Tumgik
saentorine · 11 days
Text
In a BoromirLives fanfic, Faramir must be forced to confront this line of his in particular; Whether he erred or no, of this I am sure: he died well, achieving some good thing. His face was more beautiful even than in life. It's vital to me that this is addressed. Because in Tolkien beauty is holy, they are intertwined inextricably, the holy will be beautiful.
Boromir did not live a beautiful holy life according to most, his life is not spoken of with uncomplicated worth by any but Denethor, Eomer, Theoden and Pippin (all either 'simple' or outwardly rebellious against god). But he did die a beautiful holy death, it is what most people praise him for and in Faramir's mystical dream where he sees Boromir's dead body floating down the river, this is his reaction. Boromir's corpse was more beautiful than his living body, because in death he was 'redeemed' and served his purpose in the great holy plan. He 'died well'.
This is horrifying right? It horrifies me when I read it. And I think it so concisely reveals how Faramir and many others viewed Boromir. I am essentially here to argue that this is all about piety, once again, yes I'm a one track record.
Gandalf, when hearing of Boromir's death from Aragorn, declares; It was a sore trial for such a man: a warrior, and a lord of men. Galadriel told me that he was in peril. But he escaped in the end. I am glad. It was not in vain that the young hobbits came with us, if only for Boromir’s sake.
Now, what is Gandalf saying here? Boromir did not escape, he died. Does he mean he escaped corruption? Well, no, since apparently this 'escape' had something to do with Merry and Pippin and Boromir shook off the pull of the Ring long before he was sent to find them. What role did Merry and Pippin play in this 'escape'? Well, Boromir died for them, he had too, there was no other way out of that ambush. So by process of elimination the only thing the 'young hobbits' did that was 'for Boromir's sake' was... to be there so he could die for them, right?
And remember, his death did not actually save them or really help in any way, the hobbits are still taken and the Uruk-hai's downfall has nothing to do with Boromir. In fact Aragorn squandered any time Boromir might have given him to catch up to the Uruk-hai by spending hours on his funeral. So, the death alone is what is being called 'good' here, what is beautiful. Boromir dies and that is beautiful and something to be glad for, according to Gandalf and Faramir.
But why do they think this? Faramir has his 'alas for Boromir, whom I too loved' and Gandalf laments 'poor Boromir', so they have at least some pity for him. What was 'good' to them about Boromir dying? Well we all know this one don't we, it's the accepted narrative of it all, Boromir 'redeemed' himself with this deed. He tried to take the Ring, and for this crime he needed redemption that he gained through vainly giving up his life to try and save Merry and Pippin.
But, in fact, Boromir himself has a slightly different way of phrasing it. Boromir says, of his own death; ‘I tried to take the Ring from Frodo,’ [-] ‘I am sorry. I have paid.’
He paid for it. To Boromir, in this cosmic exchange, he chose wrongly and paid for the offence with his death. This wasn't redemption, it was spiritual commerce, crime and punishment. Which is a perspective that once again demonstrates Boromir's enduring lack of 'faith' or spirituality. The powers of the west and Eru may exist, but they exist to him as forces of nature, some fact of the world we all must just live with, not something that fills him with hope or brings him nobility or meaning or a 'higher purpose'. Boromir does not want to be closer to divinity, he does not want to be beautiful or noble, he wants his people to be safe.
But of course, this is entirely opposite to Faramir's perspective, and if not downright heretical then at least unfaithful. So, when alive, Boromir cannot achieve 'beauty' in Faramir's mind, because he is unfaithful. It is only when he is dead, when 'fate' draws him into this spiritually good 'end' that sees him give up his life for a holy quest, when Boromir's life is no longer defined by him but by his death, that he can be beautiful.
And bringing this all the way back around, there are two ways you could do this in a boromirlives fic. Either, Boromir comes back but he does not look like he did in Faramir's dream. He did not pay, he is still alive to define who he is and Faramir finds himself slowly drawn into this terrible psychological horror as he realises he misses his brother's death more than he missed his actual brother.
