Females – Missing in Action!

[Estelyn Telcontar]

How is LotR - well, all of Middle-earth for that matter - affected by the females who are not there? (I was inspired to this topic by Fordim's thread on women in LotR but decided that it would not fit into that discussion well, so here’s a new thread for it.) Aside from the dead mothers mentioned on Birdland’s legendary Matricide thread, there are whole races which are missing all or many of their females.

Ents – no females

The most notable example is that of the Ents. The Entwives are lost to them, presumably all dead or so far away that they are no longer available. What happens as a result? First of all, of course, the race is dying out. Only the longevity of the Ents ensures that there are still some of them existing. This robs them of a future, so that I would add that the loss of their females causes loss of hope. Hope is an important part of the female role in the LotR! (Arwen giving Aragorn hope is the most notable example.)

Another effect is the loss of the Entwives’ domesticating influence. The race loses balance without the female factor. We see the Ents getting lonesome, depending on their trees for the companionship that they should have found in their wives. (The comparison to shepherds is given by Tolkien himself, quite appropriately.) They are growing wilder, some of them losing their mobility and becoming tree-like. In that process, they are also losing sentience, falling asleep - and losing the gift of speech, communication!.

Dwarves – few females

Another race is shown to have only a minority of females – the Dwarves. This is not evident so much in LotR itself, but information is given in Appendix A. Besides their diminishing as a race (a logical choice of Tolkien’s, since the story was supposedly set in our pre-history, and dwarves no longer exist today), what else did that cause? There are very few facts given, but we do read that they are “engrossed in their crafts” and that their one great weakness is for gold and other precious metals and gems. The emphasis on their work is one reason many of them do not marry and suggests to me that they have concentrated on material possessions instead of relationships – which could be considered a masculine trait, though it is not limited to males nor typical of all of them. Was the influence of their women ignored, or were those so tuned into the material set of mind that they no longer had that more feminine priority of personal relationships? We can only speculate (which often makes for the most interesting discussions here! ).

Orcs – unknown females

We’ve speculated on the topic of orc reproduction; Tolkien does say that it is comparable to human reproduction, which presupposes the presence of female orcs. However, there is not one mention, not even a hint of them in any of Tolkien’s works. It seems to me that the type of society the orcs have is exclusively concentrated on fighting. Would they have been a different race if their females had had a more prominent role? Or would those have been corrupted versions of women, little Shelobs, egging their men on to even worse deeds?

City Dwellers/Soldiers – temporary loss of females

In both Rohan and Gondor, the women (and children) are sent away for a time while battle is made. (Except in Peter Jackson’s movies, where it is necessary to have them near so that two cute kids can have their cameo appearance! ) This is for their protection, of course, and to ensure the future of their people, so it’s a positive phenomenon. The men were able to fight better without the nagging worry about the survival of their families. Having them in the city might have made them more susceptible to give up and in, just to attempt to save their people’s lives.

However, I remember reading about the history of Minas Tirith, though I can’t find the reference right now, that the kings were more concerned with the glory of their kingdom and remained childless (wifeless too?) – another case of concentration on abstract ‘things’ rather than relationships, which caused the downfall of the Kings of Gondor.

Individuals

Bilbo, Frodo, Boromir – these are a few examples of numerous bachelors in LotR. We’ve discussed some of those on old threads, including my all-time favorite, The One Ring?, but it might be interesting to post our thoughts on them here as well. Where was female influence missing in their lives? What might have been different had they been married? Could a woman have balanced gaps in their characters?


It may not have been a conscious authorial intention, but I think that Tolkien shows us the necessity of both genders, both in society and personally. Where one or the other is lacking, persons and peoples are missing important aspects.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Two quick thoughts on this very interesting topic.

Another category of largely "missing persons" is the figure of the "mother". In this case the individuals are not simply hiding. Instead, the author has "done them in."! As was discussed on the Tolkien as matricide thread, the motif of the missing/dead mother was a common one in fairy tale, and Tolkien uses this device extensively, whether for reasons of plot or as an unconscious reflection of his personal experience. An extraordinary number of the main characters in LotR had their mothers die. We see future mothers like Rosie and Arwen, and happily married women like Goldberry who have no children, but few who are 'current' mothers. The missing Entwives are, in a sense, also part of this category.

There is one mother/son exception: a pair who do appear at the beginning and end of the book. That would be Lobelia and Lotho! Whoops, that wasn't exactly the loving image I had in mind. I do wish that Tolkien had found a way to incorporate the mother motif into the tale. For example, we are given Galadriel as the "Virgin Mary" but at this point in life she seems far removed from the concerns a mother would have. (Or is she a loving grandmother?? Hmm...) Everything we know about Tolkien suggests he was a dedicated father and a dependable husband. Surely he had images and experiences to draw upon in this respect, even if he had lost his own mother.

But I'd also like to add a word of caution....We should remember that not only are there groups of females missing from the book but also many types of men. You could make a long list of varying types of men ---differentiated by occupation, social condition, geographical location -- who simply don't appear. This is not to say that they necessarily should have appeared. I am sure the author had quite careful reasons for who he put in and who he left out. And yet every so often, I keep looking for someone who's not there.

