[cellurdur]

IMHO Galadriel was right when she refused the pardon, because for what should she need to be forgiven? For leaving Aman?
The Valar were wrong.

No the Valar were right. The Valar cursed the Noldor for leaving, because of their actions. The right thing to do would be go and ask pardon. Ultimately the Valar would have sent a force. Finarfin acted in the correct manner and you will note he was the one that gained everything. He gained the High Kingship of all the Noldor, he was the one who led the Noldor to victory. If his children and relatives had listened then things would have turned out much better.

"Elrond's character had yet to be fully developed when The Hobbit was first published. Rateliff's The History of The Hobbit has a detailed section on Elrond's character, as Rateliff notes:

...and the very presense of Elrond himself, who is certainly not described as an elf (at the end of the chapter Elrond, the hobbit, the wizard, and the dwarves go outside to 'see the elves' dance and sing) and seems to not have been conceived of as an immortal or even particularly long lived at this point, - The History of The Hobbit: Mr. Baggins; Ch III, Rivendell.

And in The Annotated, in A Short Rest: note 9, Anderson refers to a 1964 letter where Tolkien called Elrond's naming a "fortunate accident":

Tolkien wrote to Christopher Bretherton in a letter of July 16, 1964, "The Passage in Ch. 3 relating him to the Half-elven of the mythology was a fortunate accident, due to the difficulty of constantly inventing good names for new characters. I gave him the name Elrond casually, but as this came from the mythology...I made him half-elven."

"Tolkien needed a name for this character in The Hobbit who was an "elf-friend" and the master of Rivendell, and it appears he casually plucked the name Elrond. This would become a fortunate accident, because Tolkien realized Elrond was already a character in his mythology, and already the "half-mortal and half-elfin" child of Earendel and Elwing ("Sketch of the Mythology"). I'm not sure when Elrond's full character gets fleshed out, but it would not be anytime before LOTR."

That all is copied from someone who wrote that in another forum.

Well, I wouldn´t read too much into it.
Elrond "chose to be counted among the Eldar" and therefore is included in that quote despite being half elven, with Arwen it´s a little more difficult, but alone the fact that Tolkien said that her and Aragons wedding was the third between the Eldar and Edain is prove enough for me.
They are called called half - elven, not half-man, so it is reasonable if they would be included in such a general statement.

What does that have to do with anything? Tolkien comments on how he was fortunate he used Elrond's name, but it does not change his status as one of the Half-Elven. The Half-elven are their own separate group. I have given several quotes distinguishing Elrond from other Elf-lords and his children too. None of the Half-Elven were elves. There is only one slip up when he talks about the marriages of the Eldar and the Edain and he quickly corrects this one letter. Through out the Lengendarium he is consistent in showing the difference.

In fact his quote about Elrond having the best chance out of anyone except the Maia suggest Elrond has a greater innate power.

Yes, Eomer thought Arwen was fairer, Gimli Galadriel, so now, what was Tolkiens opinion on that? Maybe he wasn´t sure. Whose opinion has more weight?

Except we have Aragorn's, Gilraen's and the references to Arwen's similarity to Luthien.

When did they rejected Finrod? He was king and would have stayed king, if he would not have helped Beren, Feanor nobody liked and Galadriel would have been Queen after Gil Galad, if they would have let a women rule, but at that time the Noldor left ME.

They rejected Finrod when Curufin and Celegorm convinced them to abandon the king. The elves of Eregion by one story rejected Galadriel in favour of Celebrimbor.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

According to me it doesn't. Being a descendant does not necessarily trump a separate quality. It's comparing apples to oranges - being less powerful than the other's ancestors, but in your own right, or not being as special by yourself but having inherited something due to your ancestry.

In Tolkien, nobility is not just down to actions, but to descent as well. Part of the reason Arwen was so great was her descent. The rest was in her actions.

There is a difference between doing nothing peacefully and doing something peacefully. The only problem is that the something turned quite bloody, but not by Galadriel's will.

The Vanyar and the remaining Noldor DID do something. They were the ones who won the war. They regained the Silmarils. Being wise and not too hasty is a virtue.

And if everyone acted perfectly we would not have a story. *sigh* But that's beside the point. Thing is, we see so few of Arwen's actions that we can't really judge her. Galadriel does things imperfectly. Arwen doesn't do much at all. Galadriel learns wisdom and humility. Arwen becomes mortal. You decide which is the apple and which is the orange.

That is true, but it does not matter when judging characters. Tolkien himself says that people have to fall, to give us the story, but falling is a failure.

I agree we do not really know enough about Arwen to judge, but we only know that she was very similar to Luthien.

I don't get your last point? How is becoming mortal anything to do with character? Earendil would have happily become a mortal as would many elves like Galadriel's own brother Aegnor.

All the Noldor Princes/Ladies were quite deeply flawed and this is why Elrond distances himself from them and would rather be Thingol's heir.