Or Faramir needs to be confronted with a brother who looks dead to him. Boromir has come back and to Faramir's eyes he looks exactly as he did in the dream, but now this corpse moves and speaks and can no longer be confined to one perfect conceptual moment. And this also horrifies him. It is for authors to decide if this is just an aspect of Faramir's perspective, or if Boromir actually 'came back wrong' as it were, he did pay but somehow he came back anyway.
128 notes · View notes
saentorine · 12 days
Text
the "i'm not pretty like the other girls because i'm pale and skinny" female protagonist trope is something i loathe more than almost anything else in the world but i'd be more willing to forgive it if the author was brave enough to commit to it. if your "unattractive" female protagonist is a snow-white waif then i'd better see you emphasising how nauseatingly corpselike she looks. how people shudder when her maggot-flesh fingers touch their bare skin because they're expecting her to be cold and damp. how her birdlike bones and dainty waist are contemptible rather than desirable. maybe even have her develop a degree of beauty by gaining some weight and colour for a change. put down the necromancer barbie template and show me a proper little freak.
31K notes · View notes
saentorine · 13 days
Text
Tumblr media
33K notes · View notes
saentorine · 13 days
Text
I hate hate HATE all those 2edgy 4me theories about kids shows. Like Angelica dreaming up the rugrats, or the ed, edd, and eddy children being ghosts, or literally anything that takes a lighthearted and fun kids show and has to turn it into some tragic take of rape or murder or misinformed mental illness. So you know what? From now on I’m gonna do the exact opposite. Every cool grim-dark show is now because of a bunch of children. To get us started: Game of Thrones: A middle-school DnD campaign with the most angry, vindictive DM who has promised to kill everyone’s player characters (and their family) by the end.
491K notes · View notes
saentorine · 15 days
Text
I don't know if this was obvious to everyone else, but I just realised that one of the reasons why the Hobbit is so effective as a children's book is that while Bilbo is an adult, the skills that make him a hero are all those of a child.
By human standards he's child-sized, which makes him unobtrusive and light on his feet. He can slip by unnoticed where bigger people can't.
He's good at playing games, and even cheats (successfully!) in a way that - let's face it - is not so different to how children try to cheat at games. He's polite in a way that's fully comprehensible to children (rather than, say, being able to perform courtly manners). He's quick-witted, but the trick of keeping the trolls talking is also one that would be achievable for a child.
He doesn't have magic powers, he's not a great fighter, and he's not some kind of Chosen One. There's not much that he does that couldn't be done by a ten-year-old, but the story shows just how valuable all those skills and traits are. It's very empowering.
10K notes · View notes
saentorine · 16 days
Text
Watching my toddler figure out how to language is fascinating. Yesterday we were stumped when he kept insisting there was a “Lego winner” behind his bookshelf - it turned out to be a little Lego trophy cup. Not knowing the word for “trophy”, he’d extrapolated a word for “thing you can win”. And then, just now, he held up his empty milk container and said, “Mummy? It’s not rubbish. It’s allowed to be a bottle.” - meaning, effectively, “I want this. Don’t throw it away.” But to an adult ear, there’s something quite lovely about “it’s allowed to be a bottle,” as if we’re acknowledging that the object is entitled to keep its title even in the absence of the original function.
451K notes · View notes
saentorine · 16 days
Text
REBLOG if you are old enough to remember what a VCR is.
378K notes · View notes
saentorine · 20 days
Text
I know I don't shut up about this but frankly not enough people are angry about the 5-day/40 hour workweek (and I am AWARE a lot of people work even more than that). I feel like a lot more people should be absolutely furious that we only really have two days a week and some occasional hours in the evening to socialise, run errands, do chores, or relax.
