Tolkien's Feminine Characters

[Finrod Felagund]

The strong women characters play minor roles but have more weight on the outcomes than their roles would suggest.

Luthien: should get most of the credit for bringing back a Silmaril, without her Beren is wolf food

Eowyn: shanks the Witchking

Idril: forethought saves the remenants of Gondolin and ME through Earendil

Miriel: Feanor, nuf said

Galadriel: her bad self

When JRR does bring them into the story, they sure do bring the thunder.

Thoughts, observations, additions, criticisms...

[Lady Ashley]

I totally agree! They may not partisipate very much, but when they do...look out, evil-doers!

[Daughter of Finarfin]

Eowyn killed the Witch King! Come on, no man could do that!

[Mirkgirl]

Well Tolkien gave power to his female characters but didn't want them to use it... most of the time. It's okay with me, tho most of people seem to find it sexist. I do not. The style excludes too many strong females.

Another thing I hate in most books ans movies in the genre (and not only) is that there always should be one strong female, comparable to man, who doesn't have anything else to do in the story. She's there because otherwise the books/movies are called sexist.

I don't think Eowyn is that tho. Through her character Tolkien manages to thouch some important themes, even such as woman's place and the real and unreal love. Eowyn had her part in the story and that part was not - be a strong female there and fight some evil.
Eowyn killed the Witch King! Come on, no man could do that!
I'm not quite sure whether this is correct. It depends on how we understand the prophecy - that no man can kill the Witch King i.e. it takes some other power to do it. Or simply that it won't be a man who kills the Witch King, i.e. maybe a man can do it, but it won't happen. I tend to agree on the second, but that can be dabated. Maybe it's even both.

The image in my head when it comes to Tolkien's femine characters is Haleth. She's the one who makes all she can, considering her abilities and gets the credits for this. IMO she's the one who can save Tolkien once for ever from the sexist issues.

One strange example - Lobelia Sackville-Baggins. She was not a role model, but her reaction to the new "authorities" in the Shire deserves respect. Especially being a great example of love to the freedom - one of the most important virtues IMO. However even the things she does before that are a sign of used power heheh. And a nice wink from Tolkien that however nasty his females might be they have something good in them.
Talking of which the ruling Numenorian queens come to mind, but I won't go there now. Enough of me for now (:

[Tar-Ancalimë]

IRKY!!!!!!!!

All right, enough spam, to add my two cents to this convers (not ofc that anyone wants that ;))

Tolkien made me mad at first, because of this lack, but I've come to agree with Mirkgirl (OMG did I just say I agree with her :o).

Maybe it was that a man couldn't kill him, maybe it was that a man didn't kill him... I still think that this issue ought to have anything to do with anything... the main issue in Eowyn's killing him is her courage, her strength--Merry's as well as hers--and her desire to die before the shadow comes.

Heh... did I hear a little irky call a certain Númenorean Queen nasty? ;) I could say a few things to that, young woman... (see above)

[Mirkgirl]

Spammer! I'll take care of that ...
I did not call her, or the three of them (not counting Miriel) nasty, Tolkien wrote them that way. He didn't trust women rulers as it seems.
Agree with me here again! lol

[Tar-Ancalimë]

To tell the truth, no, I can't agree with you, it goes against the grain (j/k). The point is, what I said in my last post, it made me really mad when I first read it. Tho I've long since forgiven him, anyway the ratio of females to males isn't essential to a story, the only problem is the way people interpret this ratio. And since I'm positive I'm not making any sense, I'll go away now :grin:

Heh... ought to give you a clue to my personality as well, you think? ;)

[lordoftheistari]

Do you forget Glorfindel's Prophecy, and the death of that one guy on account of it? Not by the hand of man shall he fall. That simplt meant that it wasn't going to be a man whether or not he was capable. It was a before-known fact, not because men did not have the strength but because Eru had before the begininng of the world planned all things, and the elves and some men where allowed to see a few events. It was just a fact that Glorfindel repeated, not some spell.

[Catz]

not necessarily lordoftheistari.....what Glorfindel says could be taken to mean that a man could not kill the WK....but as Mirky has said, it could also simply be a prophesy that no man would kill the WK
i think with Tolkiens female characters, that they reflect his image of female.....that is receptive and passive......in the books, altho many females are powerful, things tend to happen to them rather than them making things happen...they are reactive rather than proactive...
:catz:

[lordoftheistari]

hum.....you don't get it. That was just the way eru said it would happen! IT WAS A FACT! lol.

[Catz]

Ummm yes i do see what youre saying...but thats your interpretation....it can legitimately be interpreted as Mirky has said....that no man WOULD kill the Witchking...there are two sides to every coin lol
either way the result is the same....
and to get back to the female characters....often too, with the female characters we are told about thier strength, whereas with the males we have their strengths demonstrated by actions. tho this is by no means true in every case, just often...
:catz:

[Lessa]

Whenever you have this discussion about the role of women in Tolkien's books you have to take into consideration that at the time he wrote his works women had a passive role in society. Yes there were strong women at the time but they tended to use that power through their men rather than by themselves. The story of the ring is essentially a tale of the comradeship of men when they have to fight a war because of what they believe in. Most women even today are quite happy to let the men do this and will only take things into their own hands when the enemy is at the door.
Can any of you think of any queen in our history other than Boudicca who has actually lead the troops into battle and fought alongside the men? Most women who have participated actively in a war have done so in a covert capacity. Even today the forces don't allow wmen on the front lines in wartime. So given all this it is unrealistic to say that Tolkien is being sexist by having few warriors who are women in his tales because he just reflects real life both past and present.

Lessa

[lordoftheistari]

I agree Lessa. Tolkien was a devout Christian, and loved his wife according to the biographies. Also he was very respectful of women, and he wrote the story of Beren and Luthien for his wife. (or so he was quoted saying)

[Tar-Ancalimë]

aye, and didn't the words "Beren and Luthien" appear on their gravestones?

anyway, I guess in some ways you're right, Lessa, about the role of women being fundamentally the same throughout history, but I don't think anyone really calls Tolkien sexist, except shallow people who haven't really read thhis books.

[Catz]

agreed to a point...and i wouldnt call him sexist...more paternalistic...the fact is that his insistance on the priority of his job to his home life, was the cause of much friction in his marriage, as were the close male friendships he developed.....yes, he was raised in a culture that accepted that as the norm, but he accepted it also, without any thought....one wonders what might have been had he ever seriously thought about the position of women.
this is academic tho, since the story is a wonderful one as it is....interesting to speculate tho
:catz:

[lordoftheistari]

If anyone calls Tolkien a sexist they are inane. That would be stupid and ignorant. He was a devout Christian!

[Lessa]

Being a devout Christian doesn't preclude someone from being a sexist. Don't yell I've never said he was a sexist and I personally don't think he was despite being a devoutly religious man.

[lordoftheistari]

it does if you are a true christian as you love all people equally if you closely follow the bibles rules. But read a biography! Furthermore, would someone define sexist in this case? I am assuming it means disliking women but plz define your usage.

