" Politically Correct, Modern Hobbit "

[Frodo Baggins]

I enjoyed reading your posts Grond and Readwryt, while I was laughing on the floor. I believe P.J may also give some of the roles of the dwarves to women in some sort of attempt to be "non-descriminatory" adn an "equal opportunity employer".There would be no smoking or drinking in the movie, because we would not want kids to be influenced by a drunk orc or a dwarf with a pipe blowing smoke rings. There would be no magic, because children would think they could be conjuring goblins in the wave of a hand, and that would problaby lead to worship of some dark religion. I am not against women, but I dislike when male roles in the origional story are given to females in the movie. It just seems unlike the origional story that you so loved. Picture Gandalf as an old which. You get what I am trying to say. I must agree with everyone else in that if a Hobbit movie was made, it would have to stay very true to the book.

[Greymantle]

Which? What's a which?

[Thorondor]

Do you mean Witch? Which witch/which is which?:D :rolleyes:

[Proudfoots]

We have to remember that Tolkien wrote these books a long time ago. What goes then, doesn't always go now. But i agree that the movies should be as accurate as possible to the books.

The hobbit and the lord of the rings were the fairy tales that i grew up with, i had only heard of the more common, disney bastardized versions of other stories, and i am not that screwed up.

I would be very unhappy to see a P-C version of either story.

though having Liv Tyler in a movie is only a good thing. Tolkien did kind of ignore the female sex (except for Ewoyn)

'foots

[Grond]

Gosh, I always thought that Tolkien's world was an alternate universe and have never really considered it a "fairy tale". But, of course, I didn't read it for the first time until I was nineteen, so loving it so much as an adult may make me jaded.

I've also read that he really considered Middle Earth as our very world in a different time. I'm sure some of our members will love enlightening us about this thought.

[Proudfoots]

Please don't think that i characterize Lord of the Rings with a Disney movie. I was raised on JRR's books, the first book i ever read on my own was the Hobbit, and i continue to read both it and LotR at least once a year, my girlfriend teases me about the Lord of the Rings being my bible because i spend so much time on it.

There is so much depth to Tolkien's writing, each and every time i read one of his books i get more insight, and discover new facts and facets.

and please, don't let disney ever buy the rights.

i can't imagine Smaug and Sauron holding hands and singing an evil ballad.
'foots

[Aerin]

i can't imagine Smaug and Sauron holding hands and singing an evil ballad.
ROTFL!!!!! That is so funny..."We're evil dragons, but today we learned that it's not nice to be bad!"

As for the PC female vs. male roles - *shudders* I don't think that women could have handled the trek from the Shire to the Crack of Doom. I am not saying that a woman couldn't have handled it, but it would have been more difficult for a woman than for a man. I do not find Tolkien to be sexist at all. His story was much more believeable than having Arwen (a.k.a. Xena) rescuing Frodo from the Ringwraiths at the Ford.

[Grond]

Okay, I've been thinking this for a week now but have been afraid to post it because I was afraid that I would offend all the female members of the forum. Well, here goes.

I don't think JRRT is being sexist by portraying woman in less physically demanding roles. First, there's Eowyn who has a very physical and important role in the book. But, outside of her, there aren't any roles of this nature and shouldn't be. Where did we get off on the Xena - Warrior Princess and Buffy the you know who kick. In the history of the world, I can only think of one true female warrior. You know, one that actually gets in the trenches, so to speak, and dukes it out with the guys. (By the way, that would have been Joan of Arc).

I'm sure there are others, but on the whole, many, many, many less than your males. That's not a swipe or a knock on woman. If anything, it's attributable to God Almighty. The simple fact is that he made women and men differently. He designed men to hunt and bring food home... he designed women to bear children and be the home supporter. ***Ducks as debris is thrown at him*** I don't say this to offend anyone. Women are as intelligent as men and have just as important a role as men, it is just a different role. I can say this with honesty as my wife is a Sr. Vice President of a major insurance company and makes twice as much money as I do.

Lastly, can anyone cite a reference in any of Tolkien's works where an elf-maid bears a sword. I've looked and I can't find one. But I could be wrong. After all, my wife still calls me a chauvinist.

[Talierin]

This is an excellent article on the very subject: http://greenbooks.theonering.net/anwyn/files/111099.html

[Greymantle]

Leave it to Tal to post a great link! :)

[ReadWryt]

I cannot believe that I read this...any of this!

We have to remember that Tolkien wrote these books a long time ago. What goes then, doesn't always go now. But i agree that the movies should be as accurate as possible to the books.

