#angrist

thinking about explanations vis à vis angrist in the lay of leithian, the question being whether or not it was the knife, the wielder, or the forger (or some triangulation of multiple factors??) that made it possible for beren and lúthien to cut the silmaril free. the appeal of it being simply the knife itself is great for dharmic dramatic irony punished-by-the-narrative significance, since curufin had possession of something that could have fulfilled the oath and just didn't know it (!!!!), but the idea that it was beren and lúthien in particular who allowed angrist to cleave through morgoth's crown lines up nicely with the general fairy-tale logic of leithian. that it was their courage and fierce hope prising the silmaril out and the knife was just an accessory. curufin couldn't've done it even if he'd tried—in fact, maybe he lost angrist because of his own actions, and in true fairy-tale fashion it went to those who best merited it. and then there's the possibility that telchar was just on something different, which doesn't have any narrative bearing that i can figure out.. and of course it's always also feasible that nothing was special or different, and any sharp object could have done the job, it's just that no one tried. which has a nice sort of futility to it all in all