It's no wonder so many people are profoundly lonely and disconnected from their communities when maintaining a social life in what little free time we have is incredibly difficult. If you have kids, a second job, a very long commute, or other responsibilities, it's nearly impossible.
We literally aren't meant to live like this and I'll never stop being shocked how many people just take it as the natural state of things and don't want to throw a brick through a billionaire's window every time they think of it.
69K notes · View notes
saentorine · 21 days
Text
We need shittable cities (actively maintained public restrooms).
60K notes · View notes
saentorine · 22 days
Text
Yes, your Honor, I am here to submit my request that Giftedness henceforth be referred to as Autism But The Good* Parts. *Disclaimer: "Good" here refers only to being able to pass standardized tests, having no speech deficits, and being reasonably compliant in behavior and does NOT preclude anxiety, executive dysfunction, ADHD, sensory issues, hypersensitivity, depression, emotional dysregulation, burnout, social isolation and ostracization, being bullied, etc. Because you're ~smart so you'll be ~fine, eh?
4 notes · View notes
saentorine · 24 days
Text
have I somehow ruined myself for perfectly average movies? I watched both Robots (2023) and The Deer King (2021) and both of them were fine---Deer King was better, but suffered from trying to jam too much into a single film; Robots should have been more black-humored, delighting in its lazy sociopaths and their vaguely squalid world. But that's it, that's all they were---fine. Just fine.
Does this mean I have to watch exclusively Films now? I can't get into a movie unless it's black and white, or two hours of characters speaking sideways and having neuroses at each other?
121 notes · View notes
saentorine · 24 days
Text
'Then I will wish you this fortune for your comfort, Gimli,' said the Elf, 'that you may come safe from war and return to see them again. But do not tell all your kindred! There seems little left for them to do, from your account. Maybe the men of this land are wise to say little: one family of busy dwarves with hammer and chisel might mar more than they made.' 'No, you do not understand,' said Gimli. 'No dwarf could be unmoved by such loveliness. None of Durin's race would mine those caves for stones or ore, not if diamonds and gold could be got there. Do you cut down groves of blossoming trees in the springtime for firewood? We would tend these glades of flowering stone, not quarry them. With cautious skill, tap by tap – a small chip of rock and no more, perhaps, in a whole anxious day – so we could work, and as the years went by, we should open up new ways, and display far chambers that are still dark, glimpsed only as a void beyond fissures in the rock. And lights, Legolas! We should make lights, such lamps as once shone in Khazad-dûm; and when we wished we would drive away the night that has lain there since the hills were made; and when we desired rest, we would let the night return.' 'You move me, Gimli,' said Legolas. 'I have never heard you speak like this before. Almost you make me regret that I have not seen these caves. Come! Let us make this bargain – if we both return safe out of the perils that await us, we will journey for a while together. You shall visit Fangorn with me, and then I will come with you to see Helm's Deep.' 'That would not be the way of return that I should choose,' said Gimli. 'But I will endure Fangorn, if I have your promise to come back to the caves and share their wonder with me.' 'You have my promise,' said Legolas.
...This is a thing I love SO MUCH about the two of them, a little understated thing that I don't think I'd noticed or focused on much before. Legolas is thoughtless here; he says something hurtful about dwarves that he doesn't even realize is hurtful because it's just something he thinks is true, one of those microaggressive stereotypes that's just part of how he thinks about Gimli's people. And they're close enough at this point that Gimli doesn't get offended! I mean, he easily could; we've seen how he reacts to Éomer speaking thoughtlessly about Galadriel - but Legolas and Gimli have come through so much together and overcome so much already that they recognize when something is just a misunderstanding. Gimli doesn't get mad at Legolas, doesn't claim offense, just says, "No, you do not understand," and explains to him, trusts him, shares his passion with him. And Legolas lets himself be taught better, lets himself be moved by Gimli's words, and immediately promises to continue learning: to go with Gimli and see the caves for himself, because he wants to understand better what makes Gimli tick. And Gimli understands the worth in what Legolas is offering, so he agrees to reciprocate it, recognizing that this is mutual in all things and that they both have things to learn from one another.
