S03E02 Script Discussion

I am NOT talking about the 1973 text which I have always ignored. I am not suggesting she was not a Rebel. Please do not bring up straw men. Galadriel at least as early as 1968 was depicted helping the Teleri, NOT siding with Feanor, while also being a Rebel leader at the same time.

And Tolkien never, ever made Galadriel one of the Kinslayers. He never put her in that group. He never showed her siding with Feanor or with Fingon, ever. Show me, quote me, the text in which he says Galadriel helped kill the Teleri. Tell me where JRRT ever said it?

He never wrote it. She was guilty of Rebellion against the Valar, NOT of Kinslaying. Never even implied in anything Tolkien ever wrote, starting from 1937.

There is a huge middle ground between Kinslayers and people who didn't rebel at all, which Finarfin and all his sons and grandson effortlessly occupy in canon and even in this outline. It is not impossible, implausible, out of character, nor contradicting canon for Galadriel to do the same. Not being a Kinslayer does not, somehow, make her not a Rebel.

I was willing to concede making Fingolfin join in with Fingon, but this is pointless character assassination and burning every word the author ever wote about her. It serves no purpose whatsoever, and Tolkien consistently, in every single depiction of Galadriel, with NO exceptions at all, had her innocent of the Kinslaying. If you claim this is more "plausible" in "context" you are disagreeing with literally every word Tolkien ever wrote about her, from 1937 on.

This is no better than what Peter Jackson did to Faramir.
 
Last edited:
We are all agreed that Galadriel is not a Kinslayer. There is *no way* she could speak to Melian as she does if she were guilty, and no way she would be welcome in Doriath.

That means that she does not kill anyone in this fight. Regardless of which side she is seeking to aid, she does not kill anyone. This means that we cannot have her take up arms to defend the Teleri from the Noldor, either, because that would involve her...slaying her own kin (or attempting to do so, anyway).

We gave her something to do rather than stand around looking shocked and sad - we sent her to attempt to rescue her mother/recover her mother's body. This seemed a rather innocent task to assign to her which still fit in the horrors of the event.

She has to BE THERE. Certainly, we could leave her back in the camp with Finarfin, so that she doesn't even witness the Kinslaying until it is over. But that would be...rather pointless? That is already Finarfin's story. Her story is different from her father's, and so we needed to see her reaction to the Kinslaying where she has to decide *what to do about it*.

Saving someone from drowning seems like an in-character thing for her to do. Trying to get people to stop fighting, while they are fighting, means...running towards the fight. Just because she does that does not mean she had intended to kill someone.

This outline does not call for Galadriel to draw her sword against anyone. She is there, and she is armed...and what she chooses to do is to drop her weapon and dive into the water to save someone.

Faelivrin said:
This is no better than what Peter Jackson did to Faramir.
Click to expand...

tumblr_mywectryl21rtg1vzo1_r1_500.gif


Nobody wants Filmamir.

Likewise, nobody wants dark!Galadriel, either.
 
Last edited:
Faelivrin said:
I am NOT talking about the 1973 text which I have always ignored. I am not suggesting she was not a Rebel. Please do not bring up straw men. Galadriel at least as early as 1968 was depicted helping the Teleri, NOT siding with Feanor, while also being a Rebel leader at the same time.
Click to expand...

I'm not bringing up a straw man of any kind. The hosts made the case that a less actively pure Galadriel makes more sense. She is not siding with Fëanor.

I understand that we are all close to this material. It matters very deeply to us all. That said, think we could avoid accusations of logical fallacy?

Faelivrin said:
And Tolkien never, ever made Galadriel one of the Kinslayers. He never put her in that group. He never showed her siding with Feanor or with Fingon, ever. Show me, quote me, the text in which he says Galadriel helped kill the Teleri. Tell me where JRRT ever said it?
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, no, Tolkien never said that Galadriel helped kill the Teleri, and neither did we. Galadriel realizes that what is happening is wrong and does not aid in the slaughter, instead, doing something positive.
Faelivrin said:
There is a huge middle ground between Kinslayers and people who didn't rebel at all, which Finarfin and all his sons and grandson effortlessly occupy in canon and even in this outline. It is not impossible, implausible, out of character, nor contradicting canon for Galadriel to do the same. Not being a Kinslayer does not, somehow, make her not a Rebel.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is indeed a huge middle ground between the Kinslayers, and those who do not rebel. I'm just not sure how being present at the Kinslaying and trying to save one of her kin from being slain doesn't qualify. Just because she has a character arc in this episode, does not mean she is guilty of the Kinslaying in any real way.