[Catz]

well then youre assuming a LOT arent you?
besides which NO ONE has called Tolkien sexist!!! so i really dont know what youre arguing here.
and MOST christians think theyre good Christians, dont they? it would hardly be worth praticing if they did not, but the definition of "good" is far more wide ranging and varied than the definition of "sexist"
im sure that the puritans who burned and crushed several woman in the Salem Witch trials thought they were "good Christians" tho id beg to differ.
and i called him paternalistic and if you read a biography you can see that, as plain as day....it was a common attitude towards women in that day and age....that doesnt make it right, just that, thats the way it was....
:catz:

[lordoftheistari]

i wouldn't call puritans christians...

[Ronin]

quite, and u can't call puritans non-Christians...there is an inherent likeness and divergence which one cannot easily find. lord, being a true Christian doesn't mean that u're perfect. we are all frail, fragile and jealous humans...being Christians doesn't change the depth of sin that dwells inside us...only that the grace of God blesses us with the desire to be more like Christ, the one and only perfect human. i am a Christian, or profress myself to be, and am in no way perfect. no Christian was ever perfect or could ever consider themselves to be. they could be racist, sexist, bigots, or even perverts...yet as Christians, one would hope that they could recognize such a failing of their themselves and strive to live against what naturally came to them.

the Salem Witch Trials...well...those were just different kind of trials now weren't they? ;)

and as for Tolkien being sexist, thats the most ludicrous statement i've ever heard. and i'd be more pressed to agree with catz, Tolkien being observed as a paternalistic...a belief considered right within the society of the time. personally, if only more men would hold such a belief in such a society which degrades women to the degree that it does. Tolkien revered the women in his life and his literature, which imitated the women in his life.

breathe ladies and gentlemen...lets think before we speak.

[Tar-Ancalimë]

i agree completely with Ronin. (omg? a thread in which we're not arguing? no way lol).


and puritains were as christian as the crusaders... as those "noble" christains in the middle ages who did such horrible things in the name of the church... during the reformation, the christains in power did a lot of terrible things... and those for the reformation were so terrific either... yet they certainly are called christains! actually... by pure definition, a chirstian is one who believes in christ... the other criterea... are a matter of simple opinion...


but thats neither here nor there, guys! this is about tolkien's feminene characters. and, i might point out, as has my friend here catz, that NO ONE has called Tolkien sexist!!! we are merely discussing the female characters in tolkien's works :)

[Ronin]

lol...now, now Tar...lets not go overboard ;)

Many people call themselves Christians, not all of them are...simple as is, but hard to truly see.

[Tar-Ancalimë]

heh well maybe we should start an argument... lol just to keep the status quo ;)

IMO a christain who judges others... is not a true christian... practically the same thing as killing others by the book... but i would prefer to get off this topic as judgement... makes me... ruffled shall i say ;) (which itself is judgemental, and that too is... it's just too much!)

still... i dont understand why we got onto religion... this topic... has little to do with it... tolkien's feminine creatures... and his portrayal of them... might have something to do with his beliefs, but i tend to think of it as more of an attitude... not one that needs to be corrected by any means, but less of something religious and more of something inherent to his society and upbringing... and like mirky said, there are no problems with this... or her example of Haleth... it really does show Tolkien has no attitude that women are somehow inferior to men, or that their role in life has to be seperate... IMHO :grin:

[Elendur]

but I am also human, so I do judge others according to the standards that I set myself .. or which I consider that as a Christian I should live by. Unfortunately no one is perfect and you can only try to live as good a life as you possibly can. Does it follow that all christians will be non-sexist ?.. I think not We all must recognise that we all have faults and try to understand that others will have too!
Tolkien lived in an age where I suppose sexism and male domination of society was still considered to be normal - even by most women - no matter that they did not like the fact ( this is not an invitation to a bashing please ladies.. just a statement based on historical evidence!)
I have always thought that in the books Tolkiens female characters were well crafted and showed great strength of character.. I always saw Galadriel as a Victoria like character!
He was bold in a way, in portraying Eowyn as a warrior which would go against most conventions in his time.. even today, there are not very many female soldiers (though the number is growing).. not because of any lack of ability I think, but probably because Western society is still not quite comfortable with the idea of many dead or wounded daughters!?
The point I suppose in my way of thinking , is that the books were written before the need for political correctness which seems prevelant in or society these days. All the characters be they male or female to me fit in and gel well with what is going on around them with no need for token or quota!!
In the film however you can understand the reasons for expanding on Arwen's character ( bummer I Liked Glorfindel!) we live in different times and media management today have different outlooks on what sells and how to best utilise the stars that we the public made!

[Ilmarë]

I am a Christian too... and was going to add my tuppenceworth to the debate... but having just read what Elendur has written... all i can say is... beautifully put, E!

[Tar-Ancalimë]

Originally posted by Elendur
the books were written before the need for political correctness which seems prevelant in or society these days. All the characters be they male or female to me fit in and gel well with what is going on around them with no need for token or quota!!that is what the best arguement against tolkien being sexist would say. however this debate maybe is touching on whether his society was sexist? that indeed could be the real question.


In the film however you can understand the reasons for expanding on Arwen's character ( bummer I Liked Glorfindel!) we live in different times and media management today have different outlooks on what sells and how to best utilise the stars that we the public made! yes the last part is true. but i think pj could have dragged his movie away from the hollywood gutter and a) not casted Liv Tyler as she is in many opinions unfit to play Arwen (plus her influence IMHO expanded her role needlessly) and b) given Glorfindel's role to a male no matter how 'sexist' this is. i agree in this day that is overly sexist and politically uncorrect but it seems to me pj could have risen above that.


and if i make no sense and contradict myself it is because i just got back from a business trip pfbbt and am very exhausted :snooze: however could i tear myself away from the net and get some sleep or unpack? nooo!

[Elendur]

from earlier in my last post Tar, you would have notice that I did conceed that the society which Tolkien was brought up in and hence lived his life in was a male dominated and hence sexist society, however he based a lot of his writings on myths and legends from even earlier times which were for the most part even more male dominated.. I suppose the only exception would have been Boadicea.
I do not think PJ did really stoop to the hollywood gutter as you so colorfully put it (!lol )... I was one of the largest (on No!) critics of Liv Tyler before the movie came out, but consider that the job she did was pretty decent, and I felt that although the character had been expanded a little... to give a larger part to a bigger audience drawing star.. overall I thought it had been quite tastefully done.... as Glorfindel was not there the only part that disappointed me was Frodo not being ablke to hurl his own defiance at the Ulairi !!

[Tar-Ancalimë]

well... ok... the point was i wanted to reply to the last part of your post :)

yes since it was done it was done tastefully... but my thesis is that he did stoop to it (heh i like the expression now that you point it out... hollywood gutter... unfortunately it is very apt :grin: )... which makes me disappointed. yes... i see your point ;)

[Ronin]

lovely discussion y'all...

