[Mithalwen]

Welcome Aiea. You make some interesting points (and as ever I am in awe of those doing so in a second language - I lived in France for 2 years and studied it for my degree but I didn't have the confidence to post on a French Tolkien site).

Some Tolkien critics claim that LOTR is a simple "good v evil" story but it is far more complex than that. The triumph of good is in many ways the result of individuals being disobedient. Faramir and Eowyn go against orders and change the outcome for the better. Arguably the success of the Quest is dependent on Boromir's failed attempt to take the ring. The difference is perhaps in the subsequent choices rather than the fact of rebellion- the difference between a peaceful protester and a terrorist.

Of course drama requires crisis and conflict - It may have been pleasant living under the rule of Ingwe in Valinor but I doubt it would make an interesting book. It is the stories of the catalysts that are interesting the Bilbos not the Fredegars. And I think in "Arda marred" it is true that leading a quiet life and hoping nothing will change is not an option. If the Elves and Ents can't succeed at that Hobbits certainly won't. To get back to the topic, Feanor was perhaps a necessary catalyst - if he hand't existed someone else would have filled that role - maybe less extreme