I like it so far, overall, but I've never read the The Silmarillion so my lore isn't being trampled all over. Some people are saying it's just fan fiction -- but in my opinion anything not written by Tolkien himself is fan fiction, including Jackson's trilogy. I'll enjoy it or not based on its own merits, ultimately.
The movies do deviate from the original so much so that you can't really talk about the same characters without clarifying "the movie version", with a few exceptions. So yeah. Don't really get the issue here.
People who dismiss it as fan fiction are truly ignorant. The Tolkien Professor has a channel (Rings and Realms) talking about the series and he has pointed out the numerous ways the scriptwriters are keeping the spirit of what Tolkien wrote even though telling stories he didn't tell. And even with Galadriel, in a way they are providing answers to questions about her Tolkien had and never solved, so this series seriously engages with texts, even if they don't have the rights to them. It's truly marvelous. And of course, if the Professor likes it, Reddit losers crying over "lore" are clearly overreacting. These people reduce fandoms to "lore trivia" instead of what the central themes of an author are (like, the first scene with Finrod and Galadriel is 100% a conversation about eucatastrophe, a central theme in Tolkien's theology). Let these people cry over "lore" while the rest of us can truly appreciate how much attention and care is being put into this series.
I'm going to be honest. I have watched this show without being in the mood to watch a show like this but I thought that if I didn't the spoilers would find me (and they did, but it was too late). And I enjoyed it. Quite a lot actually. But I think that if people weren't being crybabies on the internet and I had come around this show when I was really in the mood, I would have enjoyed it a lot more.
Tolkien didn't write a book telling stories about the first and second age - he wrote legends. A lifetime's worth of the same stories being tweaked, changed and rewritten as real Legend's are retold and rewritten through generations with multiple artists, each with their own style, adding illustrations and music based around key events and characters (King Arthur, Merlin, Beowulf, Robbin Hood, Norse Mythology, Greek Mythology - his writing's and the associated works mimic those tales). In my view adapting Tolkiens work to a new medium, retelling some of his tales for a new audience, a new generation, should not be approached like adapting any other Fantasy writer's book's & should instead be viewed in the same way we view film's or TV shows that adapt the myths and legends his work mimics. You decide which particular story you want to adapt, look at all of the versions of that particular tale - Tolkiens various notes and reworkings, poem's and song's retelling the tale within other works (like songs about Beren and Luthien found in Lord of the Rings), paintings and drawings inspired by those works, any previous adaptations of that tale (radio plays, animations, films, stage plays and TV) - and you decide which elements (different versions of characters, plot points) you will use, which you will discard, which you will change and what new elements you will add. Lancelot doesn't appear in the earliest versions of King Arthur's story, Robin Hood didn't used to bring a black man back to England from the crusades, and Harfoots didn't appear in Tolkiens writing about the Second Age. But it doesn't matter - because Tolkien embraced the fact that tales change in the telling - that's why Riddles in the Dark was changed after the first edition of the Hobbit. And that's why I'm more accepting of changes when adapting his works when compared to other authors. It's not simply a book, it's much bigger and broader and needs to be treated accordingly. The same way we treat other myths and legends when repackaging them for a modern audience.
@@xXSinForLifeXx You struggled with Galadriel recounting her journey for Valinor bringing the reader up to the beginning of the story, and found it unearned? Huh.
They made some decisions about the visuals and I'm perfectly fine with that even if I know how they should be, they don't ruin the storytelling. It's a beautiful show. That shot of Sauron is chilling 😁
Thanks for doing this. I know a bunch of people are already mentioning how the writing is amazing and the casting is immaculate. I know they are saying that, yes - while this is an adaptation of limited amounts of information based on a collection of writings not assembled by the author but by his estate, that the expansion and interpretation of said nebulous events are a wonder to behold and a breath-taking privilege to experience. I am sure they admit that, yes - European mythology might have a strong connection to these narratives and that non while people being in it makes perfect sense as, even in early Europe people of many races and creeds existed and the world has never been stagnant and uniform. I know they laud the writing because they know that some of it is poignant and meaningful and entirely fitting for the setting. I look forward to watching your review of it and hearing your views.