Originally posted by Tar-Ancalimë i agree in this day that is overly sexist and politically uncorrect but it seems to me pj could have risen above that.

but just wanted to say this Tar, keeping with status quo and all ;), are u saying that this world is largely sexist and politically incorrect or simply that diminishing Arwen's role and including Glorfindel would be so?

either way, sexism is a very much a perspective thing...in today's society we of course, some of us at least (lol), view the Victorian period as very sexist...but then, are we so enlightened of ourselves? and even considering Tolkien a sexist, which i truly would like someone to do...with logic behind it, is not Eowyn's simple presence a negating argument?

as Elendur stated, we are defined by our times...we cannot villify someone for being so defined, especially so if those definitions fall within one's belief system.

heh...and right now, i've no idea who i'm talking to ;) :rolleyes:

[Catz]

i dont actually think that the ommission of Glorfindel had anything whatever to do with being PC, but was rather a simple matter of movie making...
in a movie of this scope, with so many names and places for the Tolkien neophyte to remember, particularly when you have Arwen, who you need your audience to get familiar with, why would you include yet another character for one scene only?
short answer is, you wouldnt....and thats perfectly reasonable
when alls said and done, Tolkien treated his female characters as his upbringing dictated, as any writer does with any characters, and as he treated women in general...he put them on a pedestal...was slightly wary of them and was far more comfortable with men.....while its hardly a realistic outlook on women, its also how most men of his generation and social status felt
:catz:

[Ilmarë]

Very, very nicely put Catz:thumbs:

[Tar-Ancalimë]

well i disagree wiht you catz and ronin (and ilmare lol). they could put in more glorfindel and make him a more major character. and you can get familiar with arwen in rivendell, her setting, where she belongs...


(having said that i think you guys sould know im playing the devils advocate ;) i have no problem with arwen taking that role.....now, if you were to get me started on this love triangle business... that would be a whole different thing entirely :grin: )

[Ronin]

aye, nicely put catz :grin:

Tar...playing the devil's advocate....NO! ....really?? NO!!! :elfeek:

lol ;)

as for the love triangle....i just hope that it'll center more on Aragorn and Eowyn, as the book does...and won't really draw Arwen into it

[Lessa]

The book tells it as it should with Aragorn sorting out a young lady's crush on an older man with sensitivity. We do not need Arwen to ''rescue'' him from the attentions of Éowyn.

Lessa

[Elendur]

Af it it were only so easy outside the movies!

[Lessa]

I know but it is resolved without Arwen. Actually all it needed was time and a distraction.

Lessa

[Lady Melody]

Unfortunately the movie is only a meagere 3 hours (around that, i guess) to show, and there are oh, so many things in the 400 paged book to show about!!!!

Naturally, PJ improvised... although some were not so approved by me...

[Ronin]

Just below actually...and just remember y'all...we don't know if Arwen "interecedes" or not...we can only but hope not!

[Catz]

too true.....so all digits and appendages crossed then;) ....including the tail ;) lol lol
:catz:

[Lessa]

Catz how do you cross your tail? :)

Lessa

[Elendur]

lol roflmao

And to get back on topic!!
I also hope that they do not make too much of the Arwen .. Eowen thing. all I can say is Faramir.. hurry up and get involved!

[Tar-Ancalimë]

but not too much there, faramir!!! stay away from that ring! sheesh lol


oooh off topic... mmm i still think pj was... what was my phrase, succumbing to the hollywood gutter lol........but... its not like i hated the movie for it or anything lol

[Mirkgirl]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! Not the movie again!!!! Is there no place one can hide?

I can agree that Glorfindel is hard to fit in the movie. I loved the character, but the truth is that he had no place in the movie. And the public needed a strong female in the first movie, they wouldn’t have been satisfied with Arwen, Aragorn’s lil elven chick. But the thing that annoys me is that she took not only Glorfindel’s but also Frodo’s part… he saved himself in the book after all.

Well that’s still movie…….. topic………. feminine characters in Tolkien’s work………. what haven’t we discussed yet…. Goldberry? 'This is Goldberry's washing day,' he said, 'and her autumn-cleaning I’m positive Tolkien intented a metaphor here, but still it doesn’t sound quite right to me… opinions?

[Lessa]

I think Tolkien is liking her to a mother earth character. Hence the allusion to her washing day ie: rain

Lessa

[Ronin]

hadn't thought of that before Lessa...but must say...have to agree! seems rather simple that...washing=rain and autumn cleaning=the harsh northern winds so typical to an England Tolkien was all too familiar with.

and just having to speak to the various love interests of M-e...Faramir looks a little stilted...probably doesn't know what to say around the girlies...especially those who could kick him around!! lol ;)

[Catz]

well there are actually legends in europe that connect things like snow fall to the cleaning activities of a nature spirit like figure.......and ive always thought of TB and GB as nature spirits. spirits of ME personified......
and Faramir was a sensible lad lol you dont push your luck with the woman whos just killed the WitchKing of Angmar!!!!!;)lol
:catz:

[Ronin]

well...this is true...lol...after all...never want to push a girl with a big honkin' sword ;) :rolleyes:

and very well said...the depth of which Tolkien instilled such a mythos with M-e is amazing

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Does men ever really understand women? (Or vicaverca, for that matter.) And LotR being written in a time, as so many of you here have said, when men made their decissions about what was important, without considering the womens opinions and needs, is it so strange that his women don't take that much action? Tolkien being a lover of great detail and a controlfreek; even if he loved and respected his wife; how could he feel comfortable with writing about a gender he, as most men of his time, probably deep down felt he didn't have enough understanding of? Does even many male writers of our time write comfortably, or good, about womens lives? Very true he put his women on pedistals, and as somone here earlier put it, they acted when called upon, as it also is many times in the real world. The story might have been different if written today, when it comes to the womens roles.

[Ronin]

I would not think it'd be much different. Men still have a highly romanticized (and Victorian) view of women - i'm not saying most do, just...heh...me at least. There is a reality of understanding, yes...but there is also an ideal - something that is tempered with reality. Knowing women is knowing people, some do and some don't. I thought Tolkien understood Eowyn (the only true female character he explored) incredibly well...from her rebellion, her unrequited love, and her ultimate victory in a world of men. At least, thats what i think.

[Cuiel Rilwen]

He did understand Eowyn, you're absolutely right about that. But I wasn't referring to him being unable to understand women at all, just to the fact that he as a male might have found it hard, as would many men today, to write about women in a larger scale than he did in LotR. As he didn't give them a more important...or should I say visible part in the story.

Knowing women is knowing people...well if that's how you feel you are an exceptional person! I tend to feel more comfortable around men in most situations, but there have been, and will be, places in my life where I've felt that a man couldn't possibly understand me. And vice versa, make no mistake about that!