Who CARES what "went" when Tolkien wrote the books...it's HIS WORLD fer chrissake! I think that were you to research ancient Europe and the role that Women played in most aspects of life back then you would find that there was a good reason why Joan of Arc was such an anachronism...there really WEREN'T a lot of Female Warriors...or even women with swords. This whole conversation is like saying that a modern production of Tom Sawyer shouldn't have the word "******" in it because these are different times we live in, when in fact THAT was a WORD USED in the Time of the Story!!

Granted, this is a mythology and not history, but Tolkien meant it to be a Mythical Pre-History that England lacked. Women's Rights Groupls complain about thousands of years of oppression for a reason, they WERE oppressed...and kept un-educated in anything but looking nice, making babies and running a household for a great many years. Why quibble over whether it's P.C. to portray what is a mythical past differently to suit the contemporary audience?

[Valinorean]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
I cannot believe that I read this...any of this!

Who CARES what "went" when Tolkien wrote the books...it's HIS WORLD fer chrissake!

I agree with you, RW, but I would add that even if JRRT had wanted to include stronger female roles, he may not have been able to. There are many modern male authors that have an incredibly difficult time writing females, and JRRT would have been hard-pressed to get into the female psyche over half a century ago. I think this helps explain why the women (or elf-maidens) that were NOT powerful (i.e. masculine?) are given such little attention.

BUT:
Here's another side to the theory that the XenArwen was created was to be "politically correct" . . .

JRRT was the original inspiration for what is now a huge genre of Sci-Fi/Fantasy literature, which branched off into games (D&D), comics, and a host of other entertainment forms.

Women are very often portayed in those media as warriors . . . Large busted, curvaceous warriors. The portrayal of women like this is NOT PC. It is all about sex, really.

But is it possible that "the bastard Peter Jackson" thinks he is giving people what they want, based on the evidence of the culture that has grown from these books?

:eek:

[Grond]

Val... I hate to disagree with you but maybe you need to reread the TT and TROTK. I have never identified more with any female character in any book I have ever read than Eowyn. He made me feel her pain at being the expected prize of Wormtongue... her hollow love for Aragorn, her bitter resignation that it would be better to die in the saddle than to lack love in this life and her blossoming upon finally realizing the reality of "twuuu luvvv" with Faramir.

I think if JRRT had wanted to portray a Xen/Arwen Warrior Princess, he could have done so magnificently. He just didn't want that role to intrude. The two main quests of the book were the destruction of the One Ring and the return of the rightful king of Arnor and Gondor.

***Ducks and hopes that he hasn't offended Val by disagreeing with her/him again*** (by the way, are you a him or a her?)

[Greymantle]

Originally posted by Grond
finally realizing the reality of "twuuu luvvv" with Faramir.


Grond, you need to stop quoting corny medieval movies today.... ;)

[Valinorean]

Originally posted by Grond

***Ducks and hopes that he hasn't offended Val by disagreeing with her/him again*** (by the way, are you a him or a her?)

Last question first - I am a her.

Poor Grond - you don't have to duck! You don't really disagree with what I intended to say, just with my clumsy phrasing . . . I'll try to clarify:

When I wrote:

" . . .even if JRRT had wanted to include stronger female roles, he may not have been able to . . ."

I should have written:

. . .even if JRRT had wanted to include larger feminine roles, he may not have be able to . . ."

I agree wholeheartedly that JRRT did a smashing job with Eowyn; BUT, I also consider her the strongest female character in LotR. Her femininity just doesn't shine through for me. I get the bitterness, but I see that more as a reaction to being treated like a weak woman. I saw her love for Aragorn as an attraction to his power, which I didn't feel was very feminine, either. Not BAD, but also not feminine.

Am I being a chauvinist by equating femininity with weakness? I am having a terrible time expressing this, but it isn't the lack of a Warrior Princess that I noticed. It is the lack of a feminine (fainting, weepy, lovestruck-into-hysterics, girlie-girlish) female lead.

Not that I want one. The mostly-male thing never really bothered me. Messing with the word of the mighty JRRT. Now that bothers me.

P.S. Is there a length of post that is considered rude? I see that 10,000 characters is all that is possible - I promise not to go that long . . .

[Grond]

Oh Val. I guess we'll just have to disagree on this one and, in all fairness, I will differ to your wisdom. After all, you are a woman and I am a man. You're perspective and judgement should be better in these matters than mine.

I give!!

