Quote:
|
A very nice point about female beauty Esty, but it’s not just confined to the women: the men are all beautiful as well, if they are good, and ugly if they are evil.
|
Fordim -
Are you certain about this? Remember Tolkien's quote regarding Strider and the fact that he looks 'foul' on the outside. This could just be referring to his dirty clothes and face, yet I don't remember anywhere else that Tolkien describes him as a "looker".
I can't put my fingers on specifics, but the fleeting references to Sam always left me with the impression that he was more good hearted than good looking. Also, the book Frodo is described as "perky and red cheeked", a bit taller and more slender than your average Hobbit. Physically, that would be pleasant enough, but nothing to create screaming fangirls.
I think the key here is what Esty says: when we first encounter a particular woman in the story, Tolkien is careful to give us a description of her physical characteristics (either via the narrative or through the eye of a particular beholder). This description is generally quite pleasing, unless the character happens to be Shelob! He is far less likely to dwell on the physical description of the male characters. Because of this, I have a clearer mental image of Goldberry in my head even thought she's a relatively minor character, than either Faramir or Boromir.
The Hobbits as a whole are described as pleasant and cheerful rather than good-looking. Perhaps, Tolkien thought of them as typical of the garden variety folk who inhabit our world today. But nowhere in his writing does he develop the theme that Lewis did so wonderfully in Till We Have Faces with the exploration of what beauty and ugliness meant in the lives of two sisters. There are times when this theme of physical versus true beauty comes up in myth and fairy so the basic idea would not be wholly alien to the spirit of his work.
Perhaps it is greedy of us to ask him to do so: he has so many themes that he handles so masterfully, and a story can't be everything to everyone. Yet I always ask myself why Tolkien put something in or left it out: was it something that he did not consider important to explore or did it simply not fit into this particular framework.