Do I need to believe in demons to be expected to know what they are? You make a good point re: propaganda, but I don't think the author is responsible for the change of perception (from religious concepts to human - especially given that he included Sam's quote when he was talking about beings he DID intend to be human). I've read quite a bit on the subject since yesterday, and I think I am right about the goblins/orcs - is it Tolkien's fault that we are so sensitive to racism (not claiming that's inherently bad, mind you) that we see it where it wasn't meant? Especially where it was specifically intended to be something else? Isn't the burden at least partially on us?
It not being intended doesn't mean it isn't there - I can follow Larry that far. The author's intention is important - I'm not a big fan of "the author is dead" dogmas - but that doesn't mean other readings aren't valid. And some things that were in fact on purpose or at least conscious are still problematic to readers now, and to many readers even at the time of publication - primarily the suggestion that one's race (or gender) determines most of one's essential characteristics. The orcs are merely the most blatant example, because their race's essential characteristic is being evil.
I agree with that, and I do think authors are at least partly responsible for what readers interpret from their works, BUT, I'm always interested in the question - is it truly racist if the author isn't thinking that at all? Is that fair? How could he have included the mythology associated with light/dark, good/evil and all his talk about stars and moonlight?? It wouldn't be remotely the same story.
To some readers it's racist and sexist, and I don't think that's a reading that requires much in the way of misreading or wilfully misrepresenting.
That doesn't mean that people who take other things away from the books are closet racists and sexists for enjoying them (well, I suppose "acrackedmoon" does think they are, but there are limits to my devil's advocating).
I'm not so sure it is a matter of distinguishing, or if it's more to do with applying it. It seems clear that he based ALL his races on real mythologies/histories, so I don't find it odd that a Christian would be drawn to include the Jewish history. Is it racist to admit that different races exist and may have shown certain historical tendencies? I don't think it always is, unless the information is being used in an unflattering way. Can no writer use a historical culture for inspiration if that culture still exists in a similar way?
The difference between culture and race is fairly crucial there, I think.
And as John and I were reading last night, there is proof that the dwarves were originally based on Norse mythology (pre-Hobbit), and eventually evolved into the more noble dwarves we see during and post-Hobbit.
Of course, I don't think anyone can doubt that. But then he has to go and say himself that they remind him of Jews. Not that he'd be the first to think that; I think it's safe to say that when Wagner wrote his Alberich in the Ring Cycle, his anti-Semitic views must have played a role.
Unfortunately, I feel like I look like I'm making excuses, but I am just telling you how I've interpreted these things while reading. I always thought Eowyn was stupidly impetuous when she didn't listen to Theoden telling her how much the people needed her. I thought that at the end, she lost her crush and met someone she could actually love (rather than being married off for convenience or ties) and realized that great people (she is more than just a woman) have certain responsibilities. It always seemed more like "growing up" to me than falling back into a "place." So anyway. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows.
I'll have to get back to this after my class, time to go now.
You better. It's fun. Plus, I have more things to say about Eowyn.
I felt those were excuses, too, when I read acrackedmoon's arguments. You can always claim that it's a coincidence, but under the circumstances that does seem to strain credulity. It just so happens that the most prominent of the very few women fighters in Tolkien is shown as repenting of her childishness and impulsivity in going to fight, and then shown as mature when she accepts to forego those things and return to her traditional woman's role. Not before she has won a great victory in woman-to-Ringwraith combat, true; but then, Tolkien rather makes it look like it's fate and the doom of the Witch-King's "no man alive can kill me" deal that do the job for her.
In LotR, it really is all Galadriel, and even she has most of her more independent moments in the Silm rather than LotR - in LotR she is powerful and a leader, yes, but still mostly in a nurturing, motherly role (with the obvious exception in her, to borrow a term from TV Tropes that really does not stroke with the rest of my post but who cares, crowning moment of awesome with the Ring).
The racist elements in Tolkien's writing
29/01/2012 01:31:02 PM
- 2494 Views
She has some points, of course.
29/01/2012 02:25:32 PM
- 1274 Views
Quite a few points
29/01/2012 02:40:45 PM
- 1368 Views
I don't find the tone blunt; I find it leading, patronizing and often wrong or inferring too much.
30/01/2012 01:43:27 AM
- 1282 Views
Agreed - reading it, I struggled to find any redeeming qualities
30/01/2012 07:32:58 PM
- 1366 Views
Agreed, in general. The tremendous bad faith and sophistry turn me off, though.
29/01/2012 09:31:04 PM
- 1472 Views
Mostly agreed with the article, but thought she undermined herself with her own racism.
29/01/2012 02:50:11 PM
- 1341 Views
Just read your Twitter convo... nice try, but looks like wasted effort. *NM*
29/01/2012 10:37:08 PM
- 578 Views
Well, I'll be honest.
29/01/2012 10:34:46 PM
- 1216 Views
Let me try to summarize some of her points with the invective filtered out, then.
29/01/2012 10:48:24 PM
- 1411 Views
Thank you.
29/01/2012 11:10:13 PM
- 1441 Views
What the hell, might as well go and play devil's advocate, right?
30/01/2012 04:50:30 PM
- 1348 Views
I expected that.
30/01/2012 05:39:59 PM
- 1246 Views
Of course you did. I'm predictable that way.
30/01/2012 10:28:10 PM
- 1234 Views
Re: Of course you did. I'm predictable that way.
31/01/2012 12:39:46 AM
- 1134 Views
Re: Of course you did. I'm predictable that way.
31/01/2012 08:38:46 PM
- 1178 Views
I <3 you, but there are several very key things we are not going to agree on.
31/01/2012 10:02:22 PM
- 1598 Views
Hmm?
31/01/2012 10:10:22 PM
- 1167 Views
Yeah. I got to reading Encyclopedia of Arda just now, and it told me the same thing.
31/01/2012 10:35:54 PM
- 1091 Views
As a sort of group answer (I've been mostly absent from forums the past two days)
31/01/2012 10:45:55 PM
- 1432 Views
I don't mind if you tell me I'm out of line here, but
31/01/2012 11:55:04 PM
- 1272 Views
I'm rarely ever offended
01/02/2012 01:54:58 AM
- 1457 Views
She was referring specifically to the Twitter "conversation" I had with the blogger.
01/02/2012 09:05:28 AM
- 1240 Views
Yes.
01/02/2012 10:47:22 AM
- 1371 Views
It makes me wonder what she thinks is happening in Zimbabwe, for example.
01/02/2012 11:13:11 AM
- 1408 Views
I've been thinking about that.
01/02/2012 11:29:18 AM
- 1198 Views
That blog post was mostly good, but the exception is a rather large one.
01/02/2012 08:35:57 PM
- 1120 Views
What's a neckbeard? And why am I supposed to care? *NM*
30/01/2012 01:29:07 AM
- 650 Views
neckbeards are when the person (either intentionally or through misfortunate genetics)...
30/01/2012 03:21:09 AM
- 1177 Views
acrackedmoon is a racist, sexist bore. And I don't even like Tolkien. *NM*
30/01/2012 01:14:17 PM
- 1309 Views