Lord of the Rings labelled racist

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this. I was just browsing different sites when I came across this. I said to myself, 'What the F***!?' As I read, I became more and more furious. Oh, by the way, here's the link Lord of the Rings labelled racist. I kept reading and I just couldn't believe what this guy was saying. First of all, Tolkien said that his works did not represent anything, so how could LOTR represent nativism or racism (actually, nativism wasn't mentioned at all). It doesn't at all.

The academic claimed: "Put simply, Tolkien’s good guys are white and the bad guys are black, slant-eyed, unattractive, inarticulate and a psychologically undeveloped horde."

I HATE it when people say f*****g stupid stuff like this (please excuse my language). It's such a shallow and underdeveloped statement. It was uncalled for and false. This person obviously cannot be very bright when it comes to Tolkien. What he said is flat out wrong.

Why do people jump to conclusions like these? Was it just as random as one on the 'jump-to-conclusions' board (if you've seen the movie Office Space, you'll know what I'm talking about)? Why did he say that? That's like saying Martin Luther King Jr. had all those speeches because he hated whites and because he was racist. It's almost as absurd as that, and it's just as stupid as that. I just hate it when someone makes a great novel or anything great, just because they want to, or for a good cause, and then someone just has to s*** all over it. Why do they do that??? Tolkien just wanted to make books for children (The Hobbit) and a mythology for England (The Lord of the Rings), and then just to develop the world he created. And now here comes Dr Shapiro, and takes something good and says it is racist. He just had to make it look bad. Why? I just can't understand. Why?

He's lucky Tolkien is dead, or he'd be beaten to a bloody pulp. I'm glad Tolkien isn't around to hear about this. I've said somethings that people do are like slapping Tolkien in the face. Well, this is like Dr Shapiro just raped Tolkien's mom. That's how I see it.

Does anyone feel like I do? I hope so. And even if you don't, tell me what you think.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie ]

[Susan Delgado]

GroundsKeeper Willie, do this: Ball your hands into fists, raise them over your head, and recite in a firm, clear voice, Serenity Now!

In other words, calm down. It's not as bad as you seem to think it is. These things always happen and since there's nothing we can do about it, there's no point to getting worked up.

And watch your language; this is a family site.

edit: I just read the article you linked to, and you know what I did? I laughed at it. It was so ridiculous that laughing was all I could do as a reasonable person.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Susan Delgado ]

[Melephelwen]

I must say, that most of the statements are absolutely ridiculous. The one quoted is true, though I doubt it's ment to be so because of racism. It's more likely to make it seem realistic - I mean, honestly, a tall, blond and fair talking Orc?
And Susan's right, calm down. It's not that bad. If you disagree, then disagree, and try not freak out. This is not ment in any negative way, but when you get that mad some people would think that you thought it was true. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[Child of the 7th Age]

On the hobbits as a "lilly white enclave"....


Let me point out to this author that the Harfoot, the single largest group within the hobbits, were said to have nut-brown skin. This, however, was not something which the movie showed.

It's interesting but my daughter Gabriela, who's just ten and loves Elves and hobbits, is of Mexican-American descent and also has nut-brown skin. She immediately picked up on that fact in the book, and prides herself on 'looking like the real Sam.'

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Maikadilwen]

Now now, take a deep breath and calm down. Think about your bloodpreassure. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

I must admit I laughed when I read this article. For goodness' sake, the guy didn't even know when the book was actually written.
Some people simply just see racism everywhere today.

[Orald]

What this man is saying is not ridiculous. How he is saying it is. However, this is still a serious debate grounded by evidence. Do not dismiss his claims until you have seen the evidence and judged it yourself.

[mordor136]

I too laughed when I read that sorry excuse for something to gripe about. HE HE HE you see I'm still laughing HE HE HE

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

Well, the basis of "Good" and "Evil" has always been "Dark" vs. "Light", but people constantly make the mistake of thinking that it is "Black" vs. "White", which it is not. I mean, why pick on Tolkien when he could go to almost any fantasy tale and see the same patterns. It's nothing to do with skin colors.
Let the guy have his stupid fun, if people get irritated then his purpose if fufilled. It's just something to get people worked up. Just don't care about... it's his beliefs, so let it stay with him.