People are hating on this show SO BAD right now and I just don't get it. I think it's good. What? You're mad that Galadriel is a badass now? She was supposed to be the pinnacle of splendor and beauty as we know her in the original trilogy. And now people are mad that her backstory has been altered a little bit to make her the pinnacle of badassery in her youth. I don't get it. What are you mad about??? lol Black dwarves? Gtfo. Grow up. I'm with you. I could care less what the ethnicity of the actor/actress as long as the character they play is enjoyable. When you meet the aforementioned 'black female dwarf' in the next episode... I found her to be exactly that. So again.... What is everyone so mad about? The negative reviews started pouring in before the show even aired. Now the videos are all titled "WELL! WE WERE RIGHT!" nope.... you weren't. This show is GORGEOUS. And I'm with it so far. I like the Harfoots. And Galadriel. And the black female dwarf (who's name I can't recall ATM). I'm here for it. I tip of my nerd-cap to you btw for having not only read the Simarillion.... but reading it MORE THAN ONCE.... in MULTIPLE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES :O That's next-level nerdery and I appreciate you enormously for it. Looking forward to the rest of the reactions. I've been watching you for a while but somehow I wasn't subscribed! #Fixed
My problem with the show is, that it has not really great writing... Even as something that stands alone it is, even with its great visualls and some good moments and elements, not something I would consider a masterpiece. And with so little things that they can use in the show from the source material, all the changes and how many of the for the show created characters feel better than the adapted ones, I have somehow to ask if it would not have been better to just save the money for the rights and just go with something of its own - even when it means, that there would not be a big name to back the show up. The diversity-thing is in My opinion not really an issue, except for how it was used too much as a tool for marketing and to put many critical voices into the same pit as some racist weirdos. I do not think that it is very necessarily and believe that the diversity should have been a bit more logical (a big city in a big empire is one thing, but with a secludet little tribe I would think, that people would mix with each other enought to look the same)... But in the end I do not see it as the ultimate woke crap, that some people say the show is. And I say that as someone that does make a difference if something is really progressive or woke. (Hehehe). Something that people should consider is to really be a bit more nice with each other. I know that this World of Tolkien, his mythology, is very precious für a lot of people (Me includet) and it is normal to get emotional about something beloved, but even if someone hates or loves the show, there should still be room for decent respekt and discussion instead of being polemic, calling each other names, harrasing people...etc. And before I forget it: I really liked your reaction! It feels somehow authentic and I do not really understand, why You still have such a small number of Followers. :) (Sorry by the way for My english, but I am german).
I have the same opinion that you about the inclusion of black characters. I was very excited to see this show, but yesterday when I first tried watching it I was so bored that I fell asleep before ending the first episode, which is something that NEVER happens to me, that was really a BAD start. I tried again today, this time luckily I didn't fell asleep, but I still found it kinda boring, right now there is nothing in the show that I really hate, but sadly there is nothing that I really love either, so I really hope the story gets more interesting soon 🤞🤞 Visually it looked stunning but it needs a good and entertaining story because if it's boring it doesn't really matter how beautiful it looks.
My biggest issue is the lore breaking (Galadriel was not a warrior), the awful writing and the terrible acting. Tolkien wrote his stories as a mythology of ancient Britain because all of their mythology and been lost with the invasion of the Romans and Normans. He said so often, so no, he wouldn't have changed how he wrote it.
"she fought fiercely against Fëanor in defence of her mother’s kin" about Galadriel in "The History of Middle-earth XII: The Peoples of Middle-earth". I think there are some other mentions of her fighting in Tolkien stories, but this is the only one I remember right now. I'm sure that there will be a lot of things that will contradict Tolkien's lore in this show, but Galadriel fighting it's not something that is exactly lore breaking.
She's thousands of years old. A few centuries of swinging a sword around would be a drop in a bucket compared to her time as the Galadriel we knew, really.
Except she was described as athletic and a fighter - your perception is your own. You do not get to determine how other people perceive that description. You can not possibly assume that Tolkien would have kept it all white if he were born a few generations later. While his stories will always be in highest tier of fantasy - it's because it grandfathered fantasy as a genre. The books/stories themselves are very much a "white man perspective" and very unrealistic to the actual world.
@@ladyorapma I don't think he meant swinging a sword. A being of her power has other means of fighting but who knows. It is open to debate. Galadriel in the show is my biggest gripe I can let almost everything else go but between the strange acting and bad writing of her character I just have no desire to see where her story takes me. I am also not a Tolkein super fan I only know his work through D&D and the Jackson movies so take my opinion for what it's worth.
