WARNING: This blog post is going to spoil Rings of Power for you if you are not already aware of the major reveal of the Second Age. Please turn away if you do not want to be thoroughly spoiled.
With Rings of Power dropping in less than a month, the question "what will they do with Sauron" gathers more and more energy. If their marketing team is smart, we haven't seen Sauron yet. If they're really clever, they will leave us hanging until the last possible moment to build that suspense. With the question of Sauron also comes the question of Celebrimbor, of whom we have received a lot more information. To Celebrimbor and his fate, Sauron is inexorably tied. What I hope to do here is look at the possible options for how they are going to approach Sauron and Celebrimbor's relationship. I will try to approach this with as much reserved judgement as possible, so if you're interested in my multitude of judgy opinions on both Sauron, Celebrimbor, and Rings of Power in general (both positive and negative), I direct you to my twitter.
This relationship can be interpreted in a number of ways but has been interpreted in fandom through a homoerotic lens. This is due to two factors. First, there is Tolkien's specificity that Sauron, prior to the sinking of Númenor into the sea, maintained beautiful form. Second, there is the extrapolation of seduction, first from Melkor's own seduction of Sauron, and of both Sauron and the Ring's history of manipulations that can be interpreted as a form of lust. While Tolkien did specify in The Unfinished Tales that Celebrimbor was not corrupted in heart or faith, the nature of this manipulated relationship has been interpreted and extrapolated quite thoroughly through a multitude of fanworks.
What we do have, and what needs to be adapted to screen, is the following: Sauron, in beautiful form, comes to Eregion and, through kindly manipulation, convinces Celebrimbor to unwittingly participate in Sauron's domination of Middle-earth.
Whether or not Tolkien intended to give Sauron and Celebrimbor homoerotic subtext is irrelevant in this context. What we are talking about here is how we interpret the visual language of adaptation. The way that we as viewers interact with television in the 21st century is miles away from how we interact with literature now, much less how we interacted with literature in the mid-20th. If you put this relationship dynamic on screen, there will be homoerotic subtext whether the author or the creators of the show intend it or not. This is due in part to the rigid gender and sexuality lines that we have drawn between the First World War and today (we are far less ambiguous and far more concerned with placing people and relationships into these boxes) and is partly due to the prevalence of fan thirst on social media. This relationship as described by Tolkien will read as homoerotic to some extent, no matter what the creators decide to do. The question is: what will the showrunners do with this inevitability?
We could say that the creators of the show aren't even considering this question, but I find that highly unlikely, if not somewhat naive. Showrunners have shown time and time again that they are aware of fandom (one only needs to look as far as the convention circuit to see this in practice) and it is well understood that often showrunners will pander to this fan interest without directly addressing it in their work. So what are the options? The way I see it, there are four possible scenarios.
1. Implied Homoerotic Subtext
This is the most common option and the one that falls into the queerbaiting category. With this option, they would write in, direct, and edit to have the relationship be flirtatious, lean heavily on the implication, but never commit to the bit. This is classic queerbaiting, because it draws in the very statistically relevant audience (fandom) that eats gay content up. It would feed the fandom machine, but also satisfy those who would take offence for one reason or another because no canon is made and it is left to the imagination. This would also be very easy, as sticking to Tolkien's text as closely as possible will, by default, give you this option to a 21st-century audience.
2. Committing to the Bit
In 2011, NBC greenlit Hannibal, a show based loosely on Red Dragon and the rest of the Hannibal Lecter series. Since the show's airing, both showrunner and cast have confirmed on multiple occasions that they turned the story into a twisted romance. What began as implied homoerotic subtext culminated in the clear statement that Hannibal was in love with Will Graham. This is what we can call committing to the bit. A showrunner saw homoerotic subtext and said 'we can lean into this and make it text'. This is option two for Rings of Power.