*************

Regarding dwarf women.... Esty - My initial feeling about dwarf women was different than yours. I actually envisioned them as craftspeople rather than persons simply desiring to pile up gold and jewels. As artists, they wanted the freedom that being single lends to a person: freedom of schedule and such (which I am sorely lacking at the moment! ). That still means they turned aside from relationships in favor of something else.

I could be mistaken in this, but there is so little written on dwarf women that it's difficult to say.

[Mithalwen]

If it may be permitted to mention something "indelicate"(and having read "Hobbit Sex ed" I hope this will be OK ), there is another category of women who are notably missing, especially in stories involving armies to such an extent and that is those of "the oldest profession". I know that LOTR was written in an earlier age and with the original intention of being a children's book but if we look at categories such as "maid, mother, hag" then "angel / whore" may be opened up as well. Tolkien was far from prudish as stories in the Silmarillion (especially early drafts) and Unfinished tales show.

I find it hard to do more than speculate on this since on the surface the Middle Earth of LOTR (save perhaps the Shire) seems a completely unbalanced society. It almost seems as if it was not only dwarves who had an unequal ratio of males to females. If women are not referred to do we assume that they existed or not?

Unless they have a specific role women are not mentioned and very few women have a specific role. Apart from no Entwives, female orcs, female trolls, female dwarves, there are no serving wenches at the Pony, and from the description of the Feast, Arwen seems to be the only elf-woman in RIvendell. When Frodo says "there was one lady" - he may mean one marked out of particular status but it is weird that no woman is described (that I recall who doesn't have a role in the plot). Even in Lorien, the only reference to elf women other than Galadriel is the mention of the cloth having been woven by Galadriel and her maidens. Again we don't "see" them, are they as sequestred as the dwarf women? In a way the fact that the women of Gondor and Rohan are said to have been evacuated makes the absence of reference to "background" elf women more conspicuous?

Hemingway's "Men without women" has nothing on this. Perhaps "Men without lust" is closer. It is as if sexual feelings are awoken in them only by the sight of the women they are to marry and are confined only to them. Until this happens they seem to lead ascetic (I can't think of a better word though I can't at the moment better it) lives untroubled by "baser" feelings. Male lust seems to be confined to desire for the ring or power and female lust by the insatiable hunger of Shelob. It really does seem slightly unhealthy. And in this light it makes sense that the two characters who are actively interested in girls (Faramir and Sam) are more resistant to the lure of the ring. . Thinking about it the war of the Ring seems just a culmination of an awful lot of unresolved sexual frustration. And without wanting to get very Freudian about warfare, especially warfare largely involving swords and spears - that hippy motto about making love not war starts to make an awful lot of sense !

[Kuruharan]

And in this light it makes sense that the two characters who are actively interested in girls (Faramir and Sam) are more resistant to the lure of the ring. . Thinking about it the war of the Ring seems just a culmination of an awful lot of unresolved sexual frustration. And without wanting to get very Freudian about warfare, especially warfare largely involving swords and spears - that hippy motto about making love not war starts to make an awful lot of sense !

I think I hear Underhill laughing.

The emphasis on their work is one reason many of them do not marry and suggests to me that they have concentrated on material possessions instead of relationships – which could be considered a masculine trait, though it is not limited to males nor typical of all of them.

As artists, they wanted the freedom that being single lends to a person: freedom of schedule and such

Not that I am disagreeing with these statements, but being the boring literalist fuddy-duddy that I am I should point out that the minority of dwarf females necessitated that dwarf males find something else to do with their time.

(Hey, somebody had to do it… )

[Firefoot]

On the Orkish females, perhaps they were similar to Dwarves in that the women (it seems strange to call Orcs women... ) were similar to the men. If you think about it, the places where there were real Orc "settelments" (Isengard, Mordor, the Misty Mts, to name a few), they were multiplying fairly rapidly indicating the presence of females. However, when Saruman sends his army to Helm's Deep, Isengard was completely emtied. I cannot see Orcs sending their women and children off to someplace safe like Men did in Minas Tirith. In The Hobbit, the Goblins basically empty their mountain hold to take revenge on their king. The logical conclusion is that the women went to fight alongside the men, odd as this may seem.

In addition, Orcs don't seem to be the type to have wives/mothers stay home and cook and clean.

[Bêthberry]

Ah, indeed Estelyn, does absence make the heart grow fonder?

For now, I won't comment on the very intriguing pattern you have brought out here--well done!--mainly because I am still mulling over your conclusion that we are shown the need for balance and both genders in LotR. I'm not convinced of it but not quite ready yet to say why not. If that makes sense.

For now, and quite simply I would like to make the observation that a group or kind of woman fairly important in classical mythology is absent: the Furies, the Maenads, the Bacchic women. No Queen Mabs. Other than Shelob, does Tolkien give any non-idealising portrayals of women? Any negative aspects? There are Ioreth's loquaciousness and Lobelia's pettiness (and these are balanced by redeeming qualities--See Evisse's post about Lobelia on Fordim's thread), but I don't think Tolkien has presented any negative aspect of what might be called the female principle. Maybe he thought he wrapped it all up in Shelob? So, for the most part, women are absent and idealised. I'm not sure what to make of that--could there be a direct relation there?