Falling Star's Tumblr

In the movie, it did seem like Boromir was boasting, particularly in his tone: “by the blood of OUR PEOPLE are YOUR lands kept safe.” But in the book, his was much kinder: “Give me leave, Master Elrond, first to say more of Gondor ... for few, I deem, know of our deeds, and therefore guess little of their peril, if we should fail at last.” He went on to explain that all of the lands East and South of Mordor have been allied with Sauron, and Gondor is the only power keeping them at bay... but it was not just by those alliances that they were being beaten back: a “great black horseman” was instilling a madness on the foes of Gondor, and filling the boldest Men with fear. The Nazgul were attacking the eastern strongholds in Ithilien before they were sent for the Ring. After that, and explaining his dream to the council, Aragorn presented the Sword that was Broken, and asked Boromir if he would want the Heir of Isildur to return: Boromir said he would accept help if it was given, but not demand it (which was the proper thing to say) but cast doubt on Aragorn’s appearance, which Aragorn “graciously” forgave him for (Tolkien went on to repeatedly say how kingly Aragorn looked), and then chastised him for his account of Gondor’s plight, because he and the Rangers of the North were defending the North from Angmar, saying that Boromir knew “little of the lands beyond [his] bounds. Peace and freedom, you say? The North would have known little of them but for us. Fear would have destroyed them. But when dark things come from the houseless hills, or creep from the sunless woods, they fly from us.” What is that if not boasting?

The only thing we could say on Tolkien’s behalf is that he gave Boromir a brief moment of redemption, when he admitted his faults and apologized, and gave Aragorn precisely the information he needed and could in the seconds he had left, and begged that his people - whom he loved more than he ever could love himself - be saved.

Then Aragorn, the man who would be the greatest king of Men since Elendil, concealed the truth from his most trusted friends and companions. And Aragorn continued to fail to show any semblance of humility when he scorned the door-wardens of Meduseld, claiming that the rightful King of Gondor should not be disarmed, especially from a legendary sword. What the actual fuck.

are they…

❏ a wife beater? ❏ sexually abusive? ❏ violent towards small children? ❏ extremely racist? ❏ a goddamn fascist?

First off, I think it’s important to say that I’m very aware of how abuse works.  I have crisis training from a domestic violence shelter and I’m a survivor myself.  I’m familiar with the idea of therapy and intervention to help abusers become better people.  I can tell you right now that the slow, uncomfortable therapeutic work that goes into rehabilitating abusers is not really made for “fun” TV.  However, even then, characters are not real people, and when considering how a work is going to impact your target audience, you NEED to prioritize victims.

The issue is that an arc where any abuser changes their ways is almost always dangerous to those real life victims.  The fantasy that your abuser is a good person deep down and wouldn’t be hurting you if they understood that’s what they were doing or just saw the error of their ways is very seductive.  Victims loving their abuser and wanting to see the good in them is REALLY common, almost universal.  It’s usually how people end up there in the first place.  Drowning them in media where this works out is just not a good idea.  

Abuse is complicated emotionally and psychologically, and unless they’re written VERY carefully, any sort of redemption arc for an abuser is going to be contributing to a culture that keeps people trapped in bad situations.  Unless a good chunk of the plot is devoted to realistic recovery from an abusive mindset, you’re pretty much not going to be able to do this in a way that’s sensitive to the realities of abuse.

And god, I don’t even know where to start with racism.  White people shouldn’t be redeeming racists in their fiction, full stop.

There have been a few other comments about reformed neo-nazis on this post, and while I firmly believe that fictional works glorifying them is a quick slide into “not being a literal nazi is a gold standard rather than the bare minimum”, if you want more information about things like this, I’d check out Life After Hate.

I think a perfect example here is Oskar Schindler. While it is true Oskar was never as excessively violent as other more prominent examples of Nazis, he was, in fact, a Nazi, and took full advantage of his position. It wasn’t until he had a change of heart, and started using that position to undermine the Nazi agenda. Oskar Schindler is exactly the sort of evil person who was redeemed to the point where, by the end, we feel genuinely sorry for him.

