Without the Spirit of Fire?

[Kuruharan]

I'm going to make a definitive statement from right here in this comfortable position of straddling the fence.

I'd say, both better and worse. Whether the good outweighed the bad or vice versa would depend on the perspective.

Feanor did accomplish some things that were good in and of themselves.

The adaptation of the Tengwar, the creation of the Silmarils, and the palantiri, to name just a few.

However, he also did some things that were just downright naughty.

The Oath of Feanor and the Rebellion of the Noldor, the Kinslaying, abandoning most of the Noldor in crossing the Sea, (and some sarcastic souls might say that his having children was an unmitigated catastrophe).

An interesting thing is that if one examines the aftermath (or wreckage) of Feanor's actions, several things ultimately had an impact quite opposite from the original intent.

The creation of the Silmarils, which was not an act evil of itself, resulted in all the disasters that overtook the Noldor later. And on a much more minor scale (which is almost pitiful to note) the palantiri were turned to evil by Sauron and resulted in the overthrow of the minds of Saurman and Denethor.

But on the other hand, the Revolt of the Noldor brought the High Elves back to Middle-Earth which resulted in the edification and enlightenment of humanity, who were ultimately destined to replace the Elves in Middle-Earth. This would not have happened to the same degree if the Noldor had not returned. (No disrespect to the Sindar, but...)

So, in the end, I believe that the exact opposite of Niggle's statement at the end of Tree and Leaf applies to Feanor, it is hard to say if things in Arda would have been better or worse without him, but they would certainly have been different.

[symestreem]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

(and some sarcastic souls might say that his having children was an unmitigated catastrophe).

If he had died before he had kids, would he have gotten a Darwin Award?

[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?