[Orin]

I would hate to see a PC hobbit or LOTR (save as a jest). But I'm shocked to hear that people think women could not make it to the Cracks of Doom. I'm going to pretend that everyone is young and uninformed. Women could endure the trip, better so than males. They could not, however, carry as heavy a pack. As for enduring pain, hardship, starvation etc. It has been shown that women handle these things better than do men. They may screech louder about it and complain more, but they would be able to make it. But it's all acedemic anyway. There are no Cracks of Doom, well, maybe on Hilary Clinton..........

[Walter]

I do agree with Orin, as far as the post concerns the ability of women to endure fatigue. And except for the last sentence of course, which was totally unnecessary!
And I would appreciate if of our members could refrain from showing off their political tendency...

[Elanor2]

I think that Tolkien could and did write about strong female caracters, specially in the Silmarillion. The courage and endurance of Luthien beats most of the male caracters. Many female Noldors chose exile and on their own, when they could have stayed in the Blessed Realm doing neddlework! And not necessarily just to follow a husband or beloved. Galadriel had none and she chose to go, enduring a cruel trekking over the ice in equal footing with the male Noldors because she wanted to.

If Tolkien did not include more strong female warriors in LOTR is perhaps because he was more worried about other subjects. After all, LOTR is a book about a war, and soldiers even nowadays are mostly males, so it is normal that the emphasis is given to male caracters. I have never felt that Tolkien writing was particularly sexist. If he had written the book today, he might have included more females, but not necessarily.

I did not like at the beginning the idea of including Arwen in the movie as a warrioress, but it was just because I like to respect the great original where possible. On the other hand, considering that Arwen is descendant from a bunch of very strong females of her Elf and Human sides, it does not seem too bad a change. One that perhaps Tolkien himself would have approved.

[DGoeij]

Welcome Elanor2,

no doubt about the female power in Middle Earth in my mind. But I do not like the way PJ is trying to show this. I could have taken it when Arwen would have brought Frodo across the Fords, but waving a sword at the Nazgul crying: Come and claim him!.......
yeez, why not pack an M-60 and storm Barad-Dur while you're at it?

[Orin]

Sorry Chief Entropy Officer. I appologize for letting my political tendencies show. I forget that while this is still a relatively free country, the message board is not. I do reserve the right to keep my signature line, as it complies with the board's directives on such an item. I am sorry if I let my work spill over into my fun. I will also refrain from any more Hitlar...Hilary Cracks.:D

[Grond]

Welcome to our little forum Elanor2. I appreciate your opinion on Arwen having a greater action role but feel that the changes, in many instances, alter the true message that Mr. Tolkien was trying to convey. The scene cited with Arwen riding Asfaloth (Glorfindel's horse for goodness sake) and defying the Nazgul at the Fords is a slap in the face to Frodo and the strength, stamina and resolve that come to him in that very scene in the book.

Adding something of value would be tolerable... but adding plot and storylines for the sake of developing a non-existent role at the expense of existing roles is absolutely, positively unforgivable.

[Walter]

Welcome to this forum, Elanor :)
In Tolkiens world - I mean the real world he was living in - and at the time he was writing the LotR or the Sil there was a different understanding about the roles of men and women, female emancipation - in the form we know it today - was not yet invented. Taking this into consideration, Tolkien showed a pretty modern and courageous way of creating characters, when he invented Luthien or Eowyn.

----
Orin if You really are a teacher I pity Your pupils...

[Elanor2]

Agree with you, if such is the case. I have not seen the movie yet (arrives here next week). If it were just a case of replacing Glorfindel with Arwen, fine. Glorfindel had a great role as a healer and warrior in the little treck to the ford that could have been enhanced for Arwen without diminishing the real meening of the episode.

But if they have done it at the expense of Frodo`s role, when for the first time consciously resists the combined power of the ring and the ringwrights, it is wrong. The scene was meant to show the hobbit's endurance that proves that he has the back-bone that the ring-bearer must have, despite appearances and earlier mistakes. If they do not convey that message, they have failed to capture the real spirit of the scene, and perhaps the book.

I am impatient to see the movie and judge for myself how far they have gone adapting the book.

Regards. Elanor2

[Grond]

Elanor2, the stealing of the scene is portrayed in all the trailers from the movie. It shows her on Asfaloth with sword drawn and Frodo across the saddle. She yells defiantely, "If you want him, take him!" or some such drivel. But, you're right, I too am looking forward to the film.

[Tar-Steve]

Actually it's": "If you want him, come and claim him ... but first ... give me a moment to freshen up and put on something more comfortable" ... I think ...