[engwaalphiel]

It's his opinion let him think what he likes , if we don't think the same as some people so be it. A lot of things these days are twisted in some way so people decide to write articles saying things are racist , sexist etc etc . Truth is they aren't but people have got so involved in looking for discrimination they see it everywhere.
I've seen lots of articles debating this topic so it's got kind of tired and old now
[img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Keneldil the Polka-dot]

Tolkien re: allegory

Other arrangements could be devised according to the tastes or views of those who like allegory or topical reference.

I think that many confuse 'applicability' with 'allegory'; but the one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author.

Looks like Shapiro made the same confusion. To say Tolkien intended racism is ridiculous.

[Susan Delgado]

Do not dismiss his claims until you have seen the evidence and judged it yourself

I have seen the evidence: I have read the book and seen no racism.

[Belin]

You haven't seen the evidence until you've read all the arguments about it, though; they are here, here, and here.

For myself, I've decided to be very wimpy and form no opinion about this at all, but these threads are certainly interesting to read.

--Belin Ibaimendi

[The Squatter of Amon Rûdh]

We ought not to forget that Dr. Shapiro is a serious academic, and that such people are not given to publishing opinions simply in order to upset an author's fans. We should also be aware that this is a newspaper article about what he has said: it has not been written by Dr. Shapiro himself, and his arguments may have been simplified or misrepresented.

That being understood, his is a legitimate line to take: there is a lot of stress placed on the purity of bloodlines in Númenorean culture; the Orcs are dark, diminutive, harshly-spoken and brutal, the very picture of a rampaging horde of savages.

On a more detailed analysis of the work one might note that the Haradrim, allies of Sauron, have a distinctly Indian feel about them: they are dark-skinned, dressing in exotic silks and gold, and riding elephants. A large number of the immigrants to Britain in the 1950s came from India. The Dunlendings, too, fall short of the Aryan ideal that Dr. Shapiro assumes Tolkien to have been promoting, and there is even a brief reference to "...black men like half-trolls with white eyes and red tongues" at the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.

The argument is therefore one that can be supported, and I understand how somebody whose academic background lies in social and cultural history could come to that conclusion on a cursory examination of the work. It is, however, an erroneous one, as Dr. Shapiro would have realised had he devoted as much attention to actually reading the book as he has to tying it in with British social history.

Firstly, a representative of the Tolkien Society is on record as saying that he hated racism, which seems to me a good reason to assume that there was no racist intent on his part when he was writing his novel. Obviously this is what we would expect the Society to say, as they have a vested interest in ensuring that Tolkien's works do not become the focus of an anti-racism campaign. It is also possible, however unlikely, that Tolkien betrayed repressed racist impulses in his works. Even these improbable possibilities can, however, be discounted.

There is, for example, the question of Sauron's dark-skinned troops. Unlike the Orcs, they are portrayed as being "bold men and grim", "strong and war-hardened". They are always described in a manner that emphasises the fact that they are human, distinct from the sub-human Orcs and Trolls, almost as though to drive home the point that Orcs are not an allegory for any human race. It is also well worth noting that the Corsairs of Umbar, not to mention the Mouth of Sauron, are portrayed as being of Númenorean descent. Then there are the Wild Men, who take common cause with Sauron's enemies: they hardly conform to any idealised Anglo-Saxon model.

As for the Orcs themselves, their speech patterns sound more like those of thugs than immigrants: they are harshly-spoken rather than inarticulate, the brutality of their speech intended to convey the viciousness of their character. If anyone ought to be offended by this portrayal it's bigoted, selfish and ignorant people who swear constantly; it certainly isn't aimed at a particular ethnic group.

Then there's the matter of the blood-lines: simply put, European sagas are infested with genealogies. When power and status are hereditary it tends to breed an obsession with tracing and recording one's antecedents, sometimes with a little embellishment. This interest in blood has nothing to do with race, but with connection with power, as evinced by the inclusion of gods in most saga genealogies. Actually, if we wanted to, we could describe Beren and Lúthien as a mixed-race couple. That could throw the racism theory a little out of kilter.