@@AmyPierrottie The point is..they are NOT the actual world just like Wakanda isn't the actual world. I can enjoy both without having to see someone who looks just like *me* in either one. Tolkien specifically stated his works were a mythology for England set in a time period where every country was almost completely a monoethnic population. He hated that all British mythology had been changed by the influence of Roman and Norman culture. He didn't even consider Arthurian legend to be an untainted British mythology because it was largely influenced by the Norman French. By the 2nd age Galadriel was somewhere around 4,000 years old and had enormous magical power even then so she didn't need a sword. The biggest point is that she was already married to Celeborn in the first age and already had a child by the year 35 in the second age. They've said this is set only approximately 1,000 years before the LOTR so she was married, had children and was settled in Lothlorien by the time this occured. It also says that after the Kinslaying that Galadriel was disgusted by violence and only used her magic and men in defense of Lothlorien.
The outrage stems from the creators very clearly made the decisions to make the characters woke in the image of todays society, the issue wasn’t that the dwarf was black it was because in the books it very clearly states dwarven women had beards. They’re deviating from the lore, and bringing in identity politics to the show
Expand your imagination. Share your world and dont be so hasty to see color as a barrier. "Woke" isnt your issue. Change is your issue. All tales change in the retelling. If you want "purity", then read the books, and stay away from anything that deviates... and leave the rest of us from your darkness.
The beard and being black were 2 completely different dramas. A lot of people were upset about a dwarven woman with no beard. And other people were angry at black characters existing in the show. Those 2 groups of people don't necessarily overlap.
There's nothing in the thing's JRR Tolkien himself actually published that says dwarven women have beard's. It was published in the Silmarilion after his death by Christopher based on one mention amongst his many, many notes and in doing so Christopher ignored several later notes and letters his dad wrote close to his death about who did and did not have beard's which made no mention of dwarf women having beards. He did specifically mentions in that letter (one of the last he ever wrote) that in his view no elves could grow beards, and as a result of their Elvish ancestry no Numenorean Nobles could grow beards (specifically naming Aragorn, Denethor, Boromir, Imrahil and Faramir - it's notable nobody is out here crying about the film's changing who does & doesn't have beard's amongst some of these characters) - and that all dwarven men had beard's. That was his final say on the matter. The show doesn't have a liscence for the Silmarilion and is adapting only what Tolkien himself published during his own lifetime. And even if we delve into his various posthumous published writing's he (as he so often did) changes his view as time went on & the Silmarilion should not (as Christopher himself states in the History of Middle Earth book's) be taken as a definitive version of the first and second ages. So really the showrunners would seem to be free to give dwarven women beards or not as they see fit without contradicting anything JJR Tolkien published, or contradicting his final view on the matter if beard's. I suggest you stop trying to justify your bigoted views by hiding behind lies about what a dead man wrote and pretending you're "protecting his legacy". Other people have read Tolkiens writing's extensively and are perfectly happy to accept changes will be made when adapting any story - only a certain type of "fan" continues to cry about dwarf women having beard's - you're not clever and we can see what you are doing.
I’m not going to waste my time on the racial issue, your world view is bigoted. The beard issue on the other hand, it is mentioned in one piece of Tolkien’s writing that Dwarf women have beards, in another Tolkien specifically states that all Male Dwarfs have beards, which validly leaves the matter open to interpretation, so no Tolkien was in no way specific that Dwarf women all had beards, or state anything otherwise is simply factually inaccurate.
Well the reason there weren't really black people in his story wasn't because there weren't black people in Europe at Tolkien's time, but because there weren't black people in Europe historically. Middle Earth roughly corresponds to Europe, but in an ancient mythical prehistory. Racial diversification wasn't really possible until recently because of changes in technology. Is having black dwarf a big problem? Not really, no. Weird hill for some people to die on. But it doesn't make any sense for the time period and location, so it's bad writing.
For something you call a weird hill to die on, you apparently have no problem fighting half way up it. It’s a fantasy world that includes giant eagles and the like, I does not have to correspond to the migration patterns of the human species. It’s not bad writing, because the characters skin tone is not the written word, it’s casting, and if it troubles you, go take a good long look at yourself in the mirror because you’ve got some work to do.
