[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I do not disagree. Both have great ancestors, but Arwen has the greater ones. Both do great deeds, but Galadriel does the greater ones. How do you balance it out? You can't. It's apples and oranges.

In my opinion nobility is about character and not just great deeds. I would say Arwen was a more pure character than Galadriel. In the same way that Tuor could be said to be more pure than Turin, even if he was lesser in power. Galadriel was contemplating stealing the ring from Frodo and her temptation was greater than Aragorn or Gandalf, who too were offered the ring.

That's beside the point. They won the war - after an Age of doing... what? Sitting at home, carving jewels, watching the stars... Life in Valinor is good when you are weary and seek rest. But what about when you are still young, vigorous, ambitious? When you don't want to just take and enjoy what the Valar have provided, but want to build yourself? Enjoyment wears off together with appreciation.

They won against a more powerful army, than the rebels faced. The desire to leave and travel ME was not inherently a bad choice. If they had petitioned the Valar reasonably (like Galadriel does in some accounts) then the Valar would have granted their request. It was the manner of the their rebelling, which led to the curse.

Alright. Sure. It's failure. But it makes a character more interesting to read about. I love Galadriel (who has fallen and risen again) as a character more than I do Arwen, who has neither fallen nor risen. She not only does little in the physical sense, but her character is pretty stagnant, other than perhaps her decision to become mortal.

I agree from a literary point of view a fallen character is more interesting. Tolkien himself says this. He goes further; here are his thoughts on the matter in a letter.

There cannot be any 'story' without a fall....So proceeding the elves have a fall, before their 'history' can become storial.

Ingwe may not be the most exciting character, but I dare say he is a better elf than Feanor.

And likewise, I love Morwen more than both of them put together, even though her fall was the hardest and grandest - perhaps I love her more because her fall was the worst.

Morwen is my favourite female character and only second to Turin in my favourite characters, but she was flawed too. If Turin and her, had been less proud then their lives very possibly may have been better, but perhaps not as great. That being said Turin and Morwen were both too proud. They were both great, but their pride was their greatest fault.

We don't know much of Arwen's character. We need deeds to judge character. Arwen does very few things that are her choice (I mean, she can be beautiful, but it's not really her credit); she visits Lorien. She weaves a banner. There's the look she gave Frodo in Rivendell that he always remembered afterwards, as well as giving him the necklace. And she became mortal. Coincidence or not, but many of her deeds originate in this choice. It's the most important thing to me in judging her character.

I disagree. We know Arwen's character, but we don't know much of her deeds. Her character is similar to Luthien. Her giving Frodo the necklace was not a coincidence. She is the first one to notice the ill effects that the ring has on Frodo. She realises that healing is impossible for him in ME and arranges for him to go the Tol Eressea.

Elrond distances himself from the Noldor and would rather be Thingol's heir? Where did you get this from? I can't seem to recall any such, but I may have forgotten this bit since my last read.

Distanced himself is too strong I feel. It was my mistake to use that word. It's better to say he favoured his Sindar descent over the Noldor and considered himself Thingol's heir.