[Gwaihir]

If Tolkien brought more of women into his books, there would be much romance! :p I've really wondered why women don't appear so important in LotR, but I don't mind. I like men anyway. :blush: I think women should be considered more important. Without Eowyn killing the Witchking, Sauron would have gotten the scared men there and then. :)

[Ronin]

I've honestly never felt that a women or a man might understand better...doesn't really seem realistic. i would still pretty much maintain that to understand a woman is to understand a person, all this complexity and mystery is utterly ridiculous, to me at least. to be able to right good, well-rounded characters is the same for men as it is women. to separate the two....ech, just don't see how u can do it.

he didn't given women a more visible part in LOTR? alright, looking at proportionately, yes. but so? i don't understand, is this a bad thing?

[Mirkgirl]

YEah same here.... men understand men and women understand women a bit better maybe... but the same goes that a worker understands another worker, a house housewife can understand another housewife, a millionaire can understand another millionaire, a teenager can understand another teenager... but we all know how (un)true are those hehe

The whole issue about the complex and mysterious women is a men invention to exuse why they cant speak with a women pffbt... (don't get me wrong, the women's view that men are a simple bag of insticts isn't any better either) otherwise no one can really know another human being, but thats another story.

I think Tolkien might have been a bit scared that he cant make a good female character... which explains his lack of females doing something, saying something, feeling something... but I think he did a good job with the females he did... with one exception... his idea for women was that she can do everything, but feels good only at home.... that's Eowyn.... she can do everything... she wants to be a warrior and so on, but she finds real happiness with Faramir... Galadriel is the (maybe) strongest elf ever, but she's ruling Lorien, and even as a wife of Celeborn, who never did anything that made its place in the history.... I've seen this in women... its real, many women are like that.... but not all... there are many which would be a lot happier with another life... well maybe Tolkien was scared of this woman image... maybe his readers would have disliked a book with such women... maybe.... but thats a fact.

However... Tolkien might not have had the best ideas for women, humans, world and everything... those ideas are in his work... no one is perfect... but when we read the book we never think how unfair it is to women or how wrong is something else... we just enjoy the book because its damn good... I'm not saying to stop discussing... but lets remember that the book is the most important thing... the ideas and the interpretations come after that (:

[Cuiel Rilwen]

I sure didnt mean that men are all instincts, and women a complete mystery, thats to shallow. I see that my first post in this thread might have lead some to believe that, and that was far from what I intened! I've been in men- dominated places of school and work almost all my adult life, and I have lots of male friends that I prefer to some females. And I agree that talking is the great issue, without it noone can understand anybody. But I still sometimes feel that in many cases its harder for a man to instictivly understand a woman than to understand another man, and ofcourse the oposite. Its not a bad thing, cuz trying to get the deep end of someone is what makes life interesting. I just wouldn't want to be without a female friend, I'm like Winnie the Pooh there. Yes, please, both!

This is why I feel Tolkien might have been reluctant to create an in depth- female in LotR, but I'm sure he wasn't afraid of what his readers would think! Somehow he doesn't strike me as a person who would worry about what feelings others might have on the issue...after all he wrote this book mainly for his own benefit, and his publisher stated that "you wouldn't edit Tolkien, he wouldn't allow it."

I'm totally with you, Mirkgirl, I couldn't care less about Tolkiens view on the female sex, or on races for that matter...this story has so much going for it and continues to hold me forever!

[Ronin]

My only problem with such statements as to Tolkien's "reluctantance" or "scared-mentality" is that just as u can't coneive of Tolkien being someone who is scared of what people think, Cuiel, i can't possiblity think that Tolkien would ever approach writing as to what he was more comfortable with. if u can understand my thinking, Tolkien wrote with a cultural perception of what women were and could be....all writing, nomatter the depth or perception of the work itself, reflects upon the author's society and culture. Tolkien grew up in a strictly Victorian society, a society which pigeon-holed women into positions which encouraged no kind of advancement. Tolkien's view of women - of empowerment, advancement, skill upon battlefield - all strident views that, for all intents and purposes, bucked the culture views of the time period.

[Cuiel Rilwen]

You see, Ronin, I agree in all that you have written in your last post. I wasn't implying that Tolkien was intimidated by describing women, as little as I think that other peoples opinion on his work scared him. And I certainly don't think his female characters aren't more visible because he felt comfortable that way. A man that goes to such a length in describing a fictious world is hardly worried about his own comfort! What I was trying to say was, that maybe... and only maybe...Tolkien felt that he couldn't give his women more depth because his (victorian) understanding of women wasn't deep enough. Maybe this man, who obviously was in need of creating the most perfect environment possible for his languages, was unsure of whether he was capable of creating truthful in-depth women characters; not because he feared what his women readers would feel, but because it wouldn't meet his own high standards of perfection.

As you say, his women are strong and stand out as individuals that weren't exactly victorian in neither actions nor voices, so if we are to speculate in the reasons, he must have had strong females in his inner circles. But for some reason they aren't as visible as his males.

[Ronin]

But thats just it...i understand perfectly what u're saying, but its entirely "pointless" to say it (or at least i feel it is). at the same time, u say that u agree that he wasn't intimidated by creating strong women and then say that maybe he didn't feel comfortable enough in creating deep, moving female characters. my point is...he did create movie, complex female characters.

there are two historical ways of analyzing literature. one in which one reviews subject matter from the current cultural and social viewpoints and another which reviews from the viewpoints and situations of the time period in which the novel was written. if one feels the women in LOTR are lacking, then one has two different perceptions for which they can critique Tolkien.

but, what i'm trying to say Tolkien's women are strong AND have a depth of human character. i don't see what fault u can bring for "invisibility" which i find a ludicrous argument...Galadriel and Eowyn? central figures in both the beginning and then end. i just don't see the argument.

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Ofcourse one has to have two perceptions of critique..anybody commenting on litterature written in another age than ones own would have that! I don't think anyone honestly could say that they, in doing that, never judged an author from their own place in history, fair or not. And it has to be so, cuz if not there wouldn't be any comparisons.

His women are complex and visible compared to other women in victorian literature, and I have to remind you that I never said they were week and invisible, but less visible than his males, which in comparison they are. You're possibly right in assuming that Tolkien didn't feel his women were imperfect, and I see that speculating in the reasons may be unrewarding. Though I don't think that every man of his age in time was equally ignorant of what capacity and capability women have...and I think Tokiens women characters show that he knew that the oposite sex posessed other qualitites than what was accepted by his contemporaries. Do you think a man of his intelligence...even if we don't know more about his social intelligence than what this work of his does to us...would never have felt that he didn't understand women? I know, I shouldn't ask you that, we've been there before.

[Ronin]

Saying that Tolkien's women are less visible to his males is like saying there are more Chinese than Americans. u respond by saying, "yeah....so"? i just don't see the point in making the statement, at all. Comparison? why make the comparison?

I understand women. i understand men. i sometimes don't understand the race of man...but the results from my innocense, i believe. i'm not more than Tolkien.