This is further achieved by the note that one of the larger themes throughout LoTR is the burgeoning friendship between Legolas and Gimli, whose races are sundered by what amounts to racial mistrust. Each comes to appreciate the culture of the other, and their friendship brings to a more personal level the increased co-operation between the two races that is required for the defeat of their mutual enemy. If one wants to look for racial themes, this seems to me to be the more obvious.

As for the assertion that Tolkien believed in some mythical pure England, this is sheer nonsense. Tolkien believed, quite correctly, that England (being a country established and named by invading Germanic tribes) had lost its mythology when the Normans invaded. He was trying to rebuild the lost legends of Anglo-Saxon England, which is scarcely a fictional entity. To suggest that he believed in some idea of racial purity is nonsensical. He was well aware of Britain's cultural history, he was merely attempting to enrich one aspect of it, in which he had a particular interest.

Essentially, then, there has been a fundamental misunderstanding of Tolkien and his work. The idea that Dwarves are idealised Scots is frankly ludicrous, and the invading threat to the village ideal is technological "progress", not immigration. Time is short, and both HarperCollins and the Tolkien Society have covered the points about timing, so it remains for me only to state that I was not attracted to the novel by racist undertones, which I hope I have debunked as thoroughly as I may. You can find in Tolkien's work whatever you want to find. If this academic wishes to find racism then that's rather sad, but he's entitled to look for it. I hope that he's made to look extremely foolish by the publication of this article.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Squatter of Amon Rudh ]

[Keneldil the Polka-dot]

I did go check out those threads(thanks for the links [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] ), and while I did appreciate the discussion it didn't take that for me to come to the conclusion Tolkien wasn't a racist. What evidence do you need other than to read Tolkien's work, read about his life, and then judge for yourself? Tolkien wasn't what you'd call politically correct, but he was never a racist.

There are always those people who are going to pick apart something popular for the purpose of advancing an agenda. Where was this Dr. Shapiro before the movies came out? His arguments look like the kind you'd see when a person starts with an idea in their head already, and then just looks for evidence to support their pre-formed conclusions.

BTW.....well said Squatter. I appreciate your even handed comments on how Shapiro may have arrived at his opinions, even if I may be skeptical. If one narrowed their view to only those things he was quoted as saying in that article, then yes I can see where he is coming from. But as Squatter pointed out, there are lots of non-racist themes in Tolkien's work, and nothing to show from his life that would indicate a racist attitude.

[Maylin Talese]

ummm... I can't get into the link (parental controls) so i can't really judge, but why would Tolkien be degrading Blacks? I mean, he was born in Africa, and must have known some of the people there, even though i don't think he lived there very long.

[Galorme]

He was a product of his times

Thats exactly it. He didn't dislike other races, he was merely patriotic. There is a difference between putting other cultures down and liking your own, and Tolkein was very Pro-English. I haven't read the Biography in a while, but i am fairly sure he lived in South Africa for a while, which would promote a rascist veiw on his party (South Africa was a fairly rascist place to be around that time I think).

Edit: Damn you MT you got there first now I look like a Shmere.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Galorme ]

[Maylin Talese]

[img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]
Sorry Galorme
[img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[Arwen Imladris]

Maylin Talese, just cause you have lived there or grown up with them, doesn't mean that you like them. Most people do not always get along with their siblings or their parents. People who are close to you can also get on your nerves very easilly. Don't get me wrong, I do not think that tolkien was intending to be racest.

For the people who do here is what I say:
All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all who wander are lost.

Aragorn looked really bad, the hobbits didn't trust him at first, remember, but then he turned out to be a really great guy.

[thorondil]

This is something that I have thought about before I ever came to the 'Downs, so these threads (and this article) do not suprise me.

I would just say a few things (since it will inevitably be misconstrued and misinterpreted just as Tolkien is.)

