Eowyn and feminism and Tolkien

[Elmo]

Do you think when Eowyn announced she was a shield-maiden anymore it shows Tolkien's contempt for feminism? Is he saying 'yes let the woman have fun playing as a man but eventually she has to grow up and get back in the kitchen'? Does Tolkien say that a woman needs a man to be complete or else she will be filled with pain and sorrow like Eowyn was before she announced her intention of being a wife to Faramir? That part of the book I think says that women can't be independent beings.

[Mithalwen]

No. (The library is about to chuck me out..I will explain later - but DEFINITELY NO!)

[Lindale]

It is misleading, but no. Warriors and healers aren't women's cup of tea in Tolkien; Eowyn's shift from one to the other doesn't mean she "degraded" herself or such. I like to think of her shift as the transition of the whole atmosphere from defending themselves with the sword and shield to healing the wounds of battle.

Of course there are oppressed women, like Erendis and Rian (who was more pathetic, in my opinion). And I don't deny Eowyn had her oppressed moments too. (Like, the way she got stuck with a sick Theoden, and her powerlessness when Theodred died and her brother wasn't there. But remember that the good guys do have their share of oppressed moments too.) And of course there'll be arguments that perhaps Galadriel isn't really a feminine woman. But for now--I'm writing a paper due in three hours!--I'm gonna have to say, Eowyn's shift from shield-maiden to healer, her shift from Theoden's caretaker to a lover of Aragorn to slayer of the Witch King to Faramir's wife doesn't make her any less valuable, any less a hero (or heroine, if you will).

I don't think Tolkien had contempt for feminism like, say, August Strindberg. Think Morwen, Ancalime, Luthien (arguably!!). Tolkien may have a dearth of female protagonists, but that doesn't really prove an author's, to use your word, contempt for feminism.

(Someone please post the link to the Ooh La La Luthien thread please. I think it's pretty much related. Sorry I haven't got time!)

[Rumil]

Here you go

Ooh la la Luthien

I think on Eowyn, Tolkien's take on Boromir and Faramir is relevant. Both were warriors, Boromir the more renowned, but solely concerned with war and politics, whereas Faramir was more interested in lore and culture, though still an effective leader.

JRRT evidently liked Faramir a lot more, and thought him the better man for being a warrior when needed, but being a man of peace by preference. The same seems to go for Eowyn.

[Lush]

LOL

How did I KNOW my thread was going to come up here?

Anyway, to answer your original question, Elmo, I think the answer is yes and no. Certainly Tolkien had his own ideas about women - some of which he ended up giving up on, from what I understand. I don't know what that means in the context of Eowyn. I personally don't like the fact that she became a healer, but I also like her words to Aragorn, at the end. Tolkien didn't quite tie her up with a pretty little bow.

[Nogrod]

One also needs to remember the times and the culture back then - and even if this discussion has been made I think a few times already - Tolkien's quite conservative views on many issues.

It is interersting indeed to see how PJ and his team had to artificially build up more central roles for females in the movies just because there was not enough in the books. I mean at the same time many of us (myself included) scorn the films for trying to please mass-audiences with all the horrible twists and turns of a blockbuster-film - the fact that Arwen has a lot larger role than in the books is just another facet of that same idea. So in a sense for example Legolas skating and Arwen substituting Glorfindel are the same thing: adjusting the story to today's requirements?

But coming to feminism the issue looks a lot more complicated I think. The thing we now know as feminism today is something which - even if it follows from the ideas of the utilitarians and the suffragettes of the 19th century - is basically a creation of the existentialists, 1960's, the various post-feminisms of the 80's & 90's etc. So obviously Tolkien couldn't have a contempt towards an idea much more radical he could have even think about...

And another issue that kind of comes to mind is making the difference between what an author hails as truth or goodness - or just the right order of things - in his own world-view, and what the people in the universe the author has created think about those issues. Surely Tolkien was looking at the great mythologies and looking at our history they tend to be "male-centered" stories. But he had also quite extensive knowledge of fex. the Kalevala which brings forward many independent and central female characters (like Galadriel in Tolkien's writings).

So it is a bit more complicated issue I'm afraid. Well, happy to be afraid of that as all simple things are usually quite boring...

[mark12_30]

Originally Posted by Lush

I personally don't like the fact that she became a healer, but I also like her words to Aragorn, at the end. Tolkien didn't quite tie her up with a pretty little bow.

Lush m'dear, miss you, long time no see.

Quick questions only partway thru the thread: When the war is over, what's a royal sheildmaiden to do? And King Eomer is wise to her now. If there are skirmishes with leftover orcs on the border, we'll send some good lads to handle it, but as for you, sis, Sorry-- put the horse back in the barn.

And once she moves to Gondor, do you really think Faramir would watch and shrug as she armed and rode off?

IMO, being a healer is self-sacrificial, not for the timid, and requires courage. It's a paradigm shift. Aragorn, after the battle, put in his time as a healer, and it was an undeniable sign of royalty and majesty.

[Galadriel]

I really don't think so. I sort of agree with the Faramir Chastising Her bit, because I think, like many feminists (like myself), she gets too defensive. Personally, I feel Faramir was right in telling her to calm down.
But don't forget, her name still goes down in history as the person who killed the Witch-king.
And I think Tolkien favoured women at the end of the day.

[Erendis]

Just a few quick thoughts on the matter:

Personally,although I respected and admired Eowyn's valor in the battlefield,I disliked her choise because it was an outcome of a broken heart in the way of since she cannot get what she whants,then she shall get nothing.And then,some days after,she decides to become a housewife and healer.

I do not think that this choice has something to do that much with feminism as with a general change of era.Middle-Earth was stepping from a time of war,blood and death to a new age of re-creation,rebuilding and healing.So,this is a time for healers and peace-makers,more mild-tempered characters like Faramir and Arwen,not warriors.Even Aragorn,who is introduced as the ultimate warriorand is by that idealised for Eowyn, appears to embrasse the role of the healer with much more joy than that of the warlord.Even if Eowyn remained a glorious,proud and alone Shield Maiden,she might have probably ended like Erendis,regretting for her stubbornes,bittered and wanting to take a last taste of the life she lost.

And concerning the stay-behind-unpraised by Aragorn...

If we see this statement from a different point of view,doesn't it reffer to the Rangers of the North in a way too?Weren't they a short of left-behind defenders of the North,whose great deeds were not praised as those of an army with shinny armors and shields,but even worse than women,they were treated as scoundrels and inhonoured?

As for some who accusse him of being the sexist warrrior due to that quote,do they really think it?With a more carefull observation to the story of his rising in power,he was not only motivated by Arwen,but also helped,if not pushed.A banner and a claim of origins can be doubted,but when it comes to the prophesy of the Elfstone and the chosen by the people name,things afe way more secure.
Now seriously,do you think that after all these political moovements would that woman would accept to become a breeding and sewind machine?Or that a man with Aragorn's wisdom would not make use of such potential?

[Lotrelf]

No, no. Tolkien portrayal of Eowyn is, I believe, the strongest one. When she confronts Witch King she not only defies him, but KILLS him. This Shows she does not have to be with someone to survive. When she accepts Faramir's love, she has accepted her destiny. She, instead of giving into despair and sorrow chooses to live. Tolkien represents Arwen, Goldberry and Galadriel as source of wisdom and eternal beauty. Certainly nothing like contempt here. Eowyn is the representative of modern woman, IMO, and she is just perfect and one of my most favorite characters.

[Andsigil