I think this is important for everybody to acknowledge. It's fun to debate this topic. What's not ok is to dismiss everybody in the Wings faction as being influenced by Peter Jackson. Because let's be honest: for serious Tolkien fans that's a denigration, and used as a rhetorical technique to delegitimize. I, too, read the books loooong before I saw any movies or even artwork, and always imagined wings. The debates here have shifted my preference to wings of shadow and flame (that he/it can either wrap around himself or spread wide*), and I'm grateful for the scholarship and ideas that have led me to think more deeply about it than I did when I was 14. But what I don't appreciate is being labeled a 2nd class Tolkien fan for not having the "correct" interpretation.Enevhar Aldarion wrote: ↑Sat Jul 29, 2017 6:27 amI read the books before any animated or live-action movie was made, before I went looking for artwork based on the books, and before I discovered any version of D&D, and in my mind the wings were always real, or at least visible, if only made of smoke or flames.
*In fact, when we get to mechanics for a Balrog I propose that Balrogs can either wrap themselves in shadow and flame and achieve one effect, or unfurl their "wings" and achieve another effect.