Another good example, albeit a much shorter one, is Boromir from Lord of the Rings. True, he started out at worst a heroic braggart; not a true evil person. But for all intents and purposes, he became Evil, with a capital ‘E’. He was corrupted. He fell to the power of the Ring. He abandoned his oath and tried to kill Frodo and take the Ring for himself. Almost immediately afterwards he saw the error of his ways, but, that was not his redeeming act. No, his redeeming act was exhausting his life in defense of Merry and Pippin.

And that’s where these redeeming stories need to go. Acts of ultimate evil can only be redeemed by acts of ultimate good. But even then, as I said, while forgiveness is earned, the act of evil is never forgotten. Oskar Schindler lived most of the rest of his life destitute, and Boromir accepted that death was his punishment even though he had a redeeming act.

So how could a child abuser earn redemption? Well, the easiest way to balance the scales is to put an identical weight on the other side. Perhaps the child abuser prevents a school shooting by taking down the shooters, and in doing so, he dies... and saves dozens of children’s lives. Does this act redeem them? One can argue that an act of great good balances out an act of terrible evil. In fact, one needs to argue that in order to see the redemption of Oskar Schindler and Boromir, because both of them did something terrible. But - and this is important - both Oskar and Boromir had the light of the hero and the shadow of the villain. Thus their ending is not rainbows and sparkles; it is bittersweet. The child abuser who dies still deserves his death, despite his final act of goodness.

In fact, this dichotomy, this blending of two distinct emotions, can make for a very profound and thoughtful ending. One can even argue, it’s a great deal more powerful than a hero winning... even with a sacrifice. Because we know the hero is going to win. Narratively, it’s expected. What no one expects is for a villain to turn-coat, to accept their badness and hate it, and end it themselves in one final blaze of light.

Case in point:

Exhibit 2

“It cannot be.”aka Doesn’t actually recognize Azog until he starts talking…

This needs no explanation:

*BOOM*

Exhibit 3:

Not subtitled, but Thorin shouts for Kili when actually Fili is the one who was almost crushed >.< 

Exhibit 4

Not pictured because I couldn’t find a gif, but Thorin prompting Balin to lead them out of Rivendell because he “can see knows these paths”

Exhibit 5 

Cut off Azog’s arm, was probably aiming for something slightly more fatal, couldn’t tell he was alive when dragged back inside Moria…

Exhibit 6

WHERE’S BILBO?

(”I have no idea because I can’t see for shit.”)

Conclusion:

1) it give a humorous explanation for Thorin’s random moments of fail that’s cracky and funny

“How far away do you think it is?”  asked Thorin, for by now they knew Bilbo had the sharpest eyes among them.   “Not far at all.  I shouldn’t think above twelve yards.” “Twelve yards!  I should have thought it was thirty at least, but my eyes don’t see as well as they used a hundred years ago-”  (From the chapter, ‘Flies and Spiders’ of The Hobbit, by JRR Tolkien )

Thorin isn’t just slightly nearsighted either, he thought a large object at across-the-street distance was three-quarters of the length of a football field away.   By modern standards he would be legally, coke-bottle-glasses-or-we-don’t-let-you-drive, blind.

In the movie Thorin’s nearsightedness is never actually stated, but I love the clever ways in which they worked it into the acting (as avelera highlighted very well), and also into the costume and set design (implying that Dwarves tend to be nearsighted in general):  Dwarven ornamentation is always three-dimensional, be it stamped leather, cut runes, thickly-embroidered brocade, or cast-metal beads.  There are no purely painted or smooth-inlaid designs anywhere that would require sight, let alone 20/20 vision.  

Dwarven cities too, are violently three-dimensional and ornamented with a lot of straight-lined geometry and gigantic statues.  Perhaps most telling of all, the terrifyingly high stone bridges found in both Erebor AND Moria are treated as perfectly ordinary sidewalks… which would make sense for a race that couldn’t even SEE the ground below.

As for Thorin’s precision-jump in the forges…

Not only are they incredibly necessary for detail work on very, very fine gem work, glasses are really freaking necessary for interacting with the world outside the mountain if you’re as fucking blind as Thorin is

Which brings up the point- why doesn’t Thorin wear glasses? 

There are two theories I can think of right off the bat. The first is that Thorin doesn’t wear them because they don’t look “kingly,” which, while absolutely hysterical, I don’t think is likely to be true.

