[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

One could say the same about Judeo-Christianity, of course. Certainly there's a kind of sexism there, but I think there are two possible types to be distinguished; is it conceptual or linguistic sexism? In other words, is it true that Iluvatar is fundamentally "male", or is this a case of the masculine pronoun being used as a sort of default for a person of unspecified sex (something that happens in English all the time)? If you ask me, the former offense is significantly graver than the latter.

There's been a fair bit of thought and discussion gone into this idea that one can distinguish a conceptual from a linguistic notion and much of it has demonstrated that this idea of a default unspecified gender reference is an erroneous concept--that always, at some place, the lack of specificity falls down, and in its place lies the defining position of one particular specified gender. Tolkien was writing before this became an issue in linguistics of course, which suggests that his use of language will demonstrate the gender traits linguist scholars have since recognised.

Given that Tolkien has--as Formendacil pointed out--begun his mythology with monotheistic creation and that creation uses the metaphor of song/music rather than the birth metaphor of many other creation myths (not all of them use such metaphors of course), I think it is difficult to argue that Iluvatar/Eru would be a gender-inclusive creator. (Although there is mention in Ainulindule that the Valar clothe themselves in male and female forms, not one female name is given here. One would think that, if the Valar or Iluvatar himself were not gender specific, at least some of the Ainur named therein would be female.) There is some research to suggest that in the Judeo-Christian tradition which you mention, there is archeological evidence to demonstrate that the ancient Israelite tribes did have a female goddess who was usurpt and occluded by the rise of monotheistic thought.

Originally Posted by Lal

If Eru was this tricksy (and Tricksy he was indeed, if the Ainur were "the offspring of his thought" he must have had something of the Melkor about him alongside the cuddly stuff)

This is the logical conundrum of monotheism, isn't it? It's possible to see Iluvatar's boast about his powers as the source of Melkor's own pride.

Originally Posted by Ainulindale

The one [music] was deep and wide and beautiful, but slow and blended with an immeasurable sorrow, from which its beauty chiefly came.

Until this point, hasn't beauty been associated with harmony? Yet now sorrow is held the prime source of beauty. Interesting.