While I find this to be the most unlikely option in this case, it is still possible. We've already seen the willingness to make bold choices with regards to casting people of colour in Middle-earth, and making sure that choice is all over their advertising.(1) Committing to the bit with Sauron and Celebrimbor would also be a bold choice which would cause a media frenzy. Controversial media generates clicks and watches, while also giving the illusion of representation. I say the illusion of representation because, much like with casting, representation only really counts as representation when there are numbers behind it. If they committed to this bit without putting other queer relationships into the story, then Sauron as the only queer character is not great. I personally love queer villains. Queer villains are usually my favourite characters, and we as queer people deserve varied stories and characters who contain multitudes, but a queer villain among a sea of heteronormativity does not representation make. This option would also not be a far stretch from canon, but rather would be a reasonable leap to make, which adaptation regularly does for the purposes of visual storytelling. It would also not infuriate homophobic viewers as strongly as, say, giving Elrond a male love interest would because it would fit well with their world view of queerness as a seduction to villainy. So again, not great.
So far, the options are that the creators can do almost nothing to the text and bank on implication, or the creators can lean in and make this relationship canonically romantic and/or sexual. Neither of these options is actually great. Option one is lazy, tired writing, which would be called out immediately. Option two is bold, but would cause chaos while also ascribing to its own tired trope of the devious queer seducer who destroys upstanding, respectable men. If there are no other queer relationships in the show, both of these problems become even worse. Option one seems more like bait without any alternatives, and Option two then turns into a story where all of your queer characters are villains, failures and tragedies.
This is the most common option and the one that falls into the queerbaiting category. With this option, they would write in, direct, and edit to have the relationship be flirtatious, lean heavily on the implication, but never commit to the bit. This is classic queerbaiting, because it draws in the very statistically relevant audience (fandom) that eats gay content up. It would feed the fandom machine, but also satisfy those who would take offence for one reason or another because no canon is made and it is left to the imagination. This would also be very easy, as sticking to Tolkien's text as closely as possible will, by default, give you this option to a 21st-century audience.
2. Committing to the Bit
In 2011, NBC greenlit Hannibal, a show based loosely on Red Dragon and the rest of the Hannibal Lecter series. Since the show's airing, both showrunner and cast have confirmed on multiple occasions that they turned the story into a twisted romance. What began as implied homoerotic subtext culminated in the clear statement that Hannibal was in love with Will Graham. This is what we can call committing to the bit. A showrunner saw homoerotic subtext and said 'we can lean into this and make it text'. This is option two for Rings of Power.
While I find this to be the most unlikely option in this case, it is still possible. We've already seen the willingness to make bold choices with regards to casting people of colour in Middle-earth, and making sure that choice is all over their advertising.(1) Committing to the bit with Sauron and Celebrimbor would also be a bold choice which would cause a media frenzy. Controversial media generates clicks and watches, while also giving the illusion of representation. I say the illusion of representation because, much like with casting, representation only really counts as representation when there are numbers behind it. If they committed to this bit without putting other queer relationships into the story, then Sauron as the only queer character is not great. I personally love queer villains. Queer villains are usually my favourite characters, and we as queer people deserve varied stories and characters who contain multitudes, but a queer villain among a sea of heteronormativity does not representation make. This option would also not be a far stretch from canon, but rather would be a reasonable leap to make, which adaptation regularly does for the purposes of visual storytelling. It would also not infuriate homophobic viewers as strongly as, say, giving Elrond a male love interest would because it would fit well with their world view of queerness as a seduction to villainy. So again, not great.
So far, the options are that the creators can do almost nothing to the text and bank on implication, or the creators can lean in and make this relationship canonically romantic and/or sexual. Neither of these options is actually great. Option one is lazy, tired writing, which would be called out immediately. Option two is bold, but would cause chaos while also ascribing to its own tired trope of the devious queer seducer who destroys upstanding, respectable men. If there are no other queer relationships in the show, both of these problems become even worse. Option one seems more like bait without any alternatives, and Option two then turns into a story where all of your queer characters are villains, failures and tragedies.
That all being said, Options 1 and 2 are the most authentic to the text as read by a 21st-century reader. I say this not as a reflection of authorial intent, because authorial intent is irrelevant in regards to reader/viewer reception of text as written. Rather, these are the most authentic to the text because Sauron fits perfectly into the mould of the Queer Villain trope, as seduction is inherent to his character and is impossible to avoid in visual media, which relies far less on imagination, and has a well-defined history of using this trope. If you keep Sauron as a canonical devious seducer who brings about the fall of men and elves through this interpersonal seduction, you have options one or two no matter what.
We have looked at doing nothing and leaning in, but what about leaning out?
