[onewhitetree]

My 200 cents:

By the way, before any homophobes jump down my throat, spare me, will you?

What? You don’t want any argument, or are you being *gasp* bigoted??? Just because someone holds even a radically different opinion, that fact doesn’t make them evil, does it?

I maintain there's more affection shown between pairs of men than there are between the straight couples who are meant to be falling in love and getting married.

Of course there is. This is written of a time when it was unheard of for women to go into battle. Have you ever been in combat? I doubt it, and neither have I, but I recognize the fact that those unfortunate enough to experience such times certainly have the right to camaraderie among those with whom they might lie dying without being assumed upon by “open-minded” people such as yourself. This brings to mind Eowyn, who is mentioned in this discussion. She loves her country so much that she is willing, even longing to die for it if need be, and what do you know?! A battle arises! She stays true to her brave spirit and fights alongside the men. Oh my, she must be a lesbian. No straight woman would love her land and her subjects that much, right? Do you think that because she is ambitious and heroic that she must be homosexual as well? Now who is being bigoted?

Side note: I am not homophobic, I think I am looking at this is a very realistic manner, and it’s all right with me if you disagree. To those of you who are somewhat less involved in this discussion, my seeming irritation is aimed not at the opinion, but the demeanor and execution of arguments of certain persons in this thread. I have no problem whatsoever with homosexuality, my problem lies with reading any sexuality into places where it does not exist.

and for those who still think that all this discussion is dirty-minded, I have two things to say. One is if you don't want to talk about sex, don't study literature....

Perhaps you should “study literature” a lot more, and “talk about sex” a lot less. I don’t know if you are assuming with all your references that no one else has read these books, and that therefore no one else knows that three-fourths of the allusions that you make are completely unfounded and ridiculous in every way, but that’s how it certainly seems to me. Well, oops! Looky here, someone who has a more than sufficient past to know that you are wrong, and I’d be willing to bet that I’m not the only one.

Snow White isn't one I've read many traditional versions of, but last I heard Prince Charming woke her up with far more than a kiss.

This is completely absurd, so much so that I refuse to waste my efforts arguing such a twisting, and your aunt should have told you so.

Yes, I’d agree that Tolkien’s work is fairly sexless, for whatever reason, and that as far as we know he was straight.

Tolkien was raised Catholic and was nothing less than as devout as he could be. Public acknowledgement of sexual matters is not exactly a Catholic trait. I think it is also safe to say that, his being so devoted to his religion, perhaps he believed in the Ten Commandments. What with “thou shalt not commit adultery” and the lack of legal gay marriages in those days (not to mention the fact that homosexuality is condemned in the Bible), I would find it far more plausible to make the assumption that the lack of sexuality in his books was a moral matter to him, as few of the characters are married until the end, and wouldn’t it be a bit awkward to throw in a communal orgy at the Grey Havens?

I don’t think the genre as we think of it today actually existed before he started writing.

Actually, it did. Tolkien himself drew from such ancients as Beowulf, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, lots of mythology, and of course the Bible.

They’re [the romances] all pretty colourless, wouldn’t you agree? ... Aragorn and Arwen is possibly the most bloodless romance I’ve ever seen: a couple of hints are dropped in Rivendell, then she turns up at the end and marries him, still without a hint of feeling on either side.

LotR is not about romance, it is about the forces of good and evil. Luckily for us, Tolkien was such a skillful storyteller that he could weave slight strains of romance into his works that did not overpower the central story but added to the richness of emotions. As for Aragorn and Arwen, read the Appendices. You will be surprised.

Compare the Bennett parents with Galadriel and Celeborn

This is where I (or you?) went off the deep end. How can you possibly compare these two couples?! The fact that you even dare to compare Austen and Tolkien is rash. Galadriel shows not a shred of the farcical Mrs. Bennet, and Celeborn has what, maybe the entirety of a whole paragraph in LotR? I cannot help but be harsh here: why don’t you read the book before you use it?

(Concerning Legolas and Gimli):(...the Elves and Dwarves would be shocked to death at the thought! though they’re certainly Very Good Friends.) There’s a lot of male bonding in there, and it’s more than you see between the straight couples.

Legolas and Gimli are both main characters. None of the female characters have the predominance on the page that the nine have. Additionally, it would be a very stiff book if the nine did not have and show close friendship and affection. The friendship of Legolas and Gimli is, at most, a racial statement.

The main one is Frodo and Sam...I think Frodo was never going to be able to enter properly into a relationship with another person once the burden of the Ring was laid upon him...There are a lot of times, reading about Sam and Frodo, when I think “that’s love”...Sam just acknowledges that he’s absolutely terrified, and after that it’s the only thing he can possibly do, and you bet he’s doing it mainly out of love for Frodo.

This “controversy” is the biggest pile of Freudian trash that has graced the planet. I cannot help but feel that if someone must insist that Frodo and Sam (and other similar literary characters) are in a sexual relationship, that someone must not have such a friend of the same sex. Well, I do. And we don’t have sex. Or want to, even! Do not pervert the relationships of those of whom you know little about. Yes, Sam loves Frodo, and Frodo loves Sam! There is something about going through such hardships together that draws people close to one another for support (not gratification). And no, Frodo was not meant to enter into a relationship with another after experiencing the burden of the Ring. He was not infallible, and he, too, fell to its guiles and longed for it the rest of his days, leaving no room for romantic love.

I know you are “not coming back” to read this, but I have my doubts. I also couldn't keep my mouth shut when faced with such effrontery. I love literature, and I especially love Tolkien, so when people deface his immortal characters, it gets to me!

And yes, there's nothing like an endless discussion of balrog wings to bore me off the board! Why on earth are people so obsessed with them?

Heaven forbid someone be interested in something other than sex.

[ December 27, 2001: Message edited by: onewhitetree ]