Don't do me like that

[Lush]

Any 'offence' found in any text is down to the reader, not the author, as meaning only resides in the text itself - or rather in what the reader finds in/imposes on the text.

Hee hee. If you're referring to Lal's earlier post-structuralist v. classissism post, I am glad to inform that I am neither and am not bound up by any of these conventions, though I do agree with Lal that the persona of Tolkien can easily overshadow our experiences of the text (if that's what she said). Now, if you just wanted to say that you didn't mean to offend, I'm down with that.

And, even though I am a white Englishman, & therefore in Hollywood shorthand personally responsible for all the badness & villainy in the whole world ever...

Really? I guess you're more up-to-date on Hollywood than I. I usually see white Englishmen taking the slightly awkward sex-object role. Or maybe it's all to do with the films I see.

I don't see that I can be blamed for where you were born & what the blokes over there are like.

d, you made a dismissive statement that is, to me, offensive. I think it would be offensive to anyone, even to you, if you step back and place it in the appropriate context. Think outside the box, d!

[Lush]

So what's going on here? Tolkien rejected classical literature for the sagas, tales, mythologies of the northern peoples. But did he in fact inherit and maintain the tradition of male friendship from classical literature, and not incorporate the gender specifics of fairy tale?

To be honest, I haven't the faintest. I based my reading of the Fellowship on the language surrounding it, on the relationships that spring up between various members, and the responses they triggered in me were very different than the image you provided, where gender, I think, is specifically delineated and placed. I'm not sure what's acting here; my own biases, my strong attachment to the work in general, or if this is something that exists beyond me and if anyone else, male or female, has felt the same way. I'd like to know what others think.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lush

d, you made a dismissive statement that is, to me, offensive. I think it would be offensive to anyone, even to you, if you step back and place it in the appropriate context. Think outside the box, d!

If anything I said was offensive to you I apologise. I usually try to be generally offensive to everyone - purely so as not to be accused of favouritism - but if I have been specifically offensive to anyone in particular I can only say it wasn't intended.

If I can rephrase what I said:

''I don't see that I can be blamed for where anybody was born & what the blokes (or the women) anywhere are like.'

I hope now that everyone feels equally dismissed & offended.

[Lush]

Thanks, d. Now... how about the effects of the Alan Lee hardback on my head? I can't afford a copy right now, but I'll let you know how it goes.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Lush

Thanks, d. Now... how about the effects of the Alan Lee hardback on my head? I can't afford a copy right now, but I'll let you know how it goes.

You can have mine if you want - the movies have ruined it for me Can't look at the pix without thinking of the movie, so I've had to buy the new 50th anniversary h/b set as my 'special' set.

(You'll have to pay the postage though )

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Eowyn is remarkable for disobeying Theoden and for being desperate (and in any case I often think she is equally representative of a young man put in the same position).

Quite so. In terms of her disobedience to Theoden and reaction against an externally imposed stricture that she was not to go to war, a parallell may be drawn with Merry. Who is of course male and of a race referred to as not particularly warlike, but doughty and resistant when called upon. And Merry's experience in the War of the Ring is part of his development (alongside Pippin, who is in a similar position) into one of the prime movers behind the resistance in the Scouring of the Shire.

Another point occurs to me with regard to Eowyn. She is forbidden to go to war by Theoden because he wanted her to take charge of those that were left behind in case the Riders failed and the enemy came to Rohan. I believe that Eowyn specifically refers to the women of Rohan being trained in swordman(woman )ship so that they could defend themselves at need. So, while it is the men that ride to war, Rohirrim culture nevertheless does not consider women as wholly unsuitable for combat.

Not sure where those points take us, but I just thought that I would throw them into the mix ...

[Numenorean]

Given the elegant and highly intelligent posts that have gone before me in this thread, please excuse my clumsy attempts at focussing on only one aspect of a vast topic. I agree entirely with your viewpoint here Saucey:

The Saucepan Man
Tolkien's tale concerns only one part of Middle-earth…. Who is to say that there was not a society of warrior women in the far south or the far east of Middle-earth who played no (or little) part in the events which he relays?

I am going to put Haleth and her people forward as a clear example of the existence of warrior Women within the Legendarium. As a female warrior ‘of great heart and strength’, Haleth was not an exception amongst her people, indeed for the Haladin it would seem that mixed gender warriors were in fact the traditional ‘norm’.

From Unfinished Tales – Part Four - The Drúedain:
Regarding the Folk of Haleth JRRT states –

“…many of their warriors were women” and “This custom was evidently ancient; for their chieftainess Haleth was a renowned Amazon with a picked bodyguard of women.”