Tolkien very rarely mentioned the colour of his characters skins in his writings that were published during his own lifetime. One of the rare occasions he did so was to compare Sam's brown skin to Frodo's white. Yet all these people crying about black dwarves and elves never said a word about the whitewashing of Sam when the Lord of the Rings films were being cast. But now all we hear about is "migration patterns" and "not following the Lore" and "an insult to Tolkiens memory". And Interestingly in all of his writing's, even those published after his death, he never really said anything about the skin colour of dwarves. On the other hand some of his note's about Elves (although admittedly he changed his mind on this a lot as time went on) suggested that some types of Elves had brown skin. Strange how all these "Lore Experts" never mention these part's of Tolkiens writing when they stand up to defend Tolkiens intentions. The most they ever say is that (and I sh*t you not, this is a real thing I've seen people argue) "Sam had dirty hands". Tells you everything you need to know.
Yes there were "Black" people in Europe historically, at least from the time of Romans onward. Mali Kingdom sold slaves to North Africa and from there to Moorish Spain and on to the rest of Europe in the Middle Ages. "Black-A-Moor" was what freed such individuals were called. Yes, they were Central Africa "Blacks", not North African Berbers who still often have dark skins. There were even rare "Black Vikings" who raided with the Norse warriors, presumably from the same source.
Idk about the woke casting or the lore changes. But honestly I found the episode to be boring and have terrible writing. Also I feel like the intro for the show should have been the story instead of a time jump. I don't know much about Tolkein lore but it looked interesting.
The show does, too. Amazon couldn't get the rights to tell it. They can't even really reference it by name (The War of Wrath), or even mention names and characters that are exclusive to it (ie not mentioned in Lord of the Rings, Hobbit, or their Appendices).
Love the vibes and the perspective. Looking forward to watching you on this reaction journey. You’ve got a subscriber in me 🇸🇪
I like it so far, overall, but I've never read the The Silmarillion so my lore isn't being trampled all over. Some people are saying it's just fan fiction -- but in my opinion anything not written by Tolkien himself is fan fiction, including Jackson's trilogy. I'll enjoy it or not based on its own merits, ultimately.
The movies do deviate from the original so much so that you can't really talk about the same characters without clarifying "the movie version", with a few exceptions. So yeah. Don't really get the issue here.
People who dismiss it as fan fiction are truly ignorant. The Tolkien Professor has a channel (Rings and Realms) talking about the series and he has pointed out the numerous ways the scriptwriters are keeping the spirit of what Tolkien wrote even though telling stories he didn't tell. And even with Galadriel, in a way they are providing answers to questions about her Tolkien had and never solved, so this series seriously engages with texts, even if they don't have the rights to them. It's truly marvelous.
And of course, if the Professor likes it, Reddit losers crying over "lore" are clearly overreacting. These people reduce fandoms to "lore trivia" instead of what the central themes of an author are (like, the first scene with Finrod and Galadriel is 100% a conversation about eucatastrophe, a central theme in Tolkien's theology). Let these people cry over "lore" while the rest of us can truly appreciate how much attention and care is being put into this series.
They do not have the rights to the Silmarillion so of course is not gonna be true to the book.
I'm going to be honest. I have watched this show without being in the mood to watch a show like this but I thought that if I didn't the spoilers would find me (and they did, but it was too late). And I enjoyed it. Quite a lot actually. But I think that if people weren't being crybabies on the internet and I had come around this show when I was really in the mood, I would have enjoyed it a lot more.
Though this would be early in the timeline for them to have arrived, Harfoots were the first of the Hobbit progenitor groups to migrate.
Tolkien didn't write a book telling stories about the first and second age - he wrote legends.
A lifetime's worth of the same stories being tweaked, changed and rewritten as real Legend's are retold and rewritten through generations with multiple artists, each with their own style, adding illustrations and music based around key events and characters (King Arthur, Merlin, Beowulf, Robbin Hood, Norse Mythology, Greek Mythology - his writing's and the associated works mimic those tales).
In my view adapting Tolkiens work to a new medium, retelling some of his tales for a new audience, a new generation, should not be approached like adapting any other Fantasy writer's book's & should instead be viewed in the same way we view film's or TV shows that adapt the myths and legends his work mimics.
You decide which particular story you want to adapt, look at all of the versions of that particular tale - Tolkiens various notes and reworkings, poem's and song's retelling the tale within other works (like songs about Beren and Luthien found in Lord of the Rings), paintings and drawings inspired by those works, any previous adaptations of that tale (radio plays, animations, films, stage plays and TV) - and you decide which elements (different versions of characters, plot points) you will use, which you will discard, which you will change and what new elements you will add.