Faelivrin said:
I was willing to concede making Fingolfin join in with Fingon, but this is pointless character assassination and burning every word the author ever wote about her. It serves no purpose whatsoever, and Tolkien consistently, in every single depiction of Galadriel, with NO exceptions at all, had her innocent of the Kinslaying. If you claim this is more "plausible" in "context" you are disagreeing with literally every word Tolkien ever wrote about her, from 1937 on.
Click to expand...

Once again, Galadriel slays no kin, and realizes, despite everyone around her, that said slaying is wrong. She breaks free of tribalistic groupthink and does the right thing. All we did was give her a reason to do so other than "she's just that awesome".

Faelivrin said:
This is no better than what Peter Jackson did to Faramir.
Click to expand...

This hurts the most. In our defense, we're talking about a ten-minute arc rather than one that spans several hours of film. Please understand that this is the compromise. This is us keeping Galadriel's hands clean while allowing her to be present for the event, and without her engaging in violence against the people she will be traveling with for some time.
 
Ok I'm not sure I should enter this discussion but I did have some thoughts on Galadriel during the webinar session that I didn't manage to get across. I wanted Galadriel to rather quickly react to the ongoing violence by calling out or trying to stop teleri from shooting but only succeed partially or even failing and causing someone being hurt or killed inadvertently - I mean for example she could call out 'No, don't shoot' at the same time as Fingolfin advances so that the Teleri turn around and see what they take as attacking Noldor and shoot at them (just an example). There would be a chaotic situation in which Galadriel tries to stop fighting but isn't completely non-violent in her actions, as use of force in this situation would be necessary even for someone trying to stop the killing. Since both sides kill, she hasn't got the power to change how things are going. And while she doesn't want to kill anyone, she is forced to make choices in the ongoing chaos that she will feel guilty about for many years. There's simply no way to engage in a battle situation and come through clean. Especially if one feels that one is somehow to blame for some of the blood spilt, even if it was non-intentional.
 
I would have liked galadriel to take part in the fight on the teleri side too...

It would be tragic if she'd fight against noldor and even eventually kill somebody of her own people... Even if not a family member.
 
Haakon said:
Ok I'm not sure I should enter this discussion but I did have some thoughts on Galadriel during the webinar session that I didn't manage to get across. I wanted Galadriel to rather quickly react to the ongoing violence by calling out or trying to stop teleri from shooting but only succeed partially or even failing and causing someone being hurt or killed inadvertently - I mean for example she could call out 'No, don't shoot' at the same time as Fingolfin advances so that the Teleri turn around and see what they take as attacking Noldor and shoot at them (just an example). There would be a chaotic situation in which Galadriel tries to stop fighting but isn't completely non-violent in her actions, as use of force in this situation would be necessary even for someone trying to stop the killing. Since both sides kill, she hasn't got the power to change how things are going. And while she doesn't want to kill anyone, she is forced to make choices in the ongoing chaos that she will feel guilty about for many years. There's simply no way to engage in a battle situation and come through clean. Especially if one feels that one is somehow to blame for some of the blood spilt, even if it was non-intentional.
Click to expand...


We can certainly have her call out to the Teleri to try and stop them as Fingolfin's troop approaches the Teleri, showing that she does not intend to do violence at the start. We should, however, remember that they still loose arrows at her and her companions. It would be highly unlikely for her (for anyone) to retain a pacifist stance under those conditions.

Having Galadriel engage in violence against the Noldor is problematic for other reasons. If she does so, and her targets live, she will have to answer for that, and would be left behind with Finarfin at best. If she kills someone, then anyone who sees her will report the incident and she will have to answer for it.

The Kinslaying is described as escalating out of control. This portrayal illustrates that in a way that both keeps Galadriel's hands clean, portrays her as strong and brave and protects her from Noldorin retribution for perceived treachery.
 
Examples of situations Galadriel could find herself in:

A Teleri attacks her and she can’t just dodge the attack but has to defend herself. She doesn’t kill the opponent but damages him/her.

She sees a Noldor attacking a Teleri and after the Teleri has lost his spear, the Noldo is about to strike him down. Galadriel wants to stop the attack but doesn’t succeed.
(Or as above but she succeeds in stopping the Noldo from killing the Teleri, but as the Teleri gets up he is pushed and falls several feet onto the docks below with severe damage or death as a result.)
Just to give you the picture of what I mean.
 
Haakon said:
Examples of situations Galadriel could find herself in:

A Teleri attacks her and she can’t just dodge the attack but has to defend herself. She doesn’t kill the opponent but damages him/her.

