[Lush]

Originally Posted by davem

Oh come on - you're the one who said this was a 'game'. I said 'There are plenty of other books to read which would maybe appeal to your taste more'. & I was speaking very precisely in terms of LotR, not the Legendarium as a whole. If you don't like the lack of female characters in LotR, you can read Aldarion & Erendis in UT, or the Athrabeth in Home 10.

That being said, in Tolkien's mind there was only really the one story. LotR is part of the Legendarium. If there are no significant female characters in Lotr apart from Galadriel & Eowyn, there are individual chapters where those characters dominate. In the final analysis, LotR itself was only one 'chapter' in the Legendarium.

Did I say "I don't like it"? Or did I say, "I don't like the way people approach it"? And what was I referring to? The Fellowship, of course!

I could have done without the "shut up" when I opened the thread, but I had just crawled back from the pub after a long, and no less fiery, discussion of literature.

Per my usage of the word "game," it appeared in this context:

"While I may strongly disagree with a reader's interpretation of a work, I wouldn't respond in a way that suggested they take a hike and read something else. That's awfully reactionary in my opinion. If you're putting your work out there, in the public domain, expect it to be criticized, both positively and negatively; expect it to be misinterpreted, re-interpreted, spat upon and praised. That's the nature of the game."

So... did this word simply jump out at you for some reason that I am not seeing?

I'm saying the story is as it is, perfect or otherwise. I'll also say that I don't believe anyone could 'improve' upon it by introducing changes in style or character.

I don't think anyone here is attempting an improvement of it. If certain aspects of the book fascinate some readers, yet ultimately leave them unsatisfied, perhaps they can write their own stories? We have a number of talented writers around here. This has always been my personal approach to all great literature I have loved, and whose lacks and depths I have mulled over in time.

I have to say I think this thread has been a bit confused from the start, in treating Tolkien's work as no different from a traditional fairy story, & asking 'why, if we have 'X' in traditional tales, do we not have 'X' in Tolkien's work?' Because Tolkien's works are not traditional tales, however powerfully & effectively he may use traditional images & themes. To take the approach 'I have this wonderful tool for interpreting traditional fairy stories & I'm going to apply it to Tolkien's work, even though its not a traditional fairy story at all' & when you find that Tolkien's work is not susceptible to your 'tool' & won't open up to that method of interpretation to start complaining that you've been let down (whether by Tolkien or you interpretative tool) is a bit off - & to start off by putting your hands on your hips & telling Tolkien 'Don't do me like that' is complaining that he's somehow failed to come up to your standards.

What?! Davem, I am going to cut and paste my original post, it's now glaringly obvious to me that you have mis-read it:

I've been here since 2001.

I've seen a lot of threads about women in Lord of the Rings on this forum.

Yet ever since doing serious research ino the fairy tale, I've discovered that you cannot always apply the rules of the tale to the rules of the real world. Therefore, all those guys talking about "women don't belong in stories of war" and "Tolkien was merely using his own experiences in WWI when it comes to women" need to shut up.

Fairy tale survives through its own logic and its own archetypes. Don't bring in the real world to justify the absence of females in the Fellowship, for example. This is reductive. It doesn't do justice to the fairy tale and to the real world.

I suggest a good dose of Maria Tatar on the subject.

Four years of putting up with reductive discussions on the precense/absence of women in Tolkien's work have taken their toll on me.

Am I telling Tolkien "don't do me like that"? Am I speaking to the dead? LOL!!!

Per your criticism of the overall application of traditional fairy tale, I would agree. I am not trying to take LotR and interpret it to a particular mold that Tatar discusses. But I think that she does process a lot of information that could be of use when approaching the book.