It's just a beautiful example of cross-cultural friendship and trust - and about the ways that they've learned to navigate these misunderstandings, to recognize that what the other person loves may seem "strange" to them, but that there must be worth in it, because this person who is so exquisitely worthy sees something there to value.
Them. I love them. I LOVE THEM. SO MUCH.
48 notes · View notes
saentorine · 25 days
Text
Tumblr media
6K notes · View notes
saentorine · 29 days
Text
Tumblr media
🗡That will depend on the manner of your return 🏹
8K notes · View notes
saentorine · 1 month
Text
you know what i hate the argument of "who was the real hero in lotr". you are missing the point. none of it could've happened, sauron and his armies could not have been defeated and the ring could not have been destroyed if there was one singular hero. it's about teamwork, it's about friendship, it's about- get this- fellowship
3K notes · View notes
saentorine · 1 month
Text
I feel like the lighting of the beacons scene is kind of a microcosm of my issues with the LOTR films as a whole, in that:
Cinematically, it's absolutely gorgeous and stirring
The visuals are lifted even further by the score
It's a reference to a thing that is actually in the book, just highly re-contextualized (the beacons exist in the book and have already been lit, but serve a different function; it is the Red Arrow that is used to ask for Théoden's aid, with the specific remark that Denethor is asking for aid and not demanding it; the messenger who brought the arrow is caught and decapitated on his way back to Minas Tirith and so Denethor can't know if the message got out without using the palantír)
The lighting of the beacons in the films is tied into the story they're telling, in which basically all the NPCs other characters are much more self-doubting and self-sabotaging and it's up to Our Heroes to get them to do the right thing or the heroes just do it themselves (see Treebeard, see Théoden, see Faramir...)
Specifically, the necessity of lighting the beacons in the films is a direct byproduct of making film Denethor malicious and incredibly incompetent
The quiet, almost incidental tragedy of the messenger's death in war—not in a big battle, not in any glorious way at all, just this random guy being casually chased down and killed—is lost in favor of something dramatic and show-stopping and cool.
It is dramatic and show-stopping and cool! But sacrifices were definitely made in order to work it into the story at all and I think those sacrifices were very representative of the films' adaptational approach.
210 notes · View notes
saentorine · 1 month
Text
Gentrification creates a stifling homogeneity in urban areas that makes it less suited for the everyday lives of the lower class and more suited towards the leisure and tourism of those with expendable income.
An old, decrepit laundromat gets replaced by an upscale bakery? And people are mad? It’s not that the poor hate organic vegan cupcakes, it’s that most of us don’t have a way to do laundry in our own home.
Run-down corner stores replaced by hand-made designer clothing boutiques? We don’t hate your eco-fabric shawl, but I can’t eat that for dinner after work like I could have a can of beans I grabbed from that corner store when I don’t have time to take the bus to the real grocery store after work.
What gentrification brings in and of itself is not typically bad, it’s that gentrification brings institutions of leisure and pleasure and makes it so that the poor have to go farther out of their way for basic necessities. It turns low-income living spaces into local tourist attractions. It can even create food deserts by putting restaurants, grocery stores, etc. in that the majority of the lower class cannot afford.
Imagine if someone totally renovated your house and turned it into a mini theme park - they took away your sleeping space, where you prepare food, where you clean yourself and get ready for your day, and replaced it with things that will please people who are visiting, who have their own homes they can go back to, who are here not for their entire life but just as a distraction from their otherwise mundane existence. It’s not that you hate theme parks, it’s not like you’ve never been to a theme park and vow to never visit one again. It’s just that you need to live! To survive! And the leisure of those who have more than you should not invalidate your existence.
210K notes · View notes