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Innocense? From where I'm standing its seems more like ignorance...or else we're not speaking the same language! Chinese and Americans jeez Ronin! You're wearing me out, I obviously can't seem to make you understand what I mean. Or maybe its me who's the ignorant here? Anyway I don't feel the need to try anymore, since your need obviously is to pick whatever I say apart and put it together in a completely different context. What I do know is that we're both too strong- headed. We're not going anywhere here, I don't see the point in continuing this discussion. And my small brain has gone into a complete melt down. Undoubtly we'll battle again...somewhere...and I'll welcome it when so happens! Right now I think I'll go and lie down for a while...with my quenya lessons...they're less work!

[Ronin]

*laughs loudly*....Innocense and ignorance, are they not like? i would rather the former and not the latter most certainly. no, i do understand what u mean...perfectly i thought, my example of Chinese and Americans was just that...an example. and believe me, u're not ignorant!! tho we are both very strong willed and pig-headed...and i'm sorry u think i put what u say out of context, i thought i was just breaking it down to a simpler degree.

lol...bring on the next battle, i shall relish the challenge

[Cuiel Rilwen]

...have to spend some time in a restinghome first I think!

Pigheaded...me? Not last time I looked in the mirror!lol

[Ilmarë]

*Ilm looks at them both ... shreiks in horror*

Man, it was bad ebough coping with him being strong-willed and pig-headed .... now, you too Cuiel???;) :p
Hey... you don't look piggy at all.... either of you...so stop!

*settles herself on a lovely comfy sofa.... glass of wine in hand... grinning*... ok.... i'm ready... you two may resume your.... "discussion";) :p lol lol

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Well I just want to point out that I have the nicest little ears, nothing to grab a hold of if someone wants to pull them! and I'm also very comfy and NOT disgussing this anymore!lol roflmao roflmao

[Ronin]

*laughs delightedly*....poor Cuiel....I shall not bother thee anymore.....here at least ;) lol :rolleyes:

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Well I'm getting over it now, and the thought of not ever being bothered again strikes me as rather boring.

[Mirkgirl]

Im sorry to interupt you all... but whatever you're discussing it's not Tolkien's Feminine Characters for sure.... get back to topic or take this somewhere else...

For topics sake.... Tolkien's women were capable to do anything on their own... but happy when they had a husband....

[Ronin]

I think Ms. Mirky needs to be put in her place.

And.....so?

[Mirkgirl]

Im tired and I have school in 7 hours... first day morning shift, don't mess with me. ;)

Oh come on... is it that hard for you to stay on topic?

[Ronin]

*grins*...do u not remember the other site? LOL :evilcool:

[Mirkgirl]

even if I do, which I haven't confessed, what's that to now? ;)

[Ronin]

confess darlin', u must confess!!

[Mirkgirl]

confess what ;) :huh: ;)?

btw I'll get you all back to topic one day... hopefully.

[Cuiel Rilwen]

:wicked: hehehehe just waiting for the confession whatever it is! Topic...oh the women...nooo....been there done that!

[Ronin]

hehehe...yes, i think we successfully drove that one into the ground ;)

[Cuiel Rilwen]

That's what we do, but then its the crash we're yerning for!:grin:

[Catz]

awww its cruel to torment Mirkymouse.....behave you two ;) lol
:catz:

[Mirkgirl]

awww thanks kitty ;) :grin:

And you two might have nailed it down... but someone else might have an opinion too... Well if someone tries to actually read the comments just skip the last page(s)... I commiserate btw

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Yes, mum.:wicked:

[Tirithel]

SO anyways, there I was just browsing through this SIX PAGE DISCUSSION on feminine characters in Tolkien's works, and I stumbled onto this little discussion on FEMININE CHARACTERS IN TOLKIEN'S WORKS. Wow! Go Figure!

(Can you see the sacrastic humor dripping down this post? Yeah, that's there on purpose...

[Tirithel]

Anyway, I wish he (Tolkien) would have gotten a little more in depth on some of his femme fatals. I haven't read The Lost Tales yet, but I went through Unfinished Tales and fell in love with the story of Turin and Lalaith (Boo Hoo...for real!)...I wish we'd get to hear more about Morwen- she seemed like that 'strong woman' type and I bet she had an interesting history. Yet - SOB - I guess we never will.mecry

[Ronin]

Sarcasm, i really like sarcasm...incredibly cool stuff :grin:

see, great feminine characters!!! mirky....:rolleyes:

[Periantari Andruil]

I"m surprised no one has mentioned Haleth..i find her character to be very interesting... she led her peopel to the lands west of Sirion which is quite a feat... there is more mentioned of her kin in UT which i have yet to read, but i find it important to note her as well as a female character that Tolkien wrote about...

Goldberry is also an important female character as well, as Mirky pointed out...

the reasons why Tolkien didn't have more important female characters was explained well by Ronin and Cuiel i think...
there was some criticism about Tolkien on the fact that he didn't know how to write about relationships and topics of that type, but i'm glad that he had strong female characters in Galadriel, Luthien, Haleth and Eowyn =)

[Mirkgirl]

Originally posted by Mirkgirl
Well Tolkien gave power to his female characters but didn't want them to use it... most of the time. It's okay with me, tho most of people seem to find it sexist. I do not. The style excludes too many strong females.

Another thing I hate in most books ans movies in the genre (and not only) is that there always should be one strong female, comparable to man, who doesn't have anything else to do in the story. She's there because otherwise the books/movies are called sexist.

I don't think Eowyn is that tho. Through her character Tolkien manages to thouch some important themes, even such as woman's place and the real and unreal love. Eowyn had her part in the story and that part was not - be a strong female there and fight some evil.

I'm not quite sure whether this is correct. It depends on how we understand the prophecy - that no man can kill the Witch King i.e. it takes some other power to do it. Or simply that it won't be a man who kills the Witch King, i.e. maybe a man can do it, but it won't happen. I tend to agree on the second, but that can be dabated. Maybe it's even both.

The image in my head when it comes to Tolkien's femine characters is Haleth. She's the one who makes all she can, considering her abilities and gets the credits for this. IMO she's the one who can save Tolkien once for ever from the sexist issues.

One strange example - Lobelia Sackville-Baggins. She was not a role model, but her reaction to the new "authorities" in the Shire deserves respect. Especially being a great example of love to the freedom - one of the most important virtues IMO. However even the things she does before that are a sign of used power heheh. And a nice wink from Tolkien that however nasty his females might be they have something good in them.
Talking of which the ruling Numenorian queens come to mind, but I won't go there now. Enough of me for now (:

Oh please Haleth is one of my favourites... of course I have mentioned her (:

btw it's interesting that she never wed... was she too busy finding safe place for her people? Was she too proud? Is that just [another] anti-feministic incline of Tolkien?

It's interesting that her successor was her brother's son... is it possible that she felt that child as her own...Especially as they with her brother were twins... and she thought there were enough prolems to add to them with another possible heir, her own child? She was faithful to her brother and father's memory, but could she be that faithful?... well that's not the only reason, but could that add to the decision?