Tolkien's writings are based on Norse myth.
His mythology is a "Northern Mythology" and his intention was to write "Norse-style stories and poetry." If you read Norse myth and poetry then you will understand his characterizations, his portrayal of the role of women, and his use of the purity of bloodlines.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

ok...I'm calm now.

Susan Delgado- I edited the post. I didn't delete the swears fully, but a lot. Sorry

Good points Squatter. I do realize everyone is entitled to their opinion, and Dr. Shapiro certainly showed it. However, he said that it is, but actually, he should say that he thinks or believes, instead of 'is'. But this may be due to misquoting the Dr., as Squatter said. But I think that he shouldn't go around talking (what I think is bs) about how LotR is racist, because Tolkien did not want it to be like that, even if it may apppear like that. And if you're going to call it racist, then you have to see the good between Legolas and Gimli, as Squatter said.

He didn't dislike other races, he was merely patriotic. There is a difference between putting other cultures down and liking your own, and Tolkein was very Pro-English. I haven't read the Biography in a while, but i am fairly sure he lived in South Africa for a while, which would promote a rascist veiw on his party (South Africa was a fairly rascist place to be around that time I think).

So do you think that Tolkien was more of nativist? I don't think he is, but do you?

[Lush]

It's sometimes annoying when people take their sterilized, hyper-sensitive (and, in my opinion, somewhat boring) politically correct values and apply them to days gone by. At the same time, Shapiro is entitled to his opinion (I am also entitled to call him a dweeb with too much time on his hands, but letting emotion get in the way of a scholarly debate is usually counter-productive), and he does substantiate his claims. Personally, I don't think you can get a completely accurate impression of anyone's views until you hang around them for a while, and we can't really do that when it comes to Tolkien, though we can always speculate. By the end of the day, when you're done hunting for "subtexts", I think it's healthier to enjoy the wealth of good writing in front of you. *Yawn*

P.S. Thanks yet again for an extremely erudite post, Squatter.

[ December 16, 2002: Message edited by: Lush ]

[Orual]

I've heard this argument before, and I can see how this idea is formed, but I think that it's held by people who haven't looked deeply enough into the book.

The physical differences between good and evil are always there in mythology, and since the Lord of the Rings was meant to be mythology for England, it's reasonable for that stark contrast to exist. I find that part of fantasy is that real, apparent line between right and wrong, as I said in the "To love, or not to love fantasy" thread. It's really easy to tell the difference between the good guys and the bad guys in the Lord of the Rings, just by looking at them. (And, on a more personal level, I never saw the orcs as black. I don't really know quite how I saw them, but more of a green thing going on. You can describe them all you want, use Tolkien's words, but I've got my own little movie going on in my head, and it would be vain to attempt to convince me that my image is wrong.)

Dr. Shapiro referred to the Fellowship as "uber-Aryan." That I found a little ridiculous. Aryans are stereotypically blond, blue-eyed, and fair-skinned, which does NOT apply to the entire Fellowship. Legolas, yes. Anybody else, no. Faramir (I know he wasn't in the Fellowship) had black hair.

It's always possible to read almost anything you want into almost any piece of literature. Dr. Shapiro was not the first to read racism into the Lord of the Rings, and he won't be the last. It's really no use to get angry about it--people will think what they will think. It's enough for us to know that Tolkien didn't intend racism, and the majority of rational readers don't find it.

~*~Orual~*~

By the way, did anybody else notice that Faramir, in the movie, has light hair? Honestly. It wasn't like Tolkien didn't make it clear that his hair was black in the book!

[Galorme]

So do you think that Tolkien was more of nativist? I don't think he is, but do you?

Hmmm. *looks up Nativist*. Ah taking your own culture to be worth more than others? Well I believe we all are. If you believe someone else's culture is worth more than yours then your culture shouldn't be your culture, as your culture should be what you believe is best for you. Is that what you meant? In that case yes i believe he valued british culture over others.

He certainly believed that England was lessened by the many invasions and watering down of the peoples. I would say the Racism wasn't directed at people in current cultures, but it was directed at races of times past.