(Holy shit I just realized that’s why Thorin misses Thranduil’s white deer by like a MILE when he shoots at it!) 

The other alternative could simply be: Thorin doesn’t know. 

See, across all the reblogs of this post I’ve seen SO MANY people mistake nearsighted and farsighted. I’m saying specifically that Thorin is nearsighted, he CAN see things that are near to him, he CAN’T see things that are far away. 

I absolutely believe dwarves have figured out lenses for close-up work like jewel-cutting or even just for reading, after all Balin has reading glasses, we see them in the film. Farsightedness (not being able to read close-up) is a product of the eye muscles growing tired over time from constantly focusing in and out. It would be very likely that people who do fine detailed work would go farsighted very quickly. 

Of course, that point is somewhat refuted by the fact that Balin, a dwarf a mere 20 years his junior, was always expected to be the look-out man.

As a huge fan of The Hobbit (the book, not the movie), I’m perfectly okay with Thorin having legitimate vision problems. Little quirks like that are what ground characters in reality, and make them more relatable. Like, Thorin asking only for wine at the Unexpected Party, and only after Gandalf asked for it. Or Thorin rambling on in a kingly way, covering everything that was already known (a trait he would be loathe to learn he shares with hobbits).

like in BuzzFeed’s Women Wear Hoop Skirts For A Day While Being Exaggeratedly Bad At Doing Everything In Them video, one woman comments that she’s being “oppressed by the patriarchy.” if you’ve read anything Victorian man ever said about hoop skirts, you know that’s pretty much the exact opposite of the truth

thing is, hoop skirts evolved as liberating garment for women. before them, to achieve roughly conical skirt fullness, they had to wear many layers of petticoats (some stiffened with horsehair braid or other kinds of cord). the cage crinoline made their outfits instantly lighter and easier to move in

it also enabled skirts to get waaaaay bigger. and, as you see in the late 1860s, 1870s, and mid-late 1880s, to take on even less natural shapes. we jokingly call bustles fake butts, but trust me- nobody saw them that way. it was just skirts doing weird, exciting Skirt Things that women had tons of fun with

men, obviously, loathed the whole affair

(1864)

(1850s. gods, if only crinolines were huge enough to keep men from getting too close)

(no date given, but also, this is 100% impossible)

(also undated, but the ruffles make me think 1850s)

it was also something that women of all social classes- maids and society ladies, enslaved women and free women of color -all wore at one point or another. interesting bit of unexpected equalization there

and when bustles came in, guess what? men hated those, too

(1880s)

(probably also 1880s? the ladies are being compared to beetles and snails. in case that was unclear)

(1870s, I think? the bustle itself looks early 1870s but the tight fit of the actual gown looks later)

The reason you suck at doing things in a hoop skirt is because you’re not used to doing things in a hoop skirt.

The first time I got in a Colonial-aristocracy dress I felt like I couldn’t breathe. The construction didn’t actually allow me to raise my arms all the way over my head (yes, that’s period-accurate). We had one dresser to every two women, because the only things we could put on ourselves were our tights, shifts, and first crinoline. Someone else had to lace our corsets, slip on our extra crinolines, hold our arms to balance us while a second person actually put the dresses on us like we were dolls, and do up our shoes–which we could not put on ourselves because we needed to be able to balance when the dress went on. My entire costume was almost 40 pounds (I should mention here that many of the dresses were made entirely of upholstery fabric), and I actually did not have the biggest dress in the show.

We wore our costumes for two weeks of rehearsal, which is quite a lot in university theatre. The first night we were all in dress, most of the ladies went propless because we were holding up our skirts to try and get a feel for both balance and where our feet were in comparison to where it looked like they should be. I actually fell off the stage.

By opening night? We were square-dancing in the damn things. We had one scene where our leading man needed to whistle, but he didn’t know how and I was the only one in the cast loud enough to be heard whistling from under the stage, so I was also commando-crawling underneath him at full speed trying to match his stage position–while still in the dress. And petticoats. And corset. Someone took my shoes off for that scene so I could use my toes to propel myself and I laid on a sheet so I wouldn’t get the dress dirty, but that was it–I was going full Solid Snake in a space about 18″ high, wearing a dress that covered me from collarbones to floor and weighed as much as a five-year-old child. And it worked beautifully.