Lancelot doesn't appear in the earliest versions of King Arthur's story, Robin Hood didn't used to bring a black man back to England from the crusades, and Harfoots didn't appear in Tolkiens writing about the Second Age.
But it doesn't matter - because Tolkien embraced the fact that tales change in the telling - that's why Riddles in the Dark was changed after the first edition of the Hobbit.
And that's why I'm more accepting of changes when adapting his works when compared to other authors. It's not simply a book, it's much bigger and broader and needs to be treated accordingly.
The same way we treat other myths and legends when repackaging them for a modern audience.
Great beard
Don’t understand the negatives about this show it looks great the actors are believable and who cares about a black dwarf gee get a life people
"who cares about a black dwarf gee get a life people" Ikr, how dare people be passionate about something they love.
Failure of imagination. That is the basis of all racism.
The writing is kinda terrible I thought also all the time jumps that are not well earned or explained.
@@TattleDelta I have no problem believing that you are supremely passionate about loving white people.
@@xXSinForLifeXx You struggled with Galadriel recounting her journey for Valinor bringing the reader up to the beginning of the story, and found it unearned? Huh.
I hope there will be sufficient diversity in the orc and general bad guy community. Representation is the most important thing today.
I recorded my reaction but just don't have the desire to even edit for UA-cam or watch your reaction. Just popping by to give you a like.
They made some decisions about the visuals and I'm perfectly fine with that even if I know how they should be, they don't ruin the storytelling. It's a beautiful show. That shot of Sauron is chilling 😁
Thanks for doing this. I know a bunch of people are already mentioning how the writing is amazing and the casting is immaculate. I know they are saying that, yes - while this is an adaptation of limited amounts of information based on a collection of writings not assembled by the author but by his estate, that the expansion and interpretation of said nebulous events are a wonder to behold and a breath-taking privilege to experience. I am sure they admit that, yes - European mythology might have a strong connection to these narratives and that non while people being in it makes perfect sense as, even in early Europe people of many races and creeds existed and the world has never been stagnant and uniform. I know they laud the writing because they know that some of it is poignant and meaningful and entirely fitting for the setting. I look forward to watching your review of it and hearing your views.
People are hating on this show SO BAD right now and I just don't get it. I think it's good. What? You're mad that Galadriel is a badass now? She was supposed to be the pinnacle of splendor and beauty as we know her in the original trilogy. And now people are mad that her backstory has been altered a little bit to make her the pinnacle of badassery in her youth. I don't get it. What are you mad about??? lol Black dwarves? Gtfo. Grow up.
I'm with you. I could care less what the ethnicity of the actor/actress as long as the character they play is enjoyable. When you meet the aforementioned 'black female dwarf' in the next episode... I found her to be exactly that. So again.... What is everyone so mad about? The negative reviews started pouring in before the show even aired. Now the videos are all titled "WELL! WE WERE RIGHT!"
nope.... you weren't. This show is GORGEOUS. And I'm with it so far. I like the Harfoots. And Galadriel. And the black female dwarf (who's name I can't recall ATM). I'm here for it.
I tip of my nerd-cap to you btw for having not only read the Simarillion.... but reading it MORE THAN ONCE.... in MULTIPLE DIFFERENT LANGUAGES :O
That's next-level nerdery and I appreciate you enormously for it.
Looking forward to the rest of the reactions.
I've been watching you for a while but somehow I wasn't subscribed! #Fixed
My problem with the show is, that it has not really great writing... Even as something that stands alone it is, even with its great visualls and some good moments and elements, not something I would consider a masterpiece. And with so little things that they can use in the show from the source material, all the changes and how many of the for the show created characters feel better than the adapted ones, I have somehow to ask if it would not have been better to just save the money for the rights and just go with something of its own - even when it means, that there would not be a big name to back the show up.
The diversity-thing is in My opinion not really an issue, except for how it was used too much as a tool for marketing and to put many critical voices into the same pit as some racist weirdos. I do not think that it is very necessarily and believe that the diversity should have been a bit more logical (a big city in a big empire is one thing, but with a secludet little tribe I would think, that people would mix with each other enought to look the same)... But in the end I do not see it as the ultimate woke crap, that some people say the show is. And I say that as someone that does make a difference if something is really progressive or woke. (Hehehe).