[Orald]

Wonderful post Squatter, exactly what I was trying to say but fell terribly short of.

[Melephelwen]

(And, on a more personal level, I never saw the orcs as black. I don't really know quite how I saw them, but more of a green thing going on. You can describe them all you want, use Tolkien's words, but I've got my own little movie going on in my head, and it would be vain to attempt to convince me that my image is wrong.)

To be honest, I couldn't imagine hobbits to look like small men before I saw the movie. They were small brown creatures without hair, no matter how hard I tried to get a better picture. Maybe dr. Shapiro had a similar thing with, I don't know, Orcs, Dunlendings, any of Tolkiens people - except he might not believe his image is incorrect or awkward.

[-Imrahil-]

I do NOT consider LotR racist. First of all, this professor did not research LotR thoroughly because if he HAD he would have discovered that there are hobbits with dark, brown SKIN! This contradicts his theory.

It's quite easy to find racism in anything, it's all quite easy to compare adventure books to religion and world wars. That is because they are often SIMILAR because of linked themes in all of them. These themes do NOT mean the author wanted the book to be an allegory for world war.

One person I know said this:

Oh, Lord of the Rings is very religious.
Mystified, I then asked him how.
He replied that the ancient struggle between good and evil, light and dark is religious.


To me this does not make a book religoius if their is a struggle between good and evil. World wars are, to each seperate side, the struggle between good (themselves) and evil (the opposing army)

Now I could understand if my friend had said the Narnia books are religious, they are blatantly so, and they were meant to be.

Why can't people just accept it and not make these foolish attacks that are merely meant to provoke others.

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: -Imrahil- ]

[lindil]

I do not know if it is so much an attempt to anger other as it is an attempt to destroy other peoples sources of higher aspirations and replace it with a thought of 'how clever the writer who discovered JRRT's dark subconcious, now I can dismiss all that he wrote'.

He wants everyone to live in his dry and pedantic wasteland also.

[Pookabunny]

I totally agree - Tolkien was NOT a racist. I know I'm echoing a lot of people here and I'm glad that many people keep these in mind. Tolkien was a learned man, not an ignorant racist who voices his opiniones at old people's birthday parties [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

if I may point to a specific quote:

Why can't people just accept it and not make these foolish attacks that are merely meant to provoke others.

Well stated! People LIVE for drama! That's why there's so much controversy over Frodo and Sam's relationship (because people can't grasp the concept of pure friendship). That's why people claim tones of racism. People love to classify!

I agree! People need to accept this is a story with good guys and bad guys. That doesn't mean that all the good guys are angels and the bad guys backstreet boys [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

[Orual]

Pookabunny, I think you hit the gold in comparing Dr. Shapiro's conclusion to the confusion over Sam and Frodo's relationship. It's all in the intent, I guess, though I find Tolkien's intent in both cases fairly obvious. If anything, I find a huge amount of tolerance in the Lord of the Rings. People dismiss Gimli and Legolas' friendship (don't mention that, it contradicts our point and makes our arguments obsolete!), and choose instead to concentrate on what geographical area of Middle-earth Sauron's human allies happen to be from. The Fellowship was the ultimate in inter-racial friendship; four of the major races of Middle-earth (okay, you try to get an Ent to go on the Quest!) were chosen. People concentrate on the details, and ignore the big picture. And even some of the details. They pick and choose those facts which coincide with their theories, and pretend that none of the other facts exist. I find this a dishonorable way to argue, and it really distresses me that Dr. Shapiro would do this, simply to try and bring down Tolkien's works of genius.

~*~Orual~*~

[ December 20, 2002: Message edited by: Orual ]

[davem]

My response to Dr Shapiro would be to quote Gimli's words to Eomer-
'You speak evil of that which is fair beyond the reach of your thought, & only little wit can excuse you!'

[Pookabunny]

I LOVED this:
(as said by Orual):

The Fellowship was the ultimate in inter-racial friendship; four of the major races of Middle-earth

RIGHT ON! If anything, why can't the people who call LOTR racist look at this? Because they're ig'nant and stoooopid. Probably politicians [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

At any rate, it's the drama that people love. And it's because of drama that we have great converstations, warning labels and dumb jokes [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

And that's cool because the rest of us have TOLKIEN!

