Hi!

This is definitely a well-researched and passionate defense of the only King of the Noldor who was not killed by some Big and Nasty Supernatural Being In Black (TM)! I am admired at how you managed to avoid turning this into a soulless compilation of quotes, but gave it acumen and a sense of real involvement. This is so rare in essays nowadays.

Hmh... and it made me think, too. Sometimes, fanfiction trends are such capricious things. The obvious reason why Finarfin is ignored would be that he does not do much in canon, but there are other characters who do even less (Erestor comes to my mind, not to mention the sons of Elrond) and yet have an enormous fan base. Maybe it´s the context: a Third Age Elf lover does not have much to choose from, while a First Age Elf lover has plenty of chances to be dazzled enough by more prominent characters to worry about secondaries.

As for Tolkien´s Finarfin´s exalted position in the tale, there is little I could agree more heartily with. Do not forget, too, that he changed Gil-galad´s genealogy and made him a Finarfinian, probably just to show that kingship had finally passed to the least "marred" of the houses of the Noldor. (Have you read Vorondis´s essay: Parentage of Gil-galad: A Textual History? http://www.henneth-annun.net/stories/chapter.cfm?stid=2448. She elaborates also on the established Western fairytale pattern of the last son proving himself the worthiest and getting everything in the end.)

Months ago, too, as I was compiling material for an essay I intend to write one day (to refute the opinion of several Tolkien scholars that Tolkien´s myth has nothing to do with Graecorroman myth)), I thought for a moment to establish a relationship between the three sons of Finwë and the Platonic three kinds of men (the rulers, the warriors and the artisans/producers). Inmediately, I realised I was rather off the mark in my purpose, because this division is common to other Indoeuropean cultures, not only to Greece, but the fact remains that Finarfin represents, once more, the worthiest of the three. And, point b), he was the only one who fulfilled his appointed task sucessfully: Fëanor (the artisan/producer) became too attached to his production and fell to his doom, and Fingolfin, as a warrior, showed an instance of very serious lack of good judgement and got killed as a result. While Finarfin lives happily ever after -well, sort of.

There is one issue I´d want to comment, though. The primacy of Finarfin in purely formal terms having been established, I think that there is a small indice of something *else*, too, especially in Tolkien´s treatment of his children. I agree with you that, in Tolkien´s mythical universe, children share more with their parents than just genes, and that the deeds of the children are supposed to reflect on the father. I also agree that Galadriel´s prudent bravery is meant to contrast with Aredhel´s recklessness (as Shippey said), and that while Fingon (and Maedhros) died in vain and in a very like way as their fathers, Finrod´s death was what allowed the fulfillment of the doom of Lúthien and Beren. There is high symbolism there. But on the other hand, it seems as if Tolkien was also trying to show that there is a thin line between prudence and weakness in the house of Finarfin. Aegnor´s excessive prudence doomed his love and wrecked the first oportunity of an Elf-Man union, which contrasts with the brave and quick acceptance of Tuor by Fingolfin´s granddaughter. Orodreth is plainly weak and useless, like a caricature of Finarfin. Angrod and Finduilas do not get a kindly treatment, either, and Finarfin himself disappears soon from the story and does not get much attention. I think this could reflect an ambiguity of some sort in Tolkien´s mind - as if he was torn between what *should* be morally higher (Finarfin´s prudence) and what really stirred his heart (the greatness of Fëanor´s Tragic Flaw and Fingolfin´s heroics).

And I wonder: maybe that could have something to do with the reason why Finarfin is not much loved by fandom writers and readers? An author may follow a conscious purpose in his writing, yet if his heart tells him otherwise, in spite of himself, the readers will eventually perceive it. As a reader, I feel a bit of a lack of enthusiasm in the characterisation of most of the House of Finarfin, even if formally they are undoubtedly the highest ranking.

Just my -hundred cents on the subject. Oops. :(

Maeve

I know this story is old, Dawn, but it's always been thought-provoking for me.

Personally I see Finarfin as Indis' son more than Finwë's, and Orodreth's father more than Finrod's or Aegnor's or Angrod's or Galadriel's.  Avoiding the disastrous outcomes that bolder people are willing to risk is not quite the same as being wise.  Abandoning one's family in their time of need, and returning to (at least relative) safety just as they're going into grave danger, even if they're wrong, is about as cowardly as one can get.  Waiting to go to war until the Valar sanction it (--after-- most of your family and folk have already been killed by the enemy) is an act of a prudent man, but not an admirable one.  And so on ;0

Aaaahhh I'm so glad this was shared with me tonight - I love Finarfin for so many of the reasons stated here!  💖  He *is* underappreciated for being calm and quiet rather than rash and outrageous - and maybe even the introvert of the family (we're so used to being overlooked!)

Just recently I've been mulling over the First Kinslaying and it's aftermath, and one thing that has no actual support but kind of has the right *feels* is Finarfin not turning back after the kinslaying because he still feels constrained by his duty to follow his family, but turning back after the Doom was pronounced because that's when he realized he might never again see his wife and that thought just makes me go completely 🥺 (especially if it takes a long time for her to forgive him)