The Role of Women in The Lord of the Rings

[davem]

Very impressive post's

I will just make the point though, that it seems from what we know that Tolkien himself experienced love at first sight, so we shouldn't necessarily dismiss it as impossible, or that he was simply tying up loose ends - he knew from personal experience that it could happen - which is why, I suspect, that he has so many of his characters experience it.

Quick note on Eowyn, I don't think we should feel too sorry for her 'descent into domesticity' from the glorious heights of hacking orcs to pieces. She did, after all, become the second most powerful woman in Middle earth after Arwen, & would have ruled in Faramir's stead whenever he was away - or does anyone see her being ordered around by 'councilors'?

[Tuor of Gondolin]

As early as 1963 readers questioned Tolkien about the speed of Eowyn and
Faramir's relationship. In Letters #244 his response was:

Criticism of the speed of the relationship or 'love' of Faramir and Eowyn. In my experience feelings and decisions ripen very quickly (as measured by mere 'clock-time', which is actually not justly applicable) in periods of great stress, and especially under the expectation of imminent death. And I not not think persons of high estate and breeding need all the petty fencing and approaches in matters of 'love'. This tale does not deal with a period of 'Courtly Love' and its pretenses, but with a culture more primitive (sc. less corrupt) and nobler.

Of course, he had experience with imminent loss in war (2 of his best friends
killed in World war I), and even after the Battle of the Pelennor Fields the
atmosphere in Gondor seems to have been that of the probable virtual extinction
of their world as they knew it (perhaps akin to a nuclear attack, or civilians
being bombed in 1945 Dresden or Tokyo).

[Bêthberry]

Thank you, Tuor of Gondolin, for posting that excerpt from the Letters and welcome to this thread. I hope you don't mind, but I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the authority of an author's letters.

It is of course always valuable and insightful to see how any writer justifies or explains his writing and Tolkien is no exception. His letters are a delight to read and his character which they display is a gracious, generous one, urbane and courteous, with wit and humour to leave us chuckling.

However, readers are also free to ask whether the explanation offered is sufficientt to answer the question. Just because an author intended his story or passage to suggest or accomplish a certain thing does not always mean the passage in question will necessarily support that justification. Some readers will read this explanation by Tolkien and say, "Yes, that makes sense." Others will say, "The principle has merit but frankly, I don't see the scene as playing out that way. There is too much emphasis on the desire to make the symbolism come together and too little on the dynamics of the interaction between the characters." Or some such reason or explanation. Readers, I suppose, can be either faithful or fickle and often both.

So, if I may suggest without being thought presumptuous or arrogant, finding an authorial statement about a passage in question is the first step in considering a question or a difference of opinion. The next step is to consider whether the statement is in fact applicable, whether the reasons it offers are sufficient to meet the question. or not.

Perhaps we will be left with the conundrum that for some it will be, for others it never will be.

[mark12_30]

I am only partway through this thread, but... here I stir things a bit.

Bethberry quoted Letters thusly:

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

Bethberry, if this rankles you, I understand. However, looking back over my own college career, it makes me smile, chuckle, and indulge a vague sense of guilt.

My father said that if I was going to major in physics (which I did), then I should also take math every single semester. So, after taking Calc 1, 2, 3, and Diff-E, what then? THe classes grew smaller, and often I was the only non-major in them. Yet how many times was I the favorite in the math class, with my quick grasp and ready answers? I took Complex Analysis for Applications, Number Theory, blah blah blah. I can't remember the names of all the classes I took. But my test scores were excellent, my class participation outstanding. No doubt those proffs thought well of me and had high hopes.

I haven't sharpened a Math Pencil since, and I graduated in '83.

Mea Culpa. I left behind a string of broken-hearted math proffs.

Poor dear naive Professor Tolkien, earnestly hoping to fan into flame a serious literary or philological interest in student after student-- most of whom only wanted an A for their class standing...

Now everyone at work will wonder what I'm smiling about.

[Bêthberry]

Tut, lassie, 'tis not a rankle but a correlation. And thank you for a lovely story about the exceeding difficulty in discerning intention.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Poor dear naive Professor Tolkien, earnestly hoping to fan into flame a serious literary or philological interest in student after student-- most of whom only wanted an A for their class standing...

Ah but he has fanned so much interest in these things among those who didn't have a chance to study with him. To be fair to the Prof, the generation of women students he was writing about - well women weren't really encouraged to have opinions generally at that time (cf "Women,Know your place", if anyone has seen those Harry Enfield "Mr Cholmondely-Walker" sketches). My mother was taught that it was rude to talk about anything for more than 3 minutes and never to talk about religion, politics etc - and she was of a slightly later generation, and attended one of those schools that had been founded with the intention of giving women a serious education!

Even for those women who went to university it would be going against a lot of conditioning to express a bold opinion. Also the proportion of women students would have been relatively low so if you adjusted to that I woner how different the ratio of original thoughts to number of pupils would be between the sexes..

[mark12_30]

Mithalwen wrote:

Ah but he has fanned so much interest in these things among those who didn't have a chance to study with him.

No doubt! Myself among them. And it is ironic, is it not? Perhaps many of the students that disillusioned Tolkien later took up Number Theory, or Complex Analysis, as a hobby.

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by Bb

HI, where would we be without you as our Archivist Extraordinaire?

I suppose more people would consider hiring Bond, Jam... I mean, exploitingengine, search engine. Joking apart, it is my pleasure, still more, when one has not much to say, one may make oneself useful by means available

So, here are 'feminist' threads by Lush:

Oh no she didn't! Oh yes she did! (Movies. Lyv Tyler. Less interest to the current issue, but the title is fascinating, so the thread gains a place in the hall of fame )

Family Matters (I believe, Lush's first attempt at feminist issue, timid a bit, but with the sure signs of oncoming tempest of the next thread )

I hate to come off as a nymphomaniac, but... (tempest)

Aredhel the bad girl?. The title speaks for itself

Ooh la la, Lúthien... If you have an 'ooh la la' to share, feel free to join it. Ahem, beware - morals and religious issues are discussed.


PS

er...um...ahem... are archivists like to librarians? I mean, do I have the right to hiss 'hush, silence' at you when you folks get too noisy in your discussions?

cheers