3. No Homo
Leaning out and avoiding the situation entirely would be the least authentic to the text, as it would remove seduction as one of Sauron's primary tools in the Second Age (a characteristic that comes down to him in a direct line from Melkor in the First Age, who did the same to him). This would require Sauron's machismo to be emphasized over his seductive qualities, even though these are qualities that are only brought to the forefront after the fall of Númenor, when Sauron has lost his fair form into the sea and returns monstrous. Option three is the safest option, even though it is the least authentic to the text. You avoid the 'damned if you do, damned if you don't big queer elephant in the room. Instead, you undermine the integrity of the characters themselves, as both Celebrimbor and Pharazôn's fall depends on Sauron's seductive qualities to be successful. So this is also not a great option. You could also, under this category, have Sauron be a seducer and have Celebrimbor outright reject those advances, but that again undermines the text as written for the purposes of a 21st-century statement, and also draws attention to hard lines of sexuality which Tolkien did not draw, because they were not discussed as they are discussed now and were more ambiguous.
So we have: do nothing, lean in, or lean out. The fourth option is the most interesting and would solve a lot of the above problems, but would also be the riskiest in today's real-world climate.
4. Gender Trouble
Quick speculation misidentified the above actress Bridie Sisson as Sauron,
which has lead to some interesting speculation.
Canonically, Sauron is a skin-changer. In Beren and Luthien alone, he turns into a wolf, a serpent, a monster, a vampire bat, and his own form again. He can, by Tolkien's own words, assume many forms. We also know that Ainur in general wear skin as clothing rather than having their bodies be inherent to their identity. It is feasible that Sauron could present as a different gender to every person that he meets. This would be interesting storytelling. First, it would create a sense of paranoia, because if we know right away that Sauron could look like anyone, then he could be watching at any time. He may be in the frame right now, and you just don't know. Second, it would be an unusual but not an inaccurate interpretation of the text, as we know this is something Sauron is absolutely capable of, at the very least before he loses his fair form.(2) What this would also do is find a middle ground for the left and right. The left would have a genderfluid Sauron and the knowledge that Sauron's pronouns are he/him as per the text, regardless of what form he takes. The right could then get a female-bodied Sauron engaging in the seduction of Celebrimbor, releasing that tension of anxiety in ways they would approve of.
But this is also not without flaws. Firstly, genderswapping a generally-presumed male character in order to avoid homoerotic tension is very obvious when it happens. Just because the character is then technically queer in the gender does not mean viewers familiar with this technique cannot see what the intention is, or why you're doing it. That weakens the action by means of intention. Second, we live in a world where trans people are subject to violence on a daily basis. Making your villain trans, especially right now, is extremely distasteful and dangerous, especially with one of the most well-known villains in literary history, and especially without any positive alternative in the text. Remember, representation is made by numbers and variety.
As far as I see it, these are the four options they have. do nothing, lean in, lean out, or get creative. There are positives to all of these options, but none of them is a great option. The writers are stuck between a rock and a hard place, one in which no one will be satisfied no matter how they approach this issue. I hope they can come up with a fifth option that I haven't, but that is yet to be seen.
(1) this is by no means to say that, in 2022, having a cast that isn't entirely white is bold, but rather to say that, given the state of Tolkien Fandom as we have seen from the backlash, the choice was bold in the context of mainstream Tolkien media.
(2) This only becomes less accurate if we consider the idea that they are stuck more in their form the more they engage in acts of the body (as per NoME), but then we would still need to think about Sauron as a sexual being and so becoming stuck in his body.
As far as I see it, these are the four options they have. do nothing, lean in, lean out, or get creative. There are positives to all of these options, but none of them is a great option. The writers are stuck between a rock and a hard place, one in which no one will be satisfied no matter how they approach this issue. I hope they can come up with a fifth option that I haven't, but that is yet to be seen.
(1) this is by no means to say that, in 2022, having a cast that isn't entirely white is bold, but rather to say that, given the state of Tolkien Fandom as we have seen from the backlash, the choice was bold in the context of mainstream Tolkien media.
(2) This only becomes less accurate if we consider the idea that they are stuck more in their form the more they engage in acts of the body (as per NoME), but then we would still need to think about Sauron as a sexual being and so becoming stuck in his body.
