Galadriel's... Brother?

 If you read my blog, then you've likely heard about Amazon's recent foray into high fantasy. They have acquired the rights to Tolkien's Second Age, the time after the Silmarillion and before the events of The Hobbit. 

I haven't read the Book of Lost Tales yet, so it's not my strong suit when it comes to Middle-Earth lore, but if you read the chapter in the Silmarillion called Akallabeth, you will see a summary of the kingdom of Numenor during the Second Age. It doesn't tell much about the elves or the dwarves, but that wasn't the point. The story is how Numenor fell. But I must admit, that is my primary knowledge about the Second Age. 

Amazon has rights exclusively to the Second Age, and, if I'm understanding the situation correctly, they have no rights to anything exclusive to the Silmarillion. Only the Second Age. 

Now, all of this brings me to Vanity Fair's teaser article about the series. (Why does Vanity Fair have this article? They're a fashion and celebrity gossip magazine, not... whatever.) The article and the subsequent Amazon Super Bowl trailer, as you no doubt are aware, left fans indignant and rather unwilling to trust that Amazon really wanted to tell a true Tolkienian story--and rather suspicious that the show could be any good. What's the like-to-dislike ratio on Amazon's trailer on YouTube? It was quite bad, last time I checked. 

There is no shortage of fan indignation at some of these bizarre changes. Plenty of people have complained that none of the elves look like elves (this guy looks like he's in a House episode about cosplaying, and what did they do to Elrond?). If we're talking about the multi-race Elves, I don't necessarily care one way or the other, but if you want a really good idea of my concerns about that change, this video absolutely nails it (short version, it's not that they did this, it's why they did this). My cousin pointed out that the idea of making Elrond a political schemer--the guy who refused a kingship before the events of this new series, and who built a Homely House instead of a castle--is ridiculous and rather antithetical to much of Tolkien's points. As this article points out, the new series is creating a whole host of new characters, and adding new characters is the last thing any Middle-Earth story needs, because Tolkien never lacked characters. Actually, I have to show this hilarious point from that Looper article: 

Even more concerning is Patrick McKay's quote in Vanity Fair, where he says, "One of the very specific things the texts say is that hobbits never did anything historic or noteworthy before the Third Age. But really, does it feel like Middle-earth if you don't have hobbits or something like hobbits in it?"

Umm, yes, it does. Most of Tolkien's stories don't have hobbits, and they still hold up fine.

That entire Looper article seems to be the most honest about fans' reactions, so it's worth reading in its entirety. 

As I said, there has been plenty of discussion (most of it very irate) regarding the series, but here is one thing from the Vanity Fair article that piqued my interest but no one else has mentioned:

If you’re not up-to-date on your ages, the second one is (seemingly) a time of peace for Middle-earth after an era of horror and conflict. The wicked god Morgoth has been defeated, and his apprentice, Sauron, has vanished. As the series begins, Galadriel is hunting down the last remnants of their collaborators, who claimed the life of her brother.

Her... brother? How exactly does Amazon plan to do that if they don't have the rights to Silmarillion?

For context, Galadriel had 4 brothers: Aegnor, Angrod, Orodreth (in earlier versions--page 51 of the second edition of Silmarillion), and Finrod Felagund. I put them in order of importance. Aegnor didn't do much and died and Angrod was the grandfather of Gil-galad, but neither of those were all that important for themselves, in my opinion. The other two, however, played rather integral roles to the plot of Silmarillion. Orodreth--who, in early versions was Galadriel's brother, and in later versions was her nephew--was a little more important. He figured prominently in a rather important part of the Silmarillion. The last and oldest one, Finrod Felegund, was one of the most important characters in one of the most important portions of the Silmarillion. 

