[Lalaith]

Lush, you beat me to it. Lyta, your point about Eowyn is spot on.

But to those who have been complaining about PC (whatever that means - friendly fire, anyone?) I would like to emphasise the difference between "could" and "should".
*Should* a female (maia/dwarf/hobbit/elf/ human/whatever) have gone on the quest? I say, of course not. I have stated elsewhere in this thread that I like the book very much just as it is.
*Could* one have gone? I say yes. My suggested substitutions were made, however, in a light-hearted spirit.
And while we are talking about the difference between "could" and "should," this, for me, is what human rights (not just womens rights)are all about. They are not about dogma, about being forced to do things, but of having the chance to do them IF you want to.
Durelin, you say that you believe that God created men and women to be different. I believe that God created us ALL different. That was his genius. And some people have a fighting, questing spirit, some are happier by hearth and home. Some like to flit between the two. We all, men and women, have a right to choose where our spirits can best flourish.
Oh, and Aratlithiel, I take and respectyour point: it may well be that Tolkien could have had problems introducing a female. (Although even this point is worth debating, judging by the stronger female characters in his works not written for publication). But some posters seemed to be saying that they themselves could not envisage a literary female in a non-romantic function. That was what I was expressing dismay about...

[ March 23, 2003: Message edited by: Lalaith ]

[ March 23, 2003: Message edited by: Lalaith ]