[DGoeij]

I think its more like: If you want him, come and claim him, for I am your worst nightmare!

At which I guess a trembling Nazgul will ask: What? A female ghostbuster?

To merely repeat what Grond and Elanor said, to be honest. Glorfindel could have been replaced by Arwen for the sake of bringing her more on the forefront. But from what I have seen yet, she starts waving a sword at Nine, boasting about and personally bringing the flood down on them. Yuk.

[Nimawae's hope]

Oh, brother. You all have it wrong! It goes more like this: If you want him come and claim him, and if you do I'll kick your butts down the river so far you may be the first wraiths to be put into orbit!

Good grief! Whatever this female is on, she had better get off quick,'cause Aragorn might just get PO and kick HER butt down the river! If this was what Arwen acted like, she certainly gained none of the dignity that her grandmother, Galadriel, had. Maybe Sauron gave Arwen a drug just so his Ringwraiths would have some sort of comedic relief for their long, boring journey before they chopped some heads off.

[Orin]

Dear Walter,

Let's not stoop to personal attacks. I turn out fine, responsible students.

Thank you,
Orin :D

[DGoeij]

Leave out the personal AND the politics, thank you.
If I'd care for political prejudice I'd visit a political forum and I wish to make up my own mind about somebody else. Leave it with that you guys, please.:mad:

[Walter]

Aye, DGoeij...

[Grond]

Walter, I'm with you on this one. DGoeij, how can one possibly respond to a thread entitled, "Politically correct, modern hobbit" without speaking of politics???? One must keep one's perspective when "surfing" through the threads.

[Aerin]

Ok, obviously I didn't explain my opinion thoroughly enough. What I meant was that most women would probably not do well on the trek from the Shire to Mordor. Undoubtedly, there are/were women who could have made it. Personally, I know I would have had a heck of a time going all that way, but I might be able to make it. Don't get me wrong, I am for equal treatment for women, being female myself, but I don't believe that all women are physically equal to all men. Even the men who were in the Fellowship were the toughest of the tough. Sam and Frodo barely survived the trek through the last stretch of Mordor. Aragorn was used to covering great distances, being a Ranger he was accustomed to hardships. Legolas and Gilmi were stout-hearted, but they were also used to "roughing it".
I am sorry if anyone interpreted my comment to mean something else. I did not mean it the way it was taken.

[DGoeij]

I'm not sure I completely get your point Grond (language problem maybe), but I will react on bases of what I make of it.
Politically correct is merely a statement in my view, referring to a 'every person is equal to another' attitude in making a film, writing a book, acting in contact with other human beings etc.

Politics is discussing the current, past and also future of your country, mostly focused on the government. (There is a heck of a lot more, I'm a political science student, you know, but this is enough for this reply)

People have different normative views on both subjects, but to me they are not something that is to be mixed when discussing politically correctness in the works of professor Tolkien.

I'm off topic I know, sorry about that.

edit:
To get back on subject. Arwen is a female Elf, she has a small part in the original LOTR story. To emphasise her existence in the movie (she being a great part in the encouragement of Aragorn), she gets more screen time. Totally acceptable, I really mean that. I don't know if it was out of political correctnes also, but I do not really care.
What I do care avout is that maybe this, resulted in a sword-waving obnoxious bad-taste suprise in the movie that truly wreck some great parts in the original story.

[Grond]

DGoeij, politics by their very nature are fluid and ever changing. So, your equating them to any form of equalibrium is misleading and incorrect. One can hardly make a determination of what would be politically correct this minute without understanding and discussing the political views that are going on behind the scenes. After all, after the next public opinion poll, political correctness could change once again.

I, for one, have seen a tremendous change in political normalcy and political correctness in the last three months. People who used to be strongly anti-death penalty are now screaming "string em up". That's just one item. I'm not sure that a politically correct vision of The Hobbit would not also have changed in the last three months.

That is all that my point suggested. Since political correctness is ever changing, it is hard to address a single question without addressing the underlying causes. I wasn't try to be "difficult" just realistic.

[DGoeij]

Grond, I tried to oversimplify, to make my point clear. Not good perhaps, but you could build a wall with books discussing political correctness. Of course it is fluent and ever changing, that's the most interesting part about politics and its sphere of influence!
What I tried to seperate is discussing current political views about US (or any other) government and political corectness in the works of professor Tolkien.
Also because I'm quite sure that the term 'political correct', althought containing the word political, has grown as a meaning of its own. Mostly referring to the 'all persons are equal' attitude I mentioned before, than to only current political issues. Yet I do agree with you, pinpointing it to one meaning only, is inaccurate.