Something that people should consider is to really be a bit more nice with each other. I know that this World of Tolkien, his mythology, is very precious für a lot of people (Me includet) and it is normal to get emotional about something beloved, but even if someone hates or loves the show, there should still be room for decent respekt and discussion instead of being polemic, calling each other names, harrasing people...etc.
And before I forget it: I really liked your reaction! It feels somehow authentic and I do not really understand, why You still have such a small number of Followers. :) (Sorry by the way for My english, but I am german).
I have the same opinion that you about the inclusion of black characters.
I was very excited to see this show, but yesterday when I first tried watching it I was so bored that I fell asleep before ending the first episode, which is something that NEVER happens to me, that was really a BAD start.
I tried again today, this time luckily I didn't fell asleep, but I still found it kinda boring, right now there is nothing in the show that I really hate, but sadly there is nothing that I really love either, so I really hope the story gets more interesting soon 🤞🤞
Visually it looked stunning but it needs a good and entertaining story because if it's boring it doesn't really matter how beautiful it looks.
My biggest issue is the lore breaking (Galadriel was not a warrior), the awful writing and the terrible acting. Tolkien wrote his stories as a mythology of ancient Britain because all of their mythology and been lost with the invasion of the Romans and Normans. He said so often, so no, he wouldn't have changed how he wrote it.
"she fought fiercely against Fëanor in defence of her mother’s kin" about Galadriel in "The History of Middle-earth XII: The Peoples of Middle-earth".
I think there are some other mentions of her fighting in Tolkien stories, but this is the only one I remember right now.
I'm sure that there will be a lot of things that will contradict Tolkien's lore in this show, but Galadriel fighting it's not something that is exactly lore breaking.
She's thousands of years old. A few centuries of swinging a sword around would be a drop in a bucket compared to her time as the Galadriel we knew, really.
Except she was described as athletic and a fighter - your perception is your own. You do not get to determine how other people perceive that description. You can not possibly assume that Tolkien would have kept it all white if he were born a few generations later. While his stories will always be in highest tier of fantasy - it's because it grandfathered fantasy as a genre. The books/stories themselves are very much a "white man perspective" and very unrealistic to the actual world.
@@ladyorapma I don't think he meant swinging a sword. A being of her power has other means of fighting but who knows. It is open to debate. Galadriel in the show is my biggest gripe I can let almost everything else go but between the strange acting and bad writing of her character I just have no desire to see where her story takes me. I am also not a Tolkein super fan I only know his work through D&D and the Jackson movies so take my opinion for what it's worth.
@@AmyPierrottie The point is..they are NOT the actual world just like Wakanda isn't the actual world. I can enjoy both without having to see someone who looks just like *me* in either one. Tolkien specifically stated his works were a mythology for England set in a time period where every country was almost completely a monoethnic population. He hated that all British mythology had been changed by the influence of Roman and Norman culture. He didn't even consider Arthurian legend to be an untainted British mythology because it was largely influenced by the Norman French.
By the 2nd age Galadriel was somewhere around 4,000 years old and had enormous magical power even then so she didn't need a sword. The biggest point is that she was already married to Celeborn in the first age and already had a child by the year 35 in the second age. They've said this is set only approximately 1,000 years before the LOTR so she was married, had children and was settled in Lothlorien by the time this occured. It also says that after the Kinslaying that Galadriel was disgusted by violence and only used her magic and men in defense of Lothlorien.
The outrage stems from the creators very clearly made the decisions to make the characters woke in the image of todays society, the issue wasn’t that the dwarf was black it was because in the books it very clearly states dwarven women had beards. They’re deviating from the lore, and bringing in identity politics to the show
Expand your imagination. Share your world and dont be so hasty to see color as a barrier.
"Woke" isnt your issue. Change is your issue. All tales change in the retelling. If you want "purity", then read the books, and stay away from anything that deviates... and leave the rest of us from your darkness.
The beard and being black were 2 completely different dramas.
A lot of people were upset about a dwarven woman with no beard.
And other people were angry at black characters existing in the show.
Those 2 groups of people don't necessarily overlap.
"bringing in identity politics to the show" - say you're a bigot without saying you're a bigot.
There's nothing in the thing's JRR Tolkien himself actually published that says dwarven women have beard's.