[ December 21, 2002: Message edited by: Pookabunny ]

[zacattack]

This Dr probably hasn't even read the books just seen the movie.I mean do you expect to have hero's looking like they've just finished having a join.You need tall,attractive heros
Imagine this

*Everybody puts on Imaginitive Hats*

It is the "Last Alliance of Elves and Men"

Elendil,Gil-Galad and a few other majors come into view.The are dark,swarthy and unnatracitve

*Takes off Imaginitive Hat*

I mean what kind of hero's or saviours are they.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Well, the basis of "Good" and "Evil" has always been "Dark" vs. "Light", but people constantly make the mistake of thinking that it is "Black" vs. "White"

Just thinking about that completely true statement, I wonder if he is black?

[Arwen_Evenstar]

I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT SOMEONE COULD BE THAT THICK! How can someone think of LotR as racist? Almost every portrayal of good and evil in stories is- evil: black colours, good: White colours. So how can someone now just turn it into racism? You might as well call every author of a good vs evil literature in the last thousand years racist! It is total and utter rubbish and I cant believe that that site would even publish such an immiture peice of writing!!!! [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img]

[Voronwe]

Upon opening the Sunday Times this morning I noticed an article with the eye-catching title 'Did Tolkien have a racist message?'. At first I thought, 'Not again', but it turned out that the article was a clear and balanced investigation of the subject, unlike the article mentioned at the start of this thread. The author (a self-confessed 'Tolkienist') argues convincingly against racism in The Lord of the Rings, but he does not fail to give the various arguments which have been used to try and brand the work as racist. All in all, the author seems to know his stuff, and it might be worth checking out.

The article should be available online at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/ , or of course in the newspaper itself.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

I couldn't find it. It just took me to the main webpage but nowhere can I find the article. Could you give some directions?

[Willow]

The December 2 copy of TIME magazine (the one with TTT on the cover) had a companion article to the LOTR article on why America craves fantasy. In it, the author writes:
"...but the Fellowship is still as much a boys' club as Augusta National. And whiter too. Don't let all the heartwarming Elf-Dwarf bonding between Legolas and Gimli fool you. The only people with dark skin in Middle-earth are the Orcs."
In ancient mythology, light/white is usually portrayed as good. This is an element of amny religions, also. Maybe it goes back to a fear of the night or something. Anyway, it's been ingrained in our minds to accept white as pure and good. I'm not referring to skin color, I mean general images: ie, wedding dresses are typically white to represent virginity. So Tolkien's imagery was a common theme in life. AND, he portrayed Saruman as evil while he was still white. In fact, of Gandalf the Grey and Saruman the White, Gandalf was undoubtedly the "gooder". (Yes, you could argue that Gandalf becomes Gandalf the White, but my point is Tolkien did not use white/light selectively to portray good. Wasn't the livery of Gondor black?)
I read an essay on this topic once. It said something about how traditionally in European mythology, which were the inspiration for Tolkien's works, evil armies came from the south and east. (The Huns, the Mongols) It's a basic fact of geography that if the earth is round (and judging from the fact that Middle-earth had night and day, it must have been), then the places closer to the Equator will receive more sunlight. This means the inhabitants skin color will probably be darker. I think Tolkien might have been reflecting the evil armies from the south theme in his work, and to call that racist would be kind of skewed.
Whew! I guess my point is, Tolkien seems to have used white sometimes to reflect good, but not all the time, so you couldn't call that racist.
P.S. Another point. In LOTR, Mordor was portrayed as the wellspring of all evil. It was also a volcanic land. Volcanic rock (I think) is frequently black, and so is volcanic ash. Also it was said to be dark there. So if you equate Mordor=darkness, and Mordor=evil, you might have the old theme darkness=evil. So it follows that the armies of Mordor would have black shields and stuff.
P.P.S. Couldn't you just as easily call Tolkien a misogynist as racist? There are only 9 (I think) females in the LOTR not counting the appendices: Lobelia, Rose, Elanor, Eowyn, Arwen, Galadriel, Ioreth, Goldberry, Shelob.
But what's the point? He wasn't trying to make his work PC.

