Balrogs
- Thread starter Marielle
- Start date
Marielle
Well-Known Member
Marie is hard to disagree with!
Obviously, we should have many more characters face a balrog and die, without injuring it, than wounding or killing one. And I'm happy to discard my idea of Elros, Elrond, and Maedros facing one together (though I still want the twins physically present, if only at the end, and only as pages or standardbearers -- but that's a fight for later).
Still, I want to hold out the possibility of killing one or two -- or at least injuring, like Fingolfin does with Morgoth -- in climatic battles outside of Gondolin, for a season finale or something, rather than having almost all of them get barely-on-screen deaths in the War of Wrath. My first suggestions were just that, rough first suggestions, and every point made against them is absolutely right.
The only idea, however, that I am prepared to go down swinging for is Ingwe. The more I think of it, the more I like it.
Obviously, we should have many more characters face a balrog and die, without injuring it, than wounding or killing one. And I'm happy to discard my idea of Elros, Elrond, and Maedros facing one together (though I still want the twins physically present, if only at the end, and only as pages or standardbearers -- but that's a fight for later).
Still, I want to hold out the possibility of killing one or two -- or at least injuring, like Fingolfin does with Morgoth -- in climatic battles outside of Gondolin, for a season finale or something, rather than having almost all of them get barely-on-screen deaths in the War of Wrath. My first suggestions were just that, rough first suggestions, and every point made against them is absolutely right.
The only idea, however, that I am prepared to go down swinging for is Ingwe. The more I think of it, the more I like it.
After some research, I'm inclined to believe that it was just Eönwë. It is not stated clearly (you are welcome to prove me wrong), but 1) the Valar had grown increasingly reluctant to interfere in Middle-earth, 2) Morgoth was weakened, 3) the host of the Valar led by Eönwë included not only Vanyar but also Thorondor and the Eagles, who were pretty fierce, and 4) it wasn't the Valar or the secondary effects of the destruction of Angband that sunk Beleriand (it was Eru himself), which implies that there was much less of Valar force used in the war (see 1)).
Regarding the killing of Balrogs, my firm view is that we should keep in mind that Tolkien's stories was a lot about fighting when all hope is lost and trying to do things against all odds, so letting the Balrogs live until the fall of Gondolin and then only killing off two of them, and then having the rest being killed in the War of Wrath seems like the best course to me.
In the War of Wrath, I think Eönwë should kill a few, and I think a couple should be killed in a mass attack by Vanyar soldiers. Perhaps the Eagles could take out one.
Edit: Ok I can accept Ingwë. But not in single combat against an unharmed Balrog.
In the War of Wrath, I think Eönwë should kill a few, and I think a couple should be killed in a mass attack by Vanyar soldiers. Perhaps the Eagles could take out one.
Edit: Ok I can accept Ingwë. But not in single combat against an unharmed Balrog.
So if we have nine Balrogs to begin with (based on the previous discussion), seven are left when we get to the War of Wrath, right? Six get killed there, of which I suggest that Eönwë (being the mightiest in combat) takes out three, the Eagles one and the Vanyar two, but in one case it is a particular move by Ingwë that does it, he deals the final blow. We should discuss (which we have some time to do) at what time they are killed. The War of Wrath takes roughly forty years or so. Preferably towards the end, I think. But then the Eagles should be engaged in fighting Dragons - so the Eagles killing a Balrog should be before that. It's important to decide who kills the final one (I mean of course the final except for the Moria Balrog) since that frames the battle in a certain way (other parts of the end of the War are important as well, but the Balrogs are such prominent foes that the 'final blow' against them is a special case). It matters if the Maia Eönwë or Ingwë kills the last one, or fifty Vanyar do it.
Well...while waiting for season three...
Well...while waiting for season three...
Nicholas Palazzo
Well-Known Member
As I recall, the eagles do not arrive until after the winged dragons are released. One of them might take a moment out of his schedule to snatch a balrog from the field if a character were in trouble, but it isn't really necessary.
Alright, then let's forget about the Eagles here. I'm fine with just having Eönwë and the Vanyar killing Balrogs.
amysrevenge
Well-Known Member
So... are the Balrogs going to have names, and individual/distinguishable characters? Are we going to care which Balrog is killed in which encounter (and which one lasts to the 3rd Age), or are they interchangeable?
Nicholas Palazzo
Well-Known Member
Gothmog has a name, obviously, and is the one who kills Fingon and is killed by Ecthelion. It might make sense to give 'Durin's Bane' some unique physical feature so he is recognizable when he reappears later.
Keep in mind that Arien *was* one of these spirits, so we also have her as a 'type' of an unfallen fire spirit. So when she goes full-on Sun, we should see her wings again.
Keep in mind that Arien *was* one of these spirits, so we also have her as a 'type' of an unfallen fire spirit. So when she goes full-on Sun, we should see her wings again.
Speaking of Arien: Should some of the Balrogs be female? Or was Arien the only one who chose a 'female form'?
Haakon, you read my mind. That's why I brought her up. We have at least one non-fallen female balrog. You wouldn't think she's the only one, as that would be a rather gender-lopsided group, and...send the message that the one girl in the group wasn't evil because, what, girls are too nice to be balrogs? That's just weird.
But it would be possible to have other female unfallen balrogs who then become....unrecognizable as male or female once they fall. Balrogs (our demons of shadow and flame without wings) could be essentially genderless, 'it' rather than 'him/her'.
But it would be possible to have other female unfallen balrogs who then become....unrecognizable as male or female once they fall. Balrogs (our demons of shadow and flame without wings) could be essentially genderless, 'it' rather than 'him/her'.
Nicholas Palazzo
Well-Known Member
I would certainly like to avoid Arien being the "Smurfette".
Hmm I had the impression they were into close combat only. Bow and arrow seems too sophisticated somehow, don't you think?
On a side note: I think we want to avoid trying to make each of the Balrogs having a special gimmick or we will end up with a Silmarillion version of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. PJ did that with the Dwarves in the 'Hobbit' movies, which I can understand but got too silly. The Balrogs are even more of a group rather than nine (or how many?) individuals.
On a side note: I think we want to avoid trying to make each of the Balrogs having a special gimmick or we will end up with a Silmarillion version of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. PJ did that with the Dwarves in the 'Hobbit' movies, which I can understand but got too silly. The Balrogs are even more of a group rather than nine (or how many?) individuals.
Nicholas Palazzo
Well-Known Member
Agreed. The primary aspect of the balrogs has been unity, and giving them hints of individuality seems to undermine this.
I should also like to avoid the "females are archers" routine which I find ... mystifying.
Marielle
Well-Known Member
Agreed on both points. I've seen the female/archer thing justified by the different musculature of men vs. women... Have these people ever tried to draw a bow?
Nicholas Palazzo
Well-Known Member
Indeed. A bow of any substantial power requires at least as much strength as a sword. This was specifically why I recommended a spear for Findis rather than a bow.