Without the Spirit of Fire?

[Kuruharan]

His own rascally ways would have disqualified him. He might have gotten the consolation prize: three strands from the hair of Galadriel.

[Lhunardawen]

However, if Feanor had never been born, then Serinde would not have died, Finwe would not have remarried, and Fingolfin and Finarfin would not have been born. Hence, no noble houses of the Noldor except for Finwe and his children

What is Middle-Earth without Fingolfin and Finarfin and their children? There would probably also be no Numenor and Half-elves, if you'll climb up their family trees. And Morgoth's evil will still manifest, and sooner or later there would have to be someone standing up against him aside from the Valar themselves. I don't think Feanor would ever match Fingolfin's courage in his wrath.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Reminds me of someone's comment on WWI what-ifs. Willow.

Anywhen, how could you tell better or worse? Is Arda worse because Eru allowed Melkor - and his evil - into it? I don't know.

But Arda will be changed, if that bleep is suddenly chronologically dissolved. Oh, yes, it will.

[tar-ancalime]

Thanks for all the responses. I find Feanor to be an absolutely fascinating character. I guess what I was thinking of, in addition to all of the butterfly-effect type things (Serinde not dying, Finwe not remarrying, Finglofin and Finarfin not being born), is that Feanor seems to me to be a very special character: he is everything Elvish, magnified. He is more creative, more skilled, more intelligent, and prouder (more flawed) than anyone else. He's not only one of the Firstborn, he is the Firstborn (in an archetypal sort of way). I do think that he stands for all of the Noldor, at least, if not for all of the Elves. So I wonder: what is the purpose of having a character like him? His presence changes the world, certainly, but in what way? In a larger sense, what is the ultimate impact of the Elves on the world? I guess I'm just ruminating--any thoughts?

[Kuruharan]

Just for the sake of rumination, I'll argue that Feanor does not represent the Noldor in an archetypical way. I certainly don't think that he represents all the Elves, but for simplification I'll confine my discussion to the Noldor.

I think Feanor may represent all the flaws and misused potential of the Noldor. He was a creative genius, a commanding leader, and generally one of the all round greatest of the Elves. However, most of the willful (and by that I mean the results of actions which he intended) acts of his life led to destruction and death. He let his abilities go to his head and ultimately his strengths became his weaknesses. I agree that this qualifies him as a archetypical figure, but I don't believe that he is representative of everything that the Noldor did.

Take Finrod for example. He was a close relative of Feanor, he was a king, and he too was one of the greater (but not greatest) of the Elves, and his behavior stands in stark contrast to much of what Feanor did.

Finrod worked for the betterment of his people. Feanor abandoned about 2/3 of his people out in the middle of nowhere, and then at the point of death commanded his remaining followers to fight on in a war that he knew they could not win.

Feanor was proud beyond the point of megalomania. Finrod humbled himself to the point of being willing to abdicate his throne, and then ultimately die for the sake of a mere mortal. It is hard to imagine Feanor doing anything even remotely similar to that.

While this is hardly an in depth treatment of the issue, I think that it does begin to show that there was a whole range of action by the Noldor that is not represented by Feanor.

There are likely many counter-arguments to be made here, and there are probably tons more material to discuss, but this is a starting point.

Who wants to take a stab at it?

[Galadriel55]

This may sound weird, but I can see Feanor as the Melkor of Noldor. Melkor brings chaos to the Song of Ainur, he leads some of the down the wrong path...Same with Feanor: he's the one who causes the Noldor to be banned from Valinor, he leads them in a, in a way, rebellion against the Valar (Melkor rebelled against Eru). Both rebellions caused evil and both were otherwise pointless, unless you consider the butterfly effect. AND he is the brightest, most skilled, etc Noldor, just like Melkor was the most powerful ainu. There are probably other similarities between them, I' just too tired right now to really think it through.

Edit: they're also the most arrogant and not very wise - even though there are moments when they are cunning; yet still not wise.

[Elmo]

Middle Earth would have been a lesser place. Feanor wasn't a boring elf like the King of the Vanyar who's so dull I can't remember his name. Feanor ruffled some feathers, stuck it to the man. (Manwe and Melkor) Sure he probably wasn't the darling of the halls of Taniquetil but that's the type of things songs are made of. What was it Eru said, something like if you try and go against me you'll only make my creation better. That's exactly what Feanor did.

He was responsible for the most beautiful objects ever created by elf or man and the Quenta Silmarillion (which is a cracking read no matter what anyone says) so he did make the Great Lands even greater in my humble opinion and Middle Earth would be a much greyer place without him.

[aiea]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

This may sound weird, but I can see Feanor as the Melkor of Noldor. Melkor brings chaos to the Song of Ainur, he leads some of the down the wrong path...Same with Feanor: he's the one who causes the Noldor to be banned from Valinor, he leads them in a, in a way, rebellion against the Valar (Melkor rebelled against Eru). .

I just start to read this forum. So i apologize if some of what i shall write is OT.
and second i am italian and i write in english i as can
I agree with what Galadriel55 wrote but ,probably, for different reason.
Melkor is ,in not understandable way for us, just doing Iluvatar will.
This is well explained with the creation of snow.
And if you like reduce Tolkien religiosity is all about choice and it is a difference between an idea and its realisation .
Melkor wish to become a creator God and "in se"(english: on own self??) this idea is not evil or good it is an aspiration that is in all the created creature to understand themselves.
You try to do what is good for your understanding.
Ainurs took Elves to their country... This was done for good but it was not an absolute good idea ...may be better was to help then in their country. The Ainur were just big brother,but took Elves as son and that was a big mistake because they wer just Iluvatar 'son.
This is as the Eden.
An equilibrium that after s time become static and has to be changed.
You believe that Hobbit were living a good life ?
No they have start to forget about their past, They believe their place the centre of the world. This changed because an Hobbit did some that was wrong for normal Hobbits go around the world and put heir nose in Wizards and King question. So Melkor :Feanor:Bilbo
Frodo at the end make the wrong decision (take the ring for himself) the same mistakes that has done Gollum the 9
the 7 .
Also the 3 in some way if subject to the one are just choices. we have to give them some sense.
Silmarillon are light creation...they are not jewels they are the meaning of what light is. Feanor is another Lucifero a bringer of light that fail when wish to keep this light on him on his world and not wish share it with the world.
But to do this is not easy task. If you not see the mistakes of Ainur you fai to see the complexity of the picture that Tolkien gave us...