[Orual]

Mae govannen, Willow! Bravo on your post; quite comprehensive and convincing. (I mean, if I wasn't on your side already.)

In Willow's TIME quote, this was said:

Don't let all the heartwarming Elf-Dwarf bonding between Legolas and Gimli fool you.

Fool us indeed! Why is that fooling us? Honestly. Just because it disproves their argument? And if they'd READ the Lord of the Rings, they'd know that the Orcs weren't the only dark-skinned people. (I won't go into my vision of Orcs again. You can just scroll up.)

As for misogyny, picture this: Elrond chooses a woman to go to Mordor with the Fellowship. Can you imagine the pandemonium that would ensue? (And being a girl myself, don't you think about calling any of this sexist.) I know that I need to bathe more frequently than I'm sure the Fellowship did. We won't discuss any potential hormonal difficulties that would arise. [img]smilies/evil.gif[/img]

My dears, a girl in the Fellowship would quite frankly be a mistake. I don't care what the femenists say (says the self-proclaimed femenist), it's right and good that the Fellowship was a boy's club. The only thing that irks me when it comes to lack of women is Helm's Deep. If, as movie Eowyn said, women of Rohan learned that those who could not wield a sword could still die on one, why didn't they have the young, able women fighting at Helm's Deep anyway, when they had the six-year-old boys fighting, and the seventy-year-old men? I found that a little weird. But, I didn't write it. (Which is just as well.)

~*~Orual~*~

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

I think that if Tolkien included women at Helms Deep, then it would be very possible that Eowyn would have been there too. I think one of the reasons Theoden did not let Eowyn join the battle is because Eowyn was a woman. Although he never said it directly, to me it seemed he hinted at it. Besides, if he did come out and say it directly, how furious do ouy think Eowyn would be? If women were allowed to fight at Helms Deep, then Eowyn would be there. There would probably be some official or somewhat high ranking captain looking over the villagers who weren't fighting. And if you look at the time period that Tolkien, I don't think women were allowed to fight. Throughout history, there have been few cases where women fought, if not then none.

And being a girl myself, don't you think about calling any of this sexist

Good point Orual, but I don't think that anybody could call it sexist even if a man said it. I'm glad you are not one of those feminists who calls anything they can find sexist. And I am glad to see a feminist who agrees the fellowship should be made of men. But hey, I'm not going to get into that. It's already done and we can't change it. But here's why it's mainly men and why they don't have many women with active roles.

First of all throughout history, the warrior was usually a male. In LotR, you have the rare case of a woman warrior, Eowyn. In history, one would be Joan of Arc. And in LotR, the views about women are almost the same as throughout history. It is just the way it is, so don't call Orual or her post sexist, and for that matter don't call LotR sexist either. Because if you were to do that, you would be doing just what Dr. shapiro did. And I am a man but that doesn't mean you can call my post sexist either. I'm not saying it shouldn't be women, I'm just saying why it isn't.

And it is the same throughout history for the racist issue. LotR is not racist. It's just throughout history, it's been light vs dark or good vs bad. And as Tigerlily said, they confuse those with white vs black. But I don't really think that they confused it. I think that know its not like that, but they just have to go out of their way to make it look like that. It soiunds kind of wierd and confusing, huh? But I really am confusing myself and getting lost in my own thoughts.

I'll close this by saying good posts all of you. Sorry if this post is confusing, I'm sure it is. Please don't jump all over me for it. If you disagree with something, go ahead and I'll try to explain that individually. Sorry again.

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

Sorry for double-posting but I just thought of something. Southern people are darker skinned than than people from the north. And if you say that it doesn't apply to the orcs of the Misty Mts., then it supports the dark vs light issue because those orcs lived underground or in the mountain. So by making them live in the dark, it portrays them as bad. And Orcs hate the light so its kind of like they hate good. Just a thought I had.