Re: to Genandra of Mirkwood
I am sorry, but that is perhaps the most twisted logic that I’ve recently encountered.
Gen:
”It's only if you're already assuming Tolkien's books are sexist that you would need "proof" of Arwen's liberated femininity.”
Do you mean that only sexist author can include a female charachter who is NOT liberated? Poor Ibsen.
Gen:
”We can safely assume that Arwen is everything a great elven female would be”
Then we can safely assume everyone mentioned by name in the book to be everything a great eleven/human/dwarven/hobbit male/female is.
WHY ON EARTH CAN WE (arbitrarily) ASSUME something like that?????
Gen:
1 = ” We can safely assume that Arwen is everything a great elven female would be, and that makes her a far sight grander, more noble, tougher and smarter than...”
2 = ”The comparison of Arwen with Luthien is unfair, in that it doesn't take into account the role of elves in the Third Age as opposed to earlier ages. They are fading...”
I find it difficult to understand how you can fit theese two claims together?
Gen:
”If Arwen is a wimp, then so are Elrond and all the elves, save perhaps Legolas!”
It seems that now I have finally found my true self. I am a ax wielding barbarian who ill understand any other kind of power then that of arrow and knife. This becomes especially clear as I obviously fail to understand the importance of Elronds or say, Galadriels role as advisors, co-ordinators, suppliers, supporters, leaders and shielders. After all, Since I have failed to place Arwens name between the lines in every paragraph of the book where theese are evident, I must have overlooked those paragraphs entirely.
Janne Harju
|