View Single Post
Old 02-10-2006, 12:19 PM   #12
Farael
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
 
Farael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: In hospitals, call rooms and (rarely) my apartment.
Posts: 1,549
Farael has just left Hobbiton.
Now there is an interesting thread, answered by people far better than me at expressing themselves.

I believe that a plausible reason for the lack of compelling females is the overall tone (or mood) of the story. LoTR is mostly a dark, gruesome tale of great heroics in a time of desperation. I hope I don't get labeled as a machist pig after saying this but at least to me, it's much harder to convey a sad mood with the precense of women.

First of all, love is a happy situation in any circumstance. What if Sam had been Lilly Gamgee instead? Madly in love with the brave and "noble" Frodo, who loved her as well. They would help each other move on and the story might soon turn into a tale about "the power of love" to paraphrase a songwriter. I see nothing wrong with that, but I'm not sure that's what Tolkien imagined.

Also, I have found often that women in my life are the ones to cheer me up when my mood is somber. My sister will (in her own way) find ways to cheer me up... talking to my mother is always good and my girlfriend really is a little angel. On the other hand, even when talking to my best (guy) friend, the effect is not the same. Sure, it helps... he's really a great pal and we've had many a talk over coffee, but he does not affect my mood so greatly.

Of course, I'm sure that the ladies here present will say that they too feel sad, stressed and even they have reached the point in which "hope and despair are akin". From a male perspective (one that the Author might have shared), having many women in the story might have altered the mood Tolkien set out to achieve.

Still, in all honesty, I'm playing Devil's advocate here. I do believe that Tolkien could have added more compelling, fully rounded female characters to the story. Not in the fellowship because I think that the sub-story of the fellowship was a story of male bonding (Very different guys coming together to defeat a greater foe) highlighted by Legolas' and Gimli's friendship. Eowyn is a nice start into a well rounded character, but that has been commented on before. A wife for Denethor would not be possible as I believe that he would have not sunk into despair like he did (which is an important part of the story) while she was still alive. After all, he would have had something to live for. If she had been killed during the battle, it would have taken away from Denethor loosing his mind when Faramir is wounded. A female Saruman might have been interesting but then again we have a potential for romance with Gandalf and it would detract from the story.

Maybe you will call me crazy, but Faramir could have been a daughter. It might become "simplistic" as Boromir (The man) would have been the impulsive and power-hungry one and Faramir (The "woman") would have been reflexive and almost poetical. Yet Faramir is a great character, even if he has less of the spotlight than his brother and I don't see how being female would stirr controversy. Of course, he could have not married Eowyn in the end, but something else could have been arranged.

I believe the greatest impediment for more females in the story is the Fellowship itself. If the goal was (as I believe) to portray a case of male bonding to overcome great peril, interactions with women might have had an adverse effect (see Aragorn and Eowyn). That leaves other women to either interact with Frodo and Sam once they peel off the Fellowship (possible female Faramir) or to have a secondary position to the men (see Ioreth).

I think that, other than female-Faramir, maybe other generals could have been women. I'm at school right now so I don't have my books handy and I'm having a bit of a mental lapse, but there is the Prince of somewhere... relative to Denethor if I'm not mistaken... that could have been a woman without detracting from the Felloship (by the time they get to Gondor, they are fairly separated). As well, some of the Dunedain could have been a woman (I can already imagine a comment by Gimli on their skill) and yet again it would have not detracted from what I see is the sub-story of the Fellowship.

We still have Galadriel who is still a woman, even if not quite femenine perhaps. We do have Eowyn, in spite of all her flaws and all her bravery. With a few female generals and a female Faramir, women might have been much better represented in the story, without changing the overall idea.

I still think that the correct "mood" would have been harder to achieve if (for example) Denethor or Theoden had a wife, or if Arwen had ridden with the Fellowship, or even if Sam had been Frodo's wife. But in the right places, some male characters could have been replaced. While it would not make any of the women as prominent as the men in the fellowship, it might have helped to represent both sexes in a fairer way.

To finish off this long rant and speculation, I would say that Tolkien was influenced by his background when writing LoTR and that is why we don't see nearly enough women. The "male bonding" sub-story might have been linked to his experiences in WWI but then, it is a compelling story for any man (I believe) and probably for any woman who will be willing to deal with the fact that her sex will be under-represented. Furthermore, while he could have done whatever he wanted, Tolkien would still be limited by his experience, beliefs and ideas. While it is not an excuse nowadays, it is a plausible reason when LoTR was written and published.

When asking why, then, are there more female characters in the Silmarillion, we should keep in mind that The Sil was never finished by JRR and we don't know how it would have shaped up in the end. Also, while Sil is the "background" for the happenings of LoTR, it is not quite a historical background. What happens in The Silmarillion influences LoTR only as much as Tolkien himself would want it to, it is not quite a cause-effect relation between the two stories, as a history book may be. I guess what I'm trying to say is that The Sil is still an independant story and while paralels between it and LoTR are bound to be made, they should be taken with a grain of salt as ultimately, Tolkien might have been trying to tell two distinct stories. I still think that LoTR is a story about good overcoming evil and bravery overcoming treachery, with a healthy dose of male bonding situations. The Silmarillion is more of a broader, mythological work and while good still overcomes evil (for the most part) the "good" guys can be evil as well (See Feanor's oath and its consequences).

I know I had said before that I was rounding up my post but more things came into mind. Now I must leave, but I hope I was clear enough. I'll probably edit any kinks out (I.E. the name of the prince that I can't recall) when I get home tonight.
__________________
I prepared Explosive Runes this morning.
Farael is offline   Reply With Quote