I can ride public transportation while wearing them. I can take a taxi while wearing them. I can go on rides at Disneyland while wearing them. Because I’ve practiced wearing them and twisting the rigid-but-flexible skirt bones so I can sit on them and not buffet other people with my skirts. 

Newt Gingrich’s 1995 Republican Revolution dismantled all the expert departmentsand bureaus that Congress depended on to make sense of the world, making lawmakers dependent on corporate lobbyists to advise them on everything from pollution to food safety to military technology to mass surveillance – nearly 25 years later, Washington DC is a literal and figurative swamp, and only 18% of Americans say they trust Congress.

Enter President Elizabeth Warren (2020-2028), who just unveiled her “Anti-Corruption Act” at a speech at the National Press Club.

The Act drives a deep wedge between public service and lobbyists, making it far harder for politicians and bureaucrats to cycle between the private sector and governments. It includes a flat out ban on lobbying for foreign governments (this being the activity that made Paul Manafort his vast fortune), and subjects domestic lobbyists to the kinds of oversight that foreign lobbyists endure today.

All candidates for political office would be required to release their tax returns, and all the rules would be enforced by a new Office of Public Integrity.

Please read this!

+

like

where are my stories about the decay of the world from the glory of days gone by?

where’s the motif of limb loss?

where’s the longing for the return of something worth following?

where are the bloodthirsty oaths that tear sanity to shreds?

where are the evil spirits who try and destroy the gods with steampunk V-1 buzz bombs (looking at you, The Lost Road)?

“I am a dragon. And this is my hoard.”

“You… don’t look like a dragon.”

“Well, hardly anyone does, these days. Times have changed, we have too. The scales and tails thing worked with the dinosaurs, but we learned quite quickly that… that wasn’t going to fly with you people.”

“You were around all the way back to the dinosaurs?”

“Well, not like… me personally. How old do you think I am?”

“… There’s no safe answer to that.”

“No.”

“So… when you say this is your hoard…?”

“All dragons have them. Some stick to the old gold and jewels thing, but that’s so cliche these days. Most of us like our hoards to be a little bit more sophisticated than ‘shiny.’“

“Like what?”

“I have known dragons to collect snowflakes from the first fall of the year over dozens of centuries. I know dragons that collect petals of flowers left on the graves of loved ones. Dragons that keep and care for soft toys and comfort items, left behind as children grow up. Dragons that guard happy memories and shards of sunlight, kept safe for rainy days. And me, I keep a sanctuary of words. A bastion of language, of poetry. Of written music and achingly beautiful prose. I am the Guardian of this monument to linguistic majesty. I collect stories of love and life and death and mourning and joy. There is nothing more beautiful in all the world, no coin or gem or sliver of starlight more fantastic than a well-told tale. A story is this world’s truest treasure, and what better chest for it than a book?”

“Wow. So these things… really mean a lot to you, huh?”

“More than anything in this world.”

“So… I probably can’t borrow your copies of Discworld, can I?”

Then about a week into their journey like

Legolas: *in Elvish, for approximately the 20th time* ugh fucking hobbits, so annoying

Frodo: *also in Elvish, deadpan* yeah we’re the worst

Legolas:

Legolas: ugh fucking hobbits

Merry: Frodo what’d he say

Frodo: I’m not sure he speaks a weird dialect but I think he’s insulting us. I should tell him I can understand Elvish

Merry: I mean you could do that but consider

Merry: you can only tell him ONCE

Legolas: umm well your accent is horrible

Aragorn: *hollering from a distance* HIS ACCENT IS BETTER THAN YOURS LEGOLAS YOU SILVAN HICK

Legolas: y’alld’ve’ff’ve

Frodo: Good morrow to thee, frend. I hope we twain shalle bee moste excellente companions.

Legolas: Wots that mate? ‘Ere, you avin’ a giggle? Fookin’ ‘obbits, I sware.

okay, so here’s the thing. i’ve got a student prime account and netflix. comes to about $15.91 a month. if i added the commercial-free version of hulu, it would come to $27.90 a month.

basic cable before internet is $64.99 a month. which includes commercials. and infomercials. about a quarter of all television is commercials. which is about $16.25 a month to have someone selling shit to you.