The Silmarillion covers thousands of years of history, but a huge portion of it suddenly swoops in and focuses on about a hundred years or so in these four stories. The first half or so talks about the creation of Middle-earth, the rise of the Elves, the fight of Morgoth, etc., etc. Then you get to the story about Beren and Luthien, and all of a sudden, all the stories come very close together in time. Which makes sense--I'm pretty sure Tolkien wrote Beren and Luthien before he wrote any other part of the Silmarillion. It's the story that Aragorn sings to the hobbits early in the Fellowship, when they're still on their way to Weathertop. Immediately after Beren and Luthien comes the story of Turin; following that, it's the story about the fall of Gondolin and Turin's cousin Tuor; and after that, it's the story of Tuor's son, Earendil the Mariner, which almost ends Silmarillion. Those are sort of the four great stories of Silmarillion. All of those except for Turin's story are referenced somewhere in Fellowship, at least in the book. To the best of my memory, only Beren and Luthien were mentioned in the movie:

All of this is to say that these are important stories. They're important even into the trilogy. 

What does any of this have to do with Galadriel's brothers? Well, this "brother" that Sauron and his minions kills must be one of these four men. But which one is it? All four of them are in the Silmarillion, but I'm not sure how much Amazon can get away with using any of them without having the rights, especially of the last two.  

In Turin's story, Orodreth is the king of Nargothrond, and his daughter is in love with Turin. Orodreth listens to Turin's advice--rather ill-advisedly (Turin is not an Aragorn-like hero)--and a lot of these actions propel part of the plot of Turin's story. But then, because Orodreth was changed to Galadriel's nephew in later writings (and because these Amazon show-makers seem to have read everything Tolkien wrote except the actual books), I'm going to guess that he isn't the one they're talking about. 

The one that the article is most likely talking about is Finrod Felagund. Vanity Fair says this brother was killed by Sauron and his minions, and that fits Felagund's story, as he was killed in Sauron's prison... in the story of Beren and Luthien. He's an integral part of the story, first because he meets Beren's grandfather (great-grandfather?) and is the first Elf to meet mortal Men, but secondly, because he and several of his warriors escort Beren as far as Sauron's tower. Felagund fights Sauron--and loses. Then he's put in prison and Sauron's minions kill him. 

In Beren and Luthien. In the story of Beren and Luthien. 

The story of Beren and Luthien is integral to Middle-earth lore. It's so integral that it's the only one of the great stories referenced in Jackson's trilogy, and on his and his wife's tombstone, Tolkien refers to himself as Beren and his wife as Luthien. It is incredibly important to the whole legendarium of Middle-earth, and Felagund is important to that story. 

And Amazon doesn't have the rights to that story. 

So, um... what is the backstory? What are they going to say for this? I mean, do they have the legal rights to reference it? I fully admit that I don't know how that works. But the thing is, how are they going to talk about how Galadriel's brother died at Sauron's hands without actually telling the most iconic story of the Silmarillion? Or can they? 

What are they going to do? I mean, do they think they can get away with only briefly mentioning, "My brother was killed by Sauron", have all the die-hard fans know exactly what story that's referencing, but actually not reference it? Are they going to skirt around it to avoid legal blowback? Or do they plan to just say, "My older brother", without going into detail about Beren and Luthien? 

In the trilogy, that scene where Aragorn is singing about Luthien is directly in the book, so that must be how Jackson got the rights to have that scene. But is there a scene like that in any of the stuff that Amazon has the rights to adapt? 

I've seen enough of the new Mulan disaster to know that they play the tunes of the old songs without ever once having any of the lyrics there, and that's just abysmal when you think about the purpose of having that particular soundtrack. You only get the full enjoyment of the movie if you've seen this one other movie. How much worse would that be for a Middle-earth saga? 

Maybe I'm completely misunderstanding what creative rights Amazon has. Maybe they have the right to reference Silmarillion material but not adapt it? Maybe one of the pieces they have the rights to mentions Felagund, so that's how they're referencing him? I'm not sure. 

But I have to say, if they try to get away with a glancing reference to the most iconic story of Silmarillion, and think that will not stick out like a sore thumb and just be incredibly awkward...