It was published in the Silmarilion after his death by Christopher based on one mention amongst his many, many notes and in doing so Christopher ignored several later notes and letters his dad wrote close to his death about who did and did not have beard's which made no mention of dwarf women having beards.
He did specifically mentions in that letter (one of the last he ever wrote) that in his view no elves could grow beards, and as a result of their Elvish ancestry no Numenorean Nobles could grow beards (specifically naming Aragorn, Denethor, Boromir, Imrahil and Faramir - it's notable nobody is out here crying about the film's changing who does & doesn't have beard's amongst some of these characters) - and that all dwarven men had beard's.
That was his final say on the matter.
The show doesn't have a liscence for the Silmarilion and is adapting only what Tolkien himself published during his own lifetime.
And even if we delve into his various posthumous published writing's he (as he so often did) changes his view as time went on & the Silmarilion should not (as Christopher himself states in the History of Middle Earth book's) be taken as a definitive version of the first and second ages.
So really the showrunners would seem to be free to give dwarven women beards or not as they see fit without contradicting anything JJR Tolkien published, or contradicting his final view on the matter if beard's.
I suggest you stop trying to justify your bigoted views by hiding behind lies about what a dead man wrote and pretending you're "protecting his legacy".
Other people have read Tolkiens writing's extensively and are perfectly happy to accept changes will be made when adapting any story - only a certain type of "fan" continues to cry about dwarf women having beard's - you're not clever and we can see what you are doing.
I’m not going to waste my time on the racial issue, your world view is bigoted. The beard issue on the other hand, it is mentioned in one piece of Tolkien’s writing that Dwarf women have beards, in another Tolkien specifically states that all Male Dwarfs have beards, which validly leaves the matter open to interpretation, so no Tolkien was in no way specific that Dwarf women all had beards, or state anything otherwise is simply factually inaccurate.
Well the reason there weren't really black people in his story wasn't because there weren't black people in Europe at Tolkien's time, but because there weren't black people in Europe historically. Middle Earth roughly corresponds to Europe, but in an ancient mythical prehistory. Racial diversification wasn't really possible until recently because of changes in technology.
Is having black dwarf a big problem? Not really, no. Weird hill for some people to die on. But it doesn't make any sense for the time period and location, so it's bad writing.
For something you call a weird hill to die on, you apparently have no problem fighting half way up it. It’s a fantasy world that includes giant eagles and the like, I does not have to correspond to the migration patterns of the human species. It’s not bad writing, because the characters skin tone is not the written word, it’s casting, and if it troubles you, go take a good long look at yourself in the mirror because you’ve got some work to do.
Tolkien very rarely mentioned the colour of his characters skins in his writings that were published during his own lifetime.
One of the rare occasions he did so was to compare Sam's brown skin to Frodo's white. Yet all these people crying about black dwarves and elves never said a word about the whitewashing of Sam when the Lord of the Rings films were being cast.
But now all we hear about is "migration patterns" and "not following the Lore" and "an insult to Tolkiens memory".
And Interestingly in all of his writing's, even those published after his death, he never really said anything about the skin colour of dwarves.
On the other hand some of his note's about Elves (although admittedly he changed his mind on this a lot as time went on) suggested that some types of Elves had brown skin.
Strange how all these "Lore Experts" never mention these part's of Tolkiens writing when they stand up to defend Tolkiens intentions.
The most they ever say is that (and I sh*t you not, this is a real thing I've seen people argue) "Sam had dirty hands".
Tells you everything you need to know.
Yes there were "Black" people in Europe historically, at least from the time of Romans onward. Mali Kingdom sold slaves to North Africa and from there to Moorish Spain and on to the rest of Europe in the Middle Ages. "Black-A-Moor" was what freed such individuals were called. Yes, they were Central Africa "Blacks", not North African Berbers who still often have dark skins. There were even rare "Black Vikings" who raided with the Norse warriors, presumably from the same source.
Idk about the woke casting or the lore changes. But honestly I found the episode to be boring and have terrible writing.
Also I feel like the intro for the show should have been the story instead of a time jump. I don't know much about Tolkein lore but it looked interesting.
The show does, too. Amazon couldn't get the rights to tell it. They can't even really reference it by name (The War of Wrath), or even mention names and characters that are exclusive to it (ie not mentioned in Lord of the Rings, Hobbit, or their Appendices).
@@gork8468 Ah that explains some of it then. Seemed like an interesting story that they just glossed over with a time jump.