[Cuiel Rilwen]

Haleth was a genuine strong female, a true matriarc. Apart from the reason you mentioned for her not marrying/ having children, its hard to find a match when you're a strong person...both because some men feel intimidated by strong females, and because a strong person, man or woman, will find it hard to find that special match.:)

[Ronin]

Just stumbled back upon this again, great thoughts by everyone. I'm still just really intrigued by the use of the sexes within any kind of medium. I think its a fascinating discussion, especially considering the throw-away female characters of so many books, where there are very few of them that would cause the story to tumble apart without their presence. Such that come to mind are the most successful fantasy books on the market. coincedence? i doubt it ;)

[Cuiel Rilwen]

"Wheel of time"...a no show without the women...and one of the most successful fantasy series. Any other examples?

[Ronin]

lets see...undoubtedly "Sword of Truth" series.

[David D]

To be fair to Tolkien the only stories that he truly completed were the Lord of the Rings and The story of Luthien and Beren. I think Tolkien would hve expanded on any other story he created.

It true that he did not expand the character of Haleth, Elwing and maybe even Morwen,but then it could also be said that he was uable to expand as much as he wanted on the likes of Huor, Earendil, Elros and Dior. Had Tolkien completed the Sil as he intended then am sure that many more of his female and male counterparts woul have been filled out a lot more.

Then there is the fact that Tolkien often wrote his stories about a time of war. Though Elvish women were amost physically the same strength as men human women are not. The average woman does not have the strength to use weapons of war such as a long bow or broad sword and so could not go to fight. Lord of the Rings being primarily a story involving lots of battles is unlikely to have female characters fighting, because they were usually physically unable to cope with war.

[Ereinion]

Well,there were some women who were strong and could or at least wanted to fight,the best exemple being Eowyn,but in general,Tolkien couldn't be ecused in femenism. When he wrote about women,they were usualy "the wife of" or "the daugher of" and they always suffered....That's perhaps one of they reasons they gave alot of lines to Arwen in the movie: to make it more femenistic and politicaly correct....

[Tirithel]

Or handed her a sword at the edge of Bruinen and told her to get all feisty and such. As much as it pains me to do so I'm going to have to agree that human women probably did not possess the strength necessary (at least back then, I suppose :huh: lol) to use the weapons offered. That was why Eowyn maybe came off as such a strange and unique character.

Excellent thinking, BTW :thumbs:

[Ronin]

Ereinion, I'm sorry, but Tolkien can be excused of any anti-feminine sentiment. One, the instances of strong feminine characters is substantial. Two, lets be realistic, most women could not handle a long bow, a long sword, pike, ect. Of course, neither could a lot of men...but then, practise is perfect ;) The women always suffered? Perhaps, but lets not forget the men. And concerning the address of women, largely this is not a denegration, but simply something very common in Victorian times.

Since we're talking about the movie (my abrupt change of subject), Arwen's character was expounded upon to appeal to a more female demographic by having a strong female in the movie. that doesn't mean that Arwwen was not a strong female in the books, just that she wasn't given that much narrative flexibility. It had nothing to do with political correctness and all about box office potential.

By the way, we should define feminism, so that we have a common understanding. Its meaning can range from the ultra-extreme to the common sense.

[Tirithel]

Whatever- she was a ninny in a pretty dress! lol

[Ereinion]

OMG,Ronin! I had to use a dictionary to understand what you wrote...:blush: But I did! I'm so proud of me!:thumbs:
About Arwen,nobody said she was a sissy-girl in the book,but it wasn't her who saved Frodo from the Wrights...I just didn't like to see her as some warrior amazon...Tolkien may not say much about her in the book,but I'm sure that was not the way he saw her...

[Ronin]

lol...sorry, i didn't mean to make it complex

You're right tho, PJ's version is not how Tolkien saw Arwen, defacto. But all elvish women are strong, resilent, and in a lot of cases, warriors.

[Finrod Felagund]

I agree with Ronin, PJ & Co could sell more tickets by "enhancing" Arwen's role. I don't think it had anything to do w/ political correctness. It's all about the $ or pound or yen or rand, or dinar or whatever, He probably had a little nudge from the producers and New Line

[Ereinion]

Originally posted by Finrod Felagund
I agree with Ronin, PJ & Co could sell more tickets by "enhancing" Arwen's role.

Well,that's kind of what I meant. On one hand a feministic warrior and on the other a female character for men to drool over, hence more money from men and women....
It's just that my english s**ks and I can't always express my ideas correctly... :blush:

[Ronin]

lol...no worries, we know what you mean now!! :grin:

[Tirithel]

And I always thought it was just because they didn't have time to properly introduce Glorfindel! Never even thought of the marketing ploys involved...You guys are waaaaay too smart...:thumbs:

[Friend of Maglor]

lol... (great forum)

Never liked Arwen much, intro to the books was to close to intro to the movies, but I think her character in the book is just sheerly strong, in the was in which only elves can be strong.

What about Elwing?

[Finrod Felagund]

Tirithel,
I think that is also correct. But as to which was the original reason for Arwen's larger role is a mystery

[Tirithel]

My guess is that a screenwriter's nightmare is tackling a novel like LotR, loved by millions around the world and with a solid cult following. Ugggghhhhh....anyway, they probably had to omit all or most of the characters that didn't appear more than once or that couldn't be replaced by someone else. Then PJ came in with his special brand of ideology and what not and decided that in a ME seemingly ruled by men, at least one strong female character was needed to hold down the militant feminist types until Eowyn's introduction in TTT. You guys are geniuses!

On other matters, at first thought Elwing came off more passive. Hold on, lemme go read a few chapters and I'll get back to you.

[Friend of Maglor]

Right, I just figured anyone willing to be thrown off a cliff, half drowned, flying until exhausted, and waking up in a brilliantly shiny country deserved some credit for hangin in there!! Besides, Maglor says her kids were like sons (even if thats a tad irrelevant! lol)

[Ereinion]

I think that Elwing was just another example of the "daughter of...wife of...mother of...." women tipe. She was important only as Elrond's link to Luthien and the bearer of Earendil's Silmaril....

[Friend of Maglor]

*sigh* but her devotion is so touching

[Ereinion]

That's because she was a great daughter-wife-mother! Well,I don't know about "mother",but then again I've never been in her position,so I can hardly judge....

[Friend of Maglor]

lol true Erenion... have I mentioned her connextion to Maglor?

Shutting up!!! lol

[Tirithel]

Hey didn't she give up her kids to go fly to Earendil? Bad mommie, Bad! lol

[Ereinion]

That's kind of what I think,but like I sad,I really can't judge her....Anyway,she didn't mean to fly to Earendil, she was going to kill herself....And maybe she did it to save her kids,because if the silmaril was gone,maybe the feanoreans would have left...:huh:

[Friend of Maglor]

And who would actually let us get ahold of it over thier dead bodies? :flamer:

Really, if we could stand to kill kin, why not stand to throw ourselves into the ocean? (Too suicidal..... Mag, I wasn't asking you)

But really it didn't matter about thier kids, cuz a certain very good hearted elf happened to be there......

