The Role of Women in The Lord of the Rings

[Lush]

I don't think I've ever opened a thread specifically on Eowyn. Maybe the relationship between Eowyn and Aragorn? That might be lurking somewhere...Arwen and Luthien, on the other hand, have been 'done' by me.

Child, you wrote:

In the context of Middle Earth, thirteen children do make sense...

Really? I'd think they would make about as much sense as the "fairy-tale" or "mythical" or however you want to call them aspects of the book, i.e. Middle Earth is a place where you can fight a Balrog, meet an evil dude in the form of a giant eyeball, and have thirteen kids AND have them all survive and be healthy, AND have your wife survive and be healthy too. You see what I mean?

I don't really think that the notion of having thirteen kids neccessarily ties into any of the societal, "pre-feminism" values of Middle Earth, because, let's face it, if everything had to do with the values of the society that Sam and Rosie lived in, at least a couple of kids would end up dead. Rosie would probably end up dead too. Or maybe there are kids who died that Tolkien doesn't mention? I don't know. I do know that if this was about the reality of the values and themes of those times, we wouldn't get this picture-perfect gigantic family that Rosie and Sam produce. But this is a tale, and tales have their own rules, divorced from basic biology.

Per Eowyn, davem and others have talked about how wonderful it is that she has found her calling in something else than acting like a spurned damsel turned kamikaze, but I personally never bought the sudden onslaught of joy at her meeting with Faramir. Call me a spoil-sport, but I don't see how a woman recently driven toward death by despair can fall into the arms of handsome lover-boy and be automatically healed, i.e. I am not entirely sure that everything just kind of worked out for her towards a glorious resolution.

I do think she genuinely liked Faramir. He was probably hot too, that can't be left out of the equation. After facing the end of her life AND the end of the world in general, she probably realized that death and destruction weren't as appealing as she previously thought. So she made a choice. A good choice, but I don't think it necessarily reflects how peachy and peaceful things were going to be for her now.

Remember how she demanded of Aragorn to be happy for her after she had already agreed to be with Faramir? I've always read that as a kind of "See? I can be happy without YOU" assertion. I don't really think her feelings for Aragorn automatically turned off when she met Faramir. That doesn't necessarily mean that she couldn't be happy with Faramir, but it does point to a kind of emotional sacrifice that only a woman would have to make, just because that that's what expected of her at the end after the baddies have lost and all is well in the jungle again, if you know what I mean.

Honestly, why marry Faramir right away? That's perhaps what really bothers me in all of this. Was Tolkien so in a hurry to tie that particular end with a neat bow and leave it at that? Why not leave it at a flirtation that carries the seed of hope for a better future for E and her F? Why not leave it at a kiss? Why is this a wham-bam-thank-you-m'am union?

Why is there this quick need to disarm the warrior woman, however misguided her instincts might have been, and stick her immediately into the arms of a big strong dude? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't mind ending up in the arms of Faramir either, but the fact that the whole process is written as if the characters are on speed is a bit disheartening. It's as if Eowyn, the only female in the book that strikes me as an actual character (as opposed to a symbol or a decoration), has no room for individual development in the narrative. Her development depends exclusively on the men in her life, and she flits between them like a moth between blinking Christmas lights.

So, to answer Fordim's original question about the role of women in Middle Earth, I'd say that the role of women is mostly decorative or symbolic, or something nice and pretty like that, but is definitely limited in the general scope of the story. A myth would be boring without a host of pretty women to be admired. Hey, life would be boring if pretty women didn't exist. But I'm not going to be all dignified here and talk about how it's wrong to view Tolkien's works through the prism of a "modern" perspective, because the idea of women as human beings with their own interiority isn't really modern at all, and it has little to do with the practical notions of the f-word that everyone so dreads.

I don't think Tolkien was especially gifted in the sense of describing the interiority of characters in general, though he did do an admirable job with some, and, to be fair, Arwen's end in Appedices is one of the most powerful moments in his entire combined works. But I really don't think he had a knack for writing about women from anything else than the perspective of their looks and charms, i.e. I don't see his women as characters per se. He came the closest with Eowyn, I believe. So she's still my girl.

But the actual "role" of women? I don't really see them as more than stand-ins for the ideas that Fordim has already listed, and the bottom line is that to me, they aren't real. Ok, so Balrogs and giant eyeballs aren't "real" either, but there is something about the experiences of the likes of Sam and Frodo with such creatures that really resonates with me. I can't say the same about the hot women of Middle Earth.

[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.