With this mixed gender army, the Haladin – despite being only few in numbers – were significantly skilled enough in military matters for their reputation amongst the Eldar, the Edain and the Orcs of Beleriand to be as follows:

“…they were esteemed as loyal allies and redoubtable warriors…..and they excelled in forest warfare. Indeed for long even those Orcs specially trained for this dared not set foot near their borders”

Christopher Tolkien seems somewhat bemused in the footnotes to this chapter that ‘nothing is said in The Silmarillion about the Amazonian element in their society, other than that the Lady Haleth was a warrior.’

Mister Underhill
Éowyn is also described in at least two instances in the professor's notes as an "amazon". I don't know if that means anything about anything, or if it offers any insights.

Perhaps the Profs notes infer that Éowyn was not the solitary Amazonian warrior-type that she is sometimes thought to be, but in fact she was just a more high-profile example of an ancient tradition that stretches back across the history of the Atani, as glimpsed in the writings concerning the Folk of Haleth.

In ‘real world’ history I find interesting parallels – maybe JRRT did too – between Haladin and Celtic society, where women participated in both warfare and kingship. Indeed, among the ancient Celts, women rulers and warriors were so common that when a group of Brigantian (Brit Celts) captives were brought to Rome in the reign of Claudius they automatically assumed his wife, Agrippina the Younger, was the ruler and ignored the Emperor while making their obeisance to her. There is also Bodiecia and her renowned Iceni army, which was described by the Roman historian Tacitus as having "in their ranks more women than fighting men." A final example (among a myriad of historical references) comes from another Roman author, Ammianus Marcellinus, who describes Gaulish(Celtic) women as being even stronger than their husbands and fighting with their fists and kicks at the same time "like missiles from a catapult".

Lush
All of the bonding, camaraderie, and shared responsibility, in my opinion could have easily occured within a mixed-gender setting

I completely agree. As history clearly shows, women were (and are) more than a match for and often surpass men in combat, therefore the often heard arguments that ‘there could be no females in the Fellowship because they were unable to compete with men in military matters’ or ‘that it wouldn’t be realistic’ (etc) are, in my opinion, nonsense.

[davem]

Numenorean. I can see where you're coming from, but I think its far more likely that Tolkien was emphasising the relative uniqueness of the people of Haleth (& of Eowyn) rather than holding them up as typical.

At the same time I accept that the way Tolkien uses the term 'Shieldmaiden' to refer to Eowyn does imply that she was not a total one-off (why would there be a term for women warriors if there weren't at least a few of them around?) Of course 'shieldmaiden' does derive from norse tradition:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shieldmaiden.

I can only repeat that women warriors are almost as rare as hen's teeth in Tolkien's writings - though not so rare as some readers might think, still rare enough that when they do appear its pointed out as something out of the ordinary.

As history clearly shows, women were (and are) more than a match for and often surpass men in combat,

is perhaps going a bit too far the other way, though.

[alatar]

Three questions that begged to be asked are: Do women in ME need to hold a sword to be considered worthy of the modern female reader? Is this what Lush and others are asking for, or do they want female characters in LotR to simply get more 'word time' in the books? If we had the Amazon army helping to break the seige of Gondor, would this satisfy if the female captains were given the same 'mention' as Halbarad? Or is the desire to have a female character that walks as far in our heads as do Sam and Frodo, and yet almost never wield a weapon, except at dire need?

And do we have data that would indicate that a mixed gender FotR would be as effective? Would there be a certain number of females in FotR that would be more or less effective? And when considering the question, we should constrain the characters to the same steps (from Bag End to Mount Doom etc and back) as taken by the currently all male Fellowship.

As a male, the question of gender never occcured when I read the LotR as I was just so enthralled by the story, writing, characters, etc that I didn't think about nor care what the gender roles were. Do new readers, either male and female, now start off with that perspective?

[Bêthberry]

Exhibit A:

Originally Posted by Lush

But what I was talking about is a general sense of the lack of importance of gender when it comes to the Fellowship's story. . . . Personally, the "maleness" of the Fellowship does not register with me anymore. I pay very close attention to gender specifics and the way they apply to the females that come up in LotR, but never to the males.

Exhibit B:

Originally Posted by alatar

the question of gender never occcured when I read the LotR as I was just so enthralled by the story, writing, characters, etc that I didn't think about nor care what the gender roles were. Do new readers, either male and female, now start off with that perspective?

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, I submit to you, are these two arguing the same case?