[Ereinion]

I think a "feeling extremly guilty elf" would fit more....He thought he got their mother dead,the least he could do is to take care of those kids.....

[Friend of Maglor]

*mean look*

jk,jk

No really, thats a big part of it, and thier bond grew as time progressed, but he was also thinking of his own wife. Mag said she died when Beleriand was destroyed. She was the only one of the brother's wives whofollowed them out of Valinor.

I don't even go to the whole guilty feeling thing, it gets him all angsty, and I have to put up with it all the time anyways

[Ereinion]

Well,you'll just have to put up with it in the sake of friendship,don't you?

Another lady's tragic story I really liked was Erendis...Her waiting reminded me a little of Arwen's, but unfortunatly her faith was different....After spending her all life sharing her man's love with the sea,it's no wonder her love turned to hatred....

[Friend of Maglor]

*very Very embarassed look*
Not familier with that story E

[Ereinion]

Owwww....It's the coolest story! You should definitely read it! It's in the Unfinished Tales....A story about a Numenorean king Aldarion, his love for Erendis and his devotion to the sea...Very sad...mecry

[Friend of Maglor]

AH, Unfinished tles is one of the 7 out of 11 Hof ME books I don't have

[Ereinion]

I don't have it either... I took it in the library :grin: I'm on the waiting list for the Sil in english now...:hyper:

[Friend of Maglor]

Wow, I wish I could just lend you all of mine, but I can't reach that far. lol

[Ereinion]

Owwwww,thanks anyway! :grin:

[Friend of Maglor]

Any time!!

[Tirithel]

Well, Erendis is just a prime example of what happens when you enter a relationship hoping to change a person. If she had only read Dear Abby once in a while...

[Ereinion]

I still feel sorry for her...I think she was pretty understanding, but there is a limit to everyone....

[Friend of Maglor]

*sigh* wish I knew what you were talking about.....

[Tirithel]

Basically, Arion or Aniron or whatever his name is (I haven't read it in a while) marries Erendis while in love with another mistress...dun dun DUN: the sea. He goes out sailing all the time and whenever he's not sailing he's off in his little Sea-Lover's club (I wanna say Uinendili..but I could be wrong) and she gets jealous and as Erienion said before, all the love Erendis had for him turns to pure hatred and jealousy. Eventually she starts kinda shieIding his kids from him and teaching them to hate and mistrust men...it's pretty sick stuff. I couldn't tell ya how the story ends, cuz i got sick of the go round and skipped to the next chapter, although my guess would be some kind of death.

Erendis strikes me as a more "typical" woman character as far as Tolkien goes (the wife-mother thing I mean, not to classify females unjustly as solely wives and mothers- God knows I'd chastise myself for a stupid comment like that without a disclaimer). She just got torqued off at not being treated right. Shoot, I would too.

[Friend of Maglor]

Wow, sounds like what would have happed to Tolkien if he didn't have such a great wife: he was in love with literature and had his own little Literature lover's club (viz. the Inklings)

[Tirithel]

Inklings....where are these inklings...are they like House Elves, but, like, inky-er?

(Sorry, just got out of a HP thread and its still a bit fresh in my mind...)

[Friend of Maglor]

Inkilngs!! ack! I won't try to explain, but they were Tolkinen group of conteporaris (including my beloved cs lewis) most of lotr was read to them before anyone else

[Tirithel]

So it has been made plain that my knowledge of the professor himself is definitely lacking.

Oh well! Thanks for the update, FoM!

[Friend of Maglor]

You can re read Tolkien as often as the book!! And always find something new

[Tirithel]

I've noticed that. I'm nearing the end of Fellowship now and it gets better and better every time I read it. Same with the Sil and the Hobbit. Did you know that the drinking song performed by Merry and Pippin in the extended edition of FotR is actually a combination of the Bath Song and a Drinking song? Ah ha! Just realized that- crazy, huh?

Anywho, *cough* back to the topic of this thread...

Arwen, what a ninny! JK! lol

[Friend of Maglor]

lol

Yes i noticed that!! The whole hey ho thingie..
i am re-reading sil and ashamed by all the things I didn't know... anyhting that has any slight reference to Fëanor? I am an expert.... came with reincarnation and customs, but everything else? very sketchy (I actually read the book out of order!!)

[Mirkgirl]

Erendis... I just got bad taste while reading this story... that's the way to picture women to make us hate them... Erendis was living in her own world (not the world opposite of the sea, just another world) and she dragged her kid there and spoiled the little good that came from the father's genes... OK, you love someone who likes the sea, you don't like the sea - both extreme points and it was Erendis who was stiffer in her possition and more guilty... it makes me think that Tolkien either experienced or heard first hand from a friend about the female I want to change you problem while writting this story... if so he gets all my credits - made me hate Erendis with ease

I can't see your problem with Elwing - first you say that's she's just a mother-wife-daughter then that she shouldn't have left her children? I'm pretty sure that even though Earendil had to walk the last path alone he wouldn't get there without her - call it moral support... the least he couldve done is staying with her, following her choice (:

And if PJ needed Arwen to hold the feminists till Eowyn... wait a second what Eowyn? She's not a shieldemaiden, she's a bored royalty in the movie ):

[Friend of Maglor]

true about Eowyn.........
the sea seems to be a center of angsty bad relationships, (or in the case of elves...depression!)

[Tirithel]

C'Mon now, Mirky, she [Eowyn] did whip out her sword on Aragorn once! :rolleyes:

[Friend of Maglor]

ok, a show offy unsatisfied houswife who looks good with a blade.... lol

[Tirithel]

I have no clever comment...I'll just laugh.

[Friend of Maglor]

ok that suits me fine lol

[Gwaihir]

When I read LotR I thought that maybe the stories were lacking feminine characters, but after reading the Sil, I knew that there was just plenty of them.

Let's see... First there are the seven Valie, the gods.
there are Idril, Miriel, Finduilas, Aredhel, Galadriel, Luthien, Melian (though she's actually a Maia), Celebrian, Arwen, Eowyn, Nienor, Morwen, Rian, and so many others that make the balance in Middle Earth just right. I'm really satisfied with them.

[Friend of Maglor]

i never felt any imbalance at all, I mean, LOTR was mainly a war book, and fightung is a man thing for that period of ime.... but women have a prominent place everywhere else...

[Shieldmaiden]

Okay, if there is already a thread about this, please merge them or lock this one or whatever.

I've noticed there's been debate on whether Tolkien's female characters were strong or not. Lots seem to think that they are mostly passive [for example, Arwen stayed home to wait for Aragorn] and such, and even Eowyn wasn't really a strong female because she had to 'become a man' [whoa, that sounds odd :mmmm:] in order to prove herself, etc. I myself disagree...I think that the characters were strong in their own ways. But anyway...

Here's the point: Were the females in Lord of the Rings strong or passive characters?

[I'm asking because I'm writing a speech about Tolkien's female characters for Academic Decathlon...though I'm not competing, just training. I'm not very good in front of audiences...]