[Walter]

Do I get that right: The LotR would be politically correct if there was a statement like: "Aragorn is just another Orc"?

*ducks and runs hiding*

[Grond]

Once again DGoeij, I must disagree. Political correctness, especially here in the States, does not necessarily equal middle of the road. Political correctness means exactly what it says. With the media, political parties, the government and the people themselves pushing differing political arguments and themes, it may be politically correct to identify with the poor dejected Taliban people one day (09/10) and advocate nuking the entire country the next (09/11). This is an extreme example and for the most part politically correct is not quite so fluid..... but it is none the less very fluid and changes regularly.

At least that's the way I see it.... but I will argue with you no longer and let's get back to the issues at hand.

[Orin]

Walter,
A more politicly correct statement would be, Orcs are just misunderstood and deserve the same respect accorded Aragorn. And Aragorn is a king and is therefore not a good thing because he is "above" the other people. Also, to refer to Hobbits and Dwarfs as being shorter in stature is hurtful. They are Verticly challenged, or stature challenged. Sauron is not evil, he just has a different world view. Neither is gondor good, it too has a different world view.

In America, political correctness tries to put everything and everyone on the same level, almost always to the point of being ridiculous. A person doesn't like the term Snowman. It is insensitive to females. She believes that by building snowmen, children are turning out to be insensitive of other genders. There are other examples, too numerous to give, but still equally, if not more, ridiculous.

Orin

[Rogar]

I am not thrilled about all the changes the movie is making to a great tale but for me Middle Earth will always be a place in my mind. The characters are etched so vividly in my imagination that I can not conceive that a movie could change them in any way.

Trying to take a great work like this and make it non-offensive to the entire movie going population is ridiculous but I gues it make financial sense.

I only worry that young people who have never read the books might not read them thinking that they "Already know what happens" I remember the first time I read The Hobbit and got to the part of the book with the Trolls. I am sure you can all remember that scene and each of us probably has our own interpretation of it. I want my kids to read the books themselves so that they can conjur up their own images of Hobbits, Elves, Ents and especially Tom Bombadil :)

[Walter]

Rogar: Many of our current members are not quite happy about the changes having been made in the film as You will notice in various threads in the movie forum (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=19) and I agree that financial aspects may have played a big role in e.g. increasing Liv Tyler's role.

Oh and: Welcome to this humble forum, Rogar :)

[Rogar]

I read through the posts you mentioned and there are some good arguments. The trailer I saw with her facing the Nazgul and telling them to come claim him.. yeah right.. like that would happen. I plan on going to see the movie and I am betting I will like it less after I have seen it.

I wish I had found this forum a long time ago.. thanks for the welcome.

[Grond]

Hail and well met Rogar. This forum shall be your haven to escape the toubles of the outside world and immerse yourself in Tolkien lore.

Besides, we pass one dam gud time here, cher. And dat's fer dam shur!!

[Rogar]

Tolkien has always been my escape from this world. Now that I have found this "fellowship" It will be a grander world for sure. Hopefully I will be able to add to these forums as much as I gain.

Thanks once again for the welcome and I will stop posting off topic now :)

[DGoeij]

Welcome Rogar. Have fun, expand your knowledge, as I have been able to.

Grond, thanks for the info. I have a different view on the term altogether. It's clearly used somewhat differently here in the Netherlands.
As for the attitude towards orcs by the free people of ME, that is not politically correct I guess. Slaying them without mercy, no questions asked.
Clearly the humans fighting on the side of darkness, like the ones at Helms deep were given a pardon, not so for the orcs. But of course, the orcs were created to be as evil as possible in a very primitive way. As POW's one would have to guard them forever.

[HLGStrider]

If I mispelt that, I apologize.
Have you ever seen the movie Yentel, where the girl, dressed as a boy, has to arm wrestle the boy? A woman is a little bit weaker than a man. I am one and know I could never make the Cracks of Doom. I'd fade before Rivendale and be complaining about not having had a bath in weeks.
I also plan to see the movie and will probably like it. It is best to be optimistic about these sort of things.
On another subject:
I see Eowyn as very feminine. I could relate to every bit of her romance with Aragorn (Except the wanting to die. I never took it that far with my infatuations). She gave me strength and still keeps me looking for my Faramir (Sappy music is now playing. Your choice between Romeo and Juliet, Affair to Remember, or the Han and Leia theme from Star Wars.);)