|
As stated above, the prime reason which for there are much more strong female characters in the Silmarillion than in LotR would be simply a game of numbers: much more heroes, acting in different ages.
But I think we should look beyond the work itself; it seems to me that Tolkien was too influenced by the social roles during his era when he considered the abilities of women compared to men. Upon reading letter #43, one gets the feeling that women have a natural limit (unlike men):
The sexual impulse makes women (naturally when unspoiled more unselfish) very sympathetic and understanding, or specially desirous of being so (or seeming so), and very ready to enter into all the interests, as far as they can, from ties to religion, of the young man they are attracted to. No intent necessarily to deceive: sheer instinct: the servient, helpmeet instinct, generously warmed by desire and young blood. Under this impulse they can in fact often achieve very remarkable insight and understanding, even of things otherwise outside their natural range
or that they seldom surpass their male teacher (in whatever form he may be):
Every teacher knows that. How quickly an intelligent woman can be taught, grasp his ideas, see his point - and how (with rare exceptions) they can go no further, when they leave his hand, or when they cease to take a personal interest in him
or that their economic independence is illusory (compared to a man's):
A man has a life-work, a career, (and male friends), all of which could (and do where he has any guts) survive the shipwreck of 'love'. A young woman, even one 'economically independent', as they say now (it usually really means economic subservience to male commercial employers instead of to a father or a family), begins to think of the 'bottom drawer' and dream of a home, almost at once. If she really falls in love, the shipwreck may really end on the rocks.
but this one tops it all:
But they are instinctively, when uncorrupt, monogamous. Men are not. .... No good pretending. Men just ain't, not by their animal nature. Monogamy (although it has long been fundamental to our inherited ideas) is for us men a piece of 'revealed' ethic, according to faith and not to the flesh
He also defends the idea that 'arranged' marriages are better than those decided by the spouses themselves - considering the exceptions (his included) as very rare. In letter #49 he also decries the fact that religious vows (making special refference to the vow of obedience made by the woman) are laughed at by the modern state ritual.
|