[Evenstar]

I think Eowyn was strong, definately, it would have been the easiest thing for her to stay at home disappointed, but she decided to go and fight along with the men, and that has to make her strong, especially as she stood up to the Witch King when none of the men would. I think Rosie was strong (in mind) as well cos she didn't fuss about Sam being away for ages and still agreed to marry him when he came home. As for Arwen... in the book, she wasn't expected to ride out and fight alongside her brothers, so I don't think staying at home makes her weak, but I don't think she's as strong willed as the other two, even tho she's an elf.
:p

[Mirkgirl]

okay there is a thread about Tolkien's feminine characters, it's for all rather than just LotR, but it has some very good discussions in it which would be shame to get lost in the archive... so I'll take the liberty and merge the two threads, I hope you don't mind (:

As to Arwen I don't think we ever understand enough to judge her personality... but giving up immortality and family isn't something which an elven doll would do...

Rosie... errr... I'm not quite sure if I agree... I'd guess there were quite a lot of hobbit women who didn't freak out, even tho their hubbies were inprisoned... I never paid much attention to what she's doing tho...

I'd come with another strong female hobbit - Lobelia. Altho she's not a role model, she is also one of the few who stood up against the new authorities and this deserves respect no matter her lust for estates and spoons. She is a real thoughy and leader, one has to admit (:

The problem with Tolkien's females usually is that they are strong but they use their power much... if that makes sense lol

[Ronin]

I never got much from Rosie, to be honest....she was there, but nothing much beyond that ;) Admittedly, Tolkien never really gives us much headway with feminine character and we have to search a lot....but with Rosie, I got the love, loyalty and devotion and that was it. Pretty flat character in my opinion.

had never thought about Lobelia tho, Mirky....but you're right, she proves herself to be one heck of a woman and demands a lot of respect and loyalty. lol...we can't expect all of our leaders to be perfect

Arwen, i second that....incredibly strong woman and passionate.

[Periantari Andruil]

I agree that Rosie's character wasn't developed much... but then again, i don't view her as a central character involved in the plot though. She's there for Sam and really that was her function... to provide fuel and motivation for Sam to return to the Shire and have the will to survive the journey.

My favorite female character is Eowyn, hands down. Even though her motivation to going to war can be criticized, her bravery and determination is evident and very emotional.

[Tirithel]

I dig Eowyn just cuz she breaks from the pack and disobeys her superiors to follow her heart. What can I say; I'm a sucker for rebels!

[Arwen Evenstar]

I was disappointed on Eowyn's slaying of the Witch-King, cuz she had the help of Merry, I wish she did it with no help.

[Stormcrow]

So do I. It never really made the statement it should have with Merry's help. She was trying to put across taht she can kill him because she is a woman, but it was Merry who weakened him at first. If he never, she would be dead. Besides, if he can die from Eowyn stabbing him in the face, does that mean that anyone can? Or only those who aren't men (remember Aragorn slaying many of them on Weathertop)? Because if it is only non-men that can, I guess Eowyn did make quite a bold statement.

[Arwen Evenstar]

I had no idea that anyone else would think that, Stormcrow.

Basically, Merry was the one who destroyed the Witch-King's knee, which made him useless, and Eowyn then 'slayed' him. Merry basically saved her life. I mean, he made the Witch-King weak and harmless, we'd be able to slay him too, though I think that would be a rare occasion.

I was confused about Aragorn as well. I supposed he didn't exactly slay them, but he set them all on fire, which did kind of distract them for a few days or so. He makes it look that he did it all the time, like it was an every day thing for him, which considering, it probably was, guarding Eriador everyday. Doesn't he get some credit?

[Stormcrow]

Yeah, I agree. In the book, he didn't throw the torch and impale one in the face did he? Because if he did, they have made a bit of confusion, unless literally, no 'man' can kill him.

[Arwen Evenstar]

I suppose Aragorn is a man, but a kind of special man, being one of the Dunedain and Numenoreans and having long life, suppose that doesn't count.

[Stormcrow]

Nah, because he is a man majorly. I am not so sure on this whole 'no man can kill him' thing, can anyone clarify? Is it literal or just something he says because he is so high and mighty?

[Arwen Evenstar]

But he can't really be killed, nothing can kill him.

[Stormcrow]

Eowyn destroyed him.

[Arwen Evenstar]

He wasn't gone forever, was he????

[Stormcrow]

I believe so, I am not entirely sure. Unless it is different in the book, he must be. The way he crumpled up in the movie. He was definitely dead there.

[Arwen Evenstar]

The Nazgul are meant to live forever unless Sauron is destroyed, in my beliefs.

[Stormcrow]

Nope, the Witchking did die when Eowyn stabbed him. He died for sure. No regular sword can harm him, but after Merry stabbed him with a Westernesse sword, which broke the spell that knit the Witchking's sinews together. The Witchking met his doom at the hands of a hobbit and a woman.

[Lessa]

as I understand it from reading the book he was definitely slain by Éomer and Merry at the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Lessa

[Stormcrow]

as I understand it from reading the book he was definitely slain by Éomer and Merry at the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Lessa

You do mean Eowyn, right? lol

[Arwen Evenstar]

Yeah, it was Eowyn.

[Lessa]

sorry yes I meant Éowyn.

Lessa

[Arwen Evenstar]

I kknew you meant that, though Eomer was brave, he was a man.

[Stormcrow]

And then there is the whole fact that Éomer didn't slay the Witchking...:p

And I am still confused about this whole 'no man can kill me' buisness. :-/

[Arwen Evenstar]

Do you think the witch-king meant that no man can kill him because he only expects a man to fight him, or something, because women would normally try to slay him...

[Cuiel Rilwen]

I think that was due to a profecy actually. Maybe I can find it if I can be bothered to go look! lol

[Stormcrow]

I have looked a bit but I cannot find much. I think it is just a saying or legend, not actual fact.

[Arwen Evenstar]

Yes, he did prophecy no man can kill him, but I'm still confused.

[Stormcrow]

So am I. But Merry weakened him, and Eowyn killed him, so there is a lot of confusion involved with this subject.

[Arwen Evenstar]

I did a bit of reading and it said that Glorfindel prophecied that 'he shall fall not at the hands of a man' or something like that, which meant he prophecied he will be defeated, but not by a man. But the witch-king overestimated his power and instead said 'no man can kill me'.

[Stormcrow]

Excellent description there, Arwen! Thanks for clarifying that! I thought it would have been something like that. Glorfindel prophesised that a female WOULD kill him, and not a man. But it was perhaps, misinterpreted to 'no man CAN kill him. I understand it all now. ;)

[Arwen Evenstar]

I suppose Glorfindel meant that he will not be killed by a man, but will eventually, and the witch-king took that as no man can kill him, and he isn't expecting anyone other than a man to challenge him, so I think he believed he can never fall.

[Stormcrow]

The Witchking was rather self-absorbed, I think.

[Daughter of Feanor]

I think he had too much self-confidence. That was a bad idea.

[Arwen Evenstar]

Always leads to downfall...