Aragorn and Arwen: More than kissing?

[HerenIstarion]

Originally Posted by Lush

Ultimately, I do not believe that Tolkien was as great in developing his female characters

Can not agree less

Men in Númenor are half-Elves (said Erendis), especially the high men; they are neither the one nor the other. The long life that they were granted deceives them, and they dally in the world, children in mind, until age finds them – and then many only forsake play out of doors for play in their houses. They turn their play into great matters and great matters into play. They would be craftsmen and loremasters and heroes all at once; and women to them are but fires on the hearth – for others to tend, until they are tired of play in the eve¬ning. All things were made for their service: hills are for quarries, river to furnish water or to turn wheels, trees for boards, women for their body's need, or if fair to adorn their table and hearth; and children to be teased when nothing else is to do – but they would as soon play with their hounds' whelps. To all they are gracious and kind, merry as larks in the morning (if the sun shines); for they are never wrathful if they can avoid it. Men should be gay, they hold, generous as the rich, giving away what they do not need. Anger they show only when they become aware, suddenly, that there are other wills in the world beside their own. Then they will be as ruthless as the seawind if anything dare to withstand them.

Thus it is, Ancalimë, and we cannot alter it. For men fashioned Númenor: men, those heroes of old that they sing of – of their women we hear less, save that they wept when their men were slain. Númenor was to be a rest after war. But if they weary of rest and the plays of peace, soon they will go back to their great play, manslaying and war. Thus it is; and we are set here among them. But we need not assent. If we love Númenor also, let us enjoy it before they ruin it. We also are daughters of the great, and we have wills and courage of our own. Therefore do not bend, Ancalimë. Once bend a little, and they will bend you further until you are bowed down. Sink your roots into the rock, and face the wind, though it blow away all your leaves.

Thus spake Erendis, embittered one, who loved and have been loved in return, but haven't lived happily ever after. May be applied by your average woman to your average man, general, I reckon. Check out your mail for the full story, and let us speak about Tolkien’s inability of writing out female characters afterwards

Eowyn? hmm...

I agree though that Arwen is not that developed. On the other hand, you answer it yourself: power of suggestion.

I do hold it is better so. What it suggests is The First Love (stage one), when one (I’m speaking from the male point of view, mind you, I do not know how it looks from the other side) is inclined to wish for all kind of disasters to befall the hometown all at once, in order to save the beloved from the fire by swimming the flood on the white charger out of earthquake's way figthing off ‘be-sombreroed’ bandits with a lightsaber, but in ‘real life’ be as dumb and shy as one is probably ever able of being, not mastering mere 'good-morning' when addressed to by the beloved by the start of the day, to undertake feverish mental quest for the rest of the day for something clever/important/funny to come up with in answer, only finding appropriate words when school is one hour over and the beloved is already gone home to have the evening tea. It is to suggest the refusal to walk with her on the grounds of 'I have a great big important thing to do just now, a-ha, my baseball cards to review, my stamps to order, that kind of thing', being totally free (or never ever being a baseball fan or philatelist in the first place) and secretly cursing oneself for being such a coward. Walking of the two when the feeling is of the kind suggested may be innocent (in the meaning ‘not sensual bodily’, but sensual indeed on all plains at the same time). Nay, it is even bound to be innocent. Sex per se never occurs to the male partner on the seesaw at this stage. (Contrary to popular belief, we (men) do not think about sex all the time, if you follow my meaning, kind lady ). What occurs, on the other hand, is the great urge to ‘do deeds’ for her (even when it is obvious even for the doer she needs them not). It is Don Quixote fighting windmills for Dulcinea del Toboso. Remember also the book we are discussing is about the pious hidalgo, and his beloved is important to define him rather then in her own right (not denying her the virtue if only the book were about her). You don’t blame Remarque for not having strong females in his All Quiet on the Western Front. You know he writes them well, per instance, in Three Comrades, but on the front line, you are bound to find males written out in puny detail and females merely suggested.

Stage one is admiration (it is good she exists, even if not for me, I would be rather denied her and suffer than know her not and feel all right) + urge to give/protect (I will stand between you and the world) + urge to receive/need to be gratified (I need you, I can not live without you)

Stage two, if it ever reaches it, is all three above + affection (we’ll trust each other, we’ll cleave to each other) and friendship (if there is common thing to be friends about - we will work together). But on all stages it wants the beloved as The Whole, as a person not as a means for bodily pleasure, nor bodily pleasure per se. I do not intend to say it would not enjoy the bodily pleasure, it probably will enjoy it even more, as a spice to the soup already good, but at some point quite tea and silence by the fireside may be equally enjoyable. (I know also you know it well without my verbose homily)

Coming to the point, any minute now - even after [un]official ‘engagement’, all their dialogues suggest the actual wedding is the future event: ‘Will you cleave? I will cleave’ of the quotes above (given also the fact that marriage in ME is fully accomplished only after bodily union takes place) indicate, for me, the future aspiration rather than confirmation of the deed done. The bodily union (as far as Eldar customs suggest) is the vow in itself, stronger than any rituals, ceremonies or words, and the Naming of the Name is suggested to perform the role of the ‘best man’ to witness the vow taken by the act of union. Kind of opposite to Fëanor’s oath, which so sworn ... may not be broken, and ... shall pursue oathkeeper and oathbreaker to the world's end

Thus Beren and Tinuviel could lawfully have wedded, but for Beren's oath to Thingol

History repeats itself here. Thus Aragorn and Arwen could lawfully have wedded, but for Aragorn’s agreement with Elrond on the ‘no less than king of both Gondor and Arnor’ issue.

Trophy re: from one angle, it is so. On the other hand, no – Aragorn is not winning something, he rather proves he is worthy of Arwen, rises to her level, traveling the path from youth of Estel to manhood of Elessar by holding on to higher virtues than love between man and woman may be, holding on to his word, even if the word is given to the third party. It is chivalry, which, on the surface, values nothing as the courtly love, but comes out with:

I could not loved you that much
If I loved not the honour more *

(*totally misquoted, and I remember not who it was who have written thus, but the meaning is what I need here)

Or, to look from the other angle, there is (as far as I am any judge) certain attitude towards love with Tolkien:

I did it for love maxim is the working one with him, but not in a modern sense: Not that I’ve forsook my duty for it (to the heck with Sauron, I’ve found my personal happiness), or (in worse cases) betrayed, stolen, murdered, and all of this is somehow sanctified by my state of ‘being in love’, but as I’ve become better, just, more merciful and brave, I rang true to my love when I abstained from love itself and thus made myself worthy of it more.

Or, another concept ('I will cleave' is not statment of 'I will always feel this way' (it is impossible) but rather 'I will always do as I've said I will do') contrary to modern belief of emotions being something uncontrollable (you can't help falling in love) - the will is what comes first, and is pretty well capable of governing emotions, thus ennobling them, rising them up. So, love is not as much emotion of love, but rather the whole bunch of emotions, thinking and willed action, expressed in deed, the thing one 'does', not merely 'feels' or 'experiences', the thing one makes happen, not finds happening to him/her.

Not a modern approach, to be sure.