She sees a Noldor attacking a Teleri and after the Teleri has lost his spear, the Noldo is about to strike him down. Galadriel wants to stop the attack but doesn’t succeed.
(Or as above but she succeeds in stopping the Noldo from killing the Teleri, but as the Teleri gets up he is pushed and falls several feet onto the docks below with severe damage or death as a result.)
Just to give you the picture of what I mean.
Click to expand...

I like both of these, but the first is even more of a problem than the version above. She actually engages in a violent act against the Teleri and only fails through incompetence. This lumps her in as guilty of the Kinslaying, which is deliberately what we are trying to avoid.

Acting against the Noldor is still an act of treachery from the Noldorin point of view even of she doesn't kill them. The idea of Galadriel fighting against the Noldor only works in the 1968 version of her story because she travels to Middle Earth separately from the Noldor and there is no one to hold her accountable for turning against them and because she was in Aqualondë already, not travelling with them.
 
Would it really be treachery if she just tried to prevent bloodshed (and didn’t stop the Noldo from disarming his foe)?
 
I see your point though about the first example. But she could be forced to parry attacks without shedding blood.

The point being she’s then forced into specific action and isn’t just passively standing watching the killing.
 
We certainly don't have her standing passively watching the killing. As far as would it be treachery for her to actively work against the Noldor? You and I might not see it that way, but the Noldor certainly would. Treachery is often a matter of perspective.
 
You’re not really reading my suggestion in the best possible way. I wasn’t suggesting Galadriel would turn against the other Noldor, just try to stop one of them from killing someone who is already disarmed and down. She could argue that killing isn’t necessary and that they have to move on. That’s hardly treason even for a Noldor.
 
Earwen's actions here certainly cover that side of the story. She was in Tirion, married to a prince of the Noldor. .. and we show her going to Alqualonde independently, taking up arms with the Teleri against the Noldor. Obviously, she never intended to join the Noldor in their rebellion, and her first act of violence is in the wake of the death of her father. Her story works, whether or not she survives.

But just as Galadriel's story is not the same as her father's, it is not the same as her mother's, either. After the Kinslaying, she still intends to go to Middle Earth. .. in the stolen ships. We have to make that make sense. Obviously, she will wind up on the Helcaraxe instead, but as the *first* character we ever had express a desire to return to Middle Earth by ship, we can't downplay how important this is to her.
 
That doesn’t mean she doesn’t try to stop someone trying to kill an unarmed elf.
 
So I went back and listened to the session in which this was discussed. The hosts seemed quite against the idea of Galadriel taking an active role against the Noldor. They wanted her to have a somewhat more complex role in the Kinslaying.
 
True, Haakon. The point of the scene is to have her inclination veer strongly in the 'saving someone' direction rather than the 'killing someone' direction. If that is her *first* reaction, though, then she will not be anywhere near the Arch at the end of the harbor when her mother takes her swandive. Logistically, we may not be able to have her do both.

I am not opposed to her rushing to save an unarmed Teleri while yelling, 'No, stop!' I think the aftermath of that action could be messy, though. Because now she has an armed Noldo who was in the act of running someone through with a sword turn towards her (or ignore her), but either way, now she's in it. So, she's either going to get herself killed, or she'll have to draw her sword and start using it. It is true that she has some authority, and she likely has a commanding voice, so it's *possible* that a shouted order from her to stand down would be obeyed...but not terribly likely. No one not in her immediate vicinity is going to hear her, and you can't really just stop in the middle of a battle, because not everyone else is going to stop, and...and since when would Fëanor's men take an order from his half-niece who so obviously scorns him?

TV is full of contrived fight scenes, so of course we can make whatever we want happen. People keep fighting after taking a severe beating, regain consciousness at a plot-convenient moment, and manage to get their hands on a weapon exactly at the most dramatic time.

But I think that if we have Galadriel run into the fight, then she is going to wind up taking part in it one way or the other. Her insistence on her innocence at a later time suggests that she did not. So...I want to toss her in the water and be done with it.
 
Haakon said:
I hear you. And if Galadriel would stop Curufin from killing someone that would result in one reaction, and if she’d try to stop Fingon from killing someone a different reaction would follow. He might actually thank her afterwards.
Click to expand...

This, I do like. But I find it difficult to work out logistically. Would you see this as happening before or after Earwen's leap? Is Fingon up on the arch when this happens? What does she do afterward? Having her stop an individual from killing someone only takes a few moments, and it leaves us with the problem of what she does afterward. Having her try to save her mother keeps her busy through the rest of the fight so that we don't have to explain what she is doing that whole time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top