Pullman rips on LOTR, others

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Child

There are passages throughout Lewis's books and his letters that show a similar ambivalence about female beauty. He is both intrigued and distrustful of it. I am as far from being a fashion plate as you can imagine. Still, it saddens me that Lewis had such difficulty appreciating the female form and figure or in acknowledging that physical beauty and goodness can be linked. His writings show no comparable problem depicting men who are brave, virile, great warriors, etc, which of course are characteristics frequently ascribed to the male gender both in fantasy and real life.

This discussion does relate to Tolkien because his own writings are a contrast to Lewis in this respect. Galadriel, Luthien, Arwen, Eowyn....Tolkien's writings have many mature and beautiful women who were good to the essence, yet capable of exercising a spell over the men near them. Just witness Gimli and Galadriel, or Frodo and Goldberry. (Whoops! I almost typed Bethberry...)

Fascinating stuff there. One accusation levelled at Tolkien is that he possibly idealises women and creates women who are up on a pedestal to be admired. For one, that would set him in direct opposition to Lewis who displays a sense of feeling threatened by female beauty and the inherent power that beauty bestows on a woman (as witnessed in the beautiful White Witch, and played to perfection by the weirdly beautiful Tilda Swinton). But for another, Tolkien's women are not at all idealised. They may be beautiful and compelling but they are also: heroic (Luthien), power-hungry (Galadriel), independently minded (Arwen - who chooses an eternity apart from her father), stubborn (Eowyn), tricksy (Goldberry), disobedient (Aredhel) etc.

I find a lot of 'meat' in Tolkien's women. And what's even better is that they are all different, and they all have failings. And they appeal or not to all types of readers. Some find Luthien heroic, some find her silly (winks at Mithalwen ); some find Aredhel tragic, whereas I think she was childish for upping and leaving her husband in that way. Some take from Eowyn a picture of a doomed young woman whereas I see her more as a symbol of the doomed youth of England in 1914. All of which just to show how we can read so much into these complex characters.

I think that you can also see this in the women Pullman creates - and he is remarkably good at this (I have to add, my modern day heroines are Lyra Belacqua and Hermione Granger (a stubborn swot with unruly hair and a penchant for punching out bullies, a girl after my own heart)). There are rounded women, who can be beautiful without being 'airheads' as we see also in Tolkien's women, and they can be both enchanting and incredibly dangerous too - like the fabulous creation of Mrs Coulter...brrrr...

Tolkien and Pullman share something in that their women are allowed to be women, they are also allowed to fail and falter, but they are always given a chance of redemption after doing Very Bad Things and that is heartening when you read about them! You do not get that with Lewis.

Originally Posted by Folwren

Their ideals had left the simple, down to earth character - the type that could let them play out in the woods and play - and flown upwards to catch the attention of the boys and society.

It may seem odd but most women do not choose hair, clothes and make-up just to please men (in fact most men would probably prefer a woman who walked around in the nip ). They do it to please themselves. Choosing to wear red lipstick is as valid a choice as choosing to wear none at all. Fashion can be as much a form of play as is running around playing horsey or whatever.