Which makes it all the more tragic later when he slays the guards with Maedhros and steals the Silmarils because we know now that he did not want to, that he might have chosen differently, but ultimately he did not.

Maedhros knew that the kinslayings were wrong and repented of them, and did not attack Sirion for many years.  However, he still did it in the end.  *mumbles in V for Vendetta “I have not come for what you hoped to do, I have come for what you did do”* He did not kill Elrond and Elros, and in some early versions of the story, was indeed the one to save them rather than Maglor.  He also continued to kill in the name of the Oath.  Rather than isolating any one of these things as proof of goodness or badness, all of them work together as part of his tragic figure - a prince, once great, with good intentions, who has fallen to such a point in his life that all he can see around him anymore is death and despair.

(On a side note, Maedhros-Hamlet AU when)

Elros and Elrond were young children who survived a horrifically traumatic event.  They were able to develop some sort of loving relationship with Maglor (or Maedhros), and as adults, they took pride in Eärendil and Elwing as their parents.  Rather than pitting Maglor against Eärendil and Elwing, is it not more important that amidst the apocalyptic horrors of late First Age Beleriand, Elros and Elrond had adult figures in their lives who loved them and cherished them, both before and after the Kinslaying?  Love is not the only important thing in the world, of course, and it is not meant to justify any of the actions taken by the aforementioned adults.  But.  Amidst the tragedy of the broken world they lived in, they were loved. 

Summary: Headcanons are great and can co-exist with each other

Not to belabour the point, but there is really so much we do not know about the end of the First Age.  Tolkien changed and developed his thoughts on his world throughout his life, and even with what he did set down in writing, there are plenty of gaps where we can only guess.  That’s part of what makes the Legendarium so fun to engage with as readers!

With all that in mind, there’s nothing wrong with having a preferred version of the story or a favourite set of headcanons, so long as we acknowledge that they are not the only way to engage with the text.  Furthermore, fiction and fan engagement is not meant to be about the moral high ground.  Especially with the complex characters and world that Tolkien created, you don’t need to put down other characters or narratives in order to justify your preferred reading.  It’s First Age Beleriand!  To modify a parlance from Reddit, Everyone Sucks At Least a Little Bit Here.  Characters can have good intentions with tragic consequences, make bad decisions but have some good come out of it nonetheless, or do things which have both positive and negative impacts.

Eärendil and Elwing do not need to be horrible or unfit parents in order for Maglor and/or Maedhros to genuinely pity and cherish Elros and Elrond.  Those are separate relationships with no correlation.  And none of them need to be perfect parental figures in order for Elros and Elrond to have real loving relationships with all of them.  It’s not a competition for who can “best” raise Elros and Elrond or who loves them “the most.”  You can love Maglor and Maedhros as good parents!  There’s just no need to go putting anyone else down, or to treat it as the one definitive interpretation of the characters and the story.

[ssaalexblake]

i need to rewatch all of disco for many reasons but mostly because i miss the era of the show where the character dynamics were a group of hopeful, good people trying their hardest to do the right thing in hard circumstances to help people, and their friend the serial killer emperor.

[nerdy-hyperfixations]

Breaking news: local doctor arrested for sunscreen incident and is facing life in prison. More at 5

Okay, but seriously, tho. I hadn't gone to the Luau somehow until very recently, and when I heard people talk about Harvey's line there, I got really concerned. Like one person claimed, he asks to rub sunscreen on Maru's back, and Maru gets really uncomfortable. I was genuinely concerned because I personally rather there be no implications that Harvey, a doctor who owns the hospital he runs, would have a crush on Maru, his employee. Even if some people can accept that age gap they must obviously have, it's just actually immoral...

But bro. I read the dialog that everyone is so creeped out by. He doesn't say that. He legit says, "I wonder if Maru could use some sunscreen on her shoulders," with a completely neutral face.

It's weird at best that he's pondering out loud to you instead of asking her, but the game doesn't really let people talk to each other outside of cut scenes. Sure sometimes their dialog can be related, but the game can't predict who you'll talk to first. If he were to ask her in his dialog but you talk to Maru first it'd be strange to watch her answer a question he hasn't asked yet.

Some people point out that it's weird he specifically singled out her, and *that's* why it obviously points to something more creepy, but... considering she was standing right next to him. And is his only friend if you don't count yourself. (According to the wiki. Some people headcanon he has more friends lol) It's really not all that strange if he were just concerned about her getting a sunburn and thus thinking of her.

The other evidence I've seen is that Harvey asks Maru to dance with him at the flower dance, so he obviously has a crush on her. But like. Again. She is his only friend. If you talk to him, he talks about being nervous to ask someone to dance. I think some people read "someone" as meaning he has someone in mind, that being Maru, but I've always kinda assumed it meant he literally is just nervous to ask anyone. Which, of course he'd end up asking the one person he knows. It's ultimately understood that the person they dance with doesn't have to be a romantic interest but can be, so I don't know why this is used as Harvey *obviously* having a crush on Maru.

The shoulders specifically being mentioned is pretty strange, however, directly quoting an article here, that's right I'm pulling out the big guns, "people are most likely to under-apply protection to their chest and shoulders." (Source linked at the end) Someone has pointed out that her shoulders are covered, but only by what looks like a loose t-shirt, which you can get sunburns through. It is entirely possible that *as a doctor* Harvey might know people often miss their shoulders when putting on sunscreen, and is genuinely concerned she might end up a little sunburnt.

Also, Harvey is an easily flustered man: he blushes, a lot, pretty much every time he flirts. And maybe it's just cuz the characters aren't able to blush around anyone but the farmer, I wouldn't know, but he has a *completely* neutral face. Not even smiling.

Maybe this is just me in denial because I like Harvey too much that I don't want to believe it, but idk. I'm willing to say it's not out of line, and that he's not interested in Maru because that would be... insanely inappropriate of him as her employer.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpost.com/entry/surprising-place-getting-sun-damage_n_595157ebe4b02734df2c8176/amp

[yannfredericks]

being online rn is such a fucking nightmare oh my god!!!

[welcometogrouchland]

I think as much as it can be important for marginalized traits to be portrayed positively in fiction due to the long history of them being villainized/portrayed as undesirable, I also think that like. If it's not in character for a character to love their marginalized traits, or if it's not befitting the tone of the story for people to be shining beacons of self love no matter what else is happening then like. Maybe that's also bad. Not as representation but as writing. Which also matters

[hearts401]

raises my hand i actually like the concept of a shitty parent getting better i just hate when its used to be like "im good now so you should forgive me."

people grow and change and hurt people!!! and those hurt people deserve to move on without having to forgive their abuser!!!