Untitled

I’d just written 2/3 pages on why it wasn’t anyone’s fault Aegnor/Andreth didn’t work out. But now I think maybe I was right the first time and Aegnor’s incurably stupid for walking out on her, even without Dr. Curufin’s Finest Anti-Mortality Serum.

So I don’t precisely blame him. I mean, the severed fates thing is not trivial and definitely requires grappling with, and maybe I’m mistaken and the sight of aged!Andreth would have disgusted him. I don't like that thought, but we don’t know and he didn’t either. 

And, depending how you read LACE, he’d been socialized to believe the only acceptable form of relationship was eternal bonding with the purpose of producing children. That makes a lot of stuff more difficult, and I tend not to expect people to singlehandedly overcome tons of social conditioning about morality. 

The fact that Elves can demonstrably make rings of immortality and that this is never even proposed (even to be dismissed) as an option for mortals strikes me more as an example of incurable stupidity. But who knows? Maybe Celebrimbor was working on those dwarvish rings in the hopes he’d have one complete before old age caught up with Narvi. And by Aragorn/Arwen’s time, they were associated with Sauron’s corruption and probably no one would attempt it. 

But, I mean, that wasn’t even supposed to be part of the story. I tried rewriting it to take that out like five times, and both Andreth and Curufin felt strongly that I was dumbing them down. 

Okay, so Turin is kind of like Feanor in that everybody’s interpretation of him is a little different and that’s okay - just like “real world” historical figures are constantly being interpreted, reinterpreted, and misinterpreted, this reaction to Tolkien’s characters is more a testament to his writing than anything else. Anyway, my point is that this post is pretty opinion-based, so no worries if you disagree with me:

I’m of the opinion that you cannot examine Turin without taking a good long look at Tuor as well. The two are clearly, intentionally, presented as foils of each other - two sides of the same coin, if you will. The two have remarkably similar beginnings (absent fathers, maternal abandonment, raised by elves, welcomed by elvish kings, etc.) The major, cataclysmic difference between the two is that Turin is cursed by Morgoth, and Tuor is blessed/chosen by Ulmo. After that we start to see their stories diverging pretty dramatically. Turin faces a serious of interpersonal failures (dead friends, dead/unknowingly-related romantic partners, and no children) before his story ultimately concludes in a tragic suicide. Tuor, on the other hand, sees success after success (a good relationship with Voronwe which gets him into the hidden kingdom of Gondolin, the easiest elf/man romance of all time, and a son who will go on to save the world and start a line of kings), before he literally sails into the sunset (and possibly, depending on who you ask, becomes immortal and lives in the paradise of Valinor.)

Now, I’m not saying that Turin didn’t make some pretty awful decisions (though personally I blame him much more for that bridge at Nargothrond than I do for poor Beleg), and I’m all for holding characters accountable for their decisions, despite the circumstances (because I expect my heroes to rise above such things, I guess, whether that’s fair or not.) But I think we also have to keep in mind that the very character flaws that caused some of his poorer decisions (pride, mostly - it’s always pride with Tolkien) could very well have been products of the curse as well.

Sorry if this wasn’t a very definitive answer. Because, honestly, I kind of think you’re both right. So, to make up for it, here’s a pretty venn diagram: