Ooh la la, Lúthien...

[Mithalwen]

And may be it was short-hand for a complete absence of character ....


Thinking back to a fascinating lecture David Doughan gave at Oxonmoot 06 about how Tolkien's attitude to women changed as he aged, I think Luthien was too much a product of his earlier attitude. Having heard reports of Priscilla being (unsuprisingly) formidable intellectually, I can't help speculating if being the father of a clever and strongminded daughter forced him to alter his opinions.

Oh that Romeo and Juliet stuff ... silly way to carry on Beren is no Kester Woodseaves - he really was "a man to die for".

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

And may be it was short-hand for a complete absence of character ....

Do I hear a poll forming somewhere on the Downs?

about how Tolkien's attitude to women changed as he aged, I think Luthien was too much a product of his earlier attitude.

Speaking from the male side and from experience, if one's attitudes regarding the 'fairer half' don't change over time, one might want to examine one's toes to see if there be a little expiration tag attached.

Oh that Romeo and Juliet stuff ... silly way to carry on Beren is no Kester Woodseaves - he really was "a man to die for".

What adolescent didn't want to die for a love, at least once? I too may have been once benighted...

And, seeing my wife's mother lose her husband of nearly fifty years, she too has wanted to die, if only to be with him, to be by his side once more, and she is well beyond the years of adolescence, may mean that later years only change the forms, but not the intensity, of the expression.

[Mithalwen]

Oh it makes so much more sense after 50 years... though your Mother in Law was truly blessed - my Great -grandmother apparently used to say that she shouldn't mind a few years a widow..... and didn't get them. But it is rather overdramatic and unnecessary - considering the duration of most relationships taking a single sleeping tablet should suffice....

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

But it is rather overdramatic and unnecessary - considering the duration of most relationships taking a single sleeping tablet should suffice....

But you must walk yourself back to those years, when so much that now seems silly was SO important. What's truly sad is when one so young is successful in taking the short bridge, not realizing that much of what seems 'to die for' will be forgotten in just a few years.

On the other hand, can we truly say that Luthien ever acted immaturely? She took down Morgoth, gave her father and company the slip, and brought back the Man and the Silmaril, and so she was much more than just a pretty face.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by alatar

But you must walk yourself back to those years, when so much that now seems silly was SO important. What's truly sad is when one so young is successful in taking the short bridge, not realizing that much of what seems 'to die for' will be forgotten in just a few years.

Which is exactly my point. Should have got over that drip Beren .... And I don't see what is so clever about giving Thingol the slip. Any girl worth her salt handles Daddy far better. Idril managed even to get Daddy's blessing for her mortal beau without all those ridiculous shenanigans. Luthien is entirely self obsessed and motivated only by self interest - that is very adolescent.

[Lalaith]

Idril managed even to get Daddy's blessing for her mortal beau without all those ridiculous shenanigans

well, yes, because it suited Tolkien's plotlines for Gondolin/Tuor better. I don't think it was due to any intrinsic difference between the characters...
Plus...wasn't Idril an even earlier character in the mythology than even Luthien? (I may be wrong on this)

We'll just have to agree to differ on this one Mith.

Rune's idea about feminism is quite interesting.

women have done great deeds, but that does not make you a feminist

As is Mith's point about Priscilla.
Eowyn (written I think to please Priscilla - where did I read that?) was aware of the constraints facing women and rebelled against them. Neither she, nor probably her creator, had ever heard of the concept of feminism. Does that make her, nonetheless, a feminist figure? I think so. Rune, and others, may not.

Which reminds me.
"I may have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the stomach of a concrete elephant. First I'm going to have a little drinkie, and then I'm going to execute the whole bally lot of you."

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Rune's idea about feminism is quite interesting.
As is Mith's point about Priscilla.

Eowyn (written I think to please Priscilla - where did I read that?) was aware of the constraints facing women and rebelled against them. Neither she, nor probably her creator, had ever heard of the concept of feminism. Does that make her, nonetheless, a feminist figure? I think so. Rune, and others, may not.

It should probably have said "many women have done great deeds, but that does not make them a feminist" and not "women have done great deeds, but that does not make you a feminist"

Anyways I do agree with what you say, I belive that you can be symbol of something you might not even understand or belive in.

My posts are just not well written.

[Mithalwen]

[QUOTE=Lalaith;564990]well, yes, because it suited Tolkien's plotlines for Gondolin/Tuor better. I don't think it was due to any intrinsic difference between the characters...
Plus...wasn't Idril an even earlier character in the mythology than even Luthien? (I may be wrong on this)

We'll just have to agree to differ on this one Mith.

QUOTE]

Oh come on you think that Luthien is as she is to suit the plot? Luthien is idealised as the perfect woman - passive other than as meets the needs of her man for whom she sacrifices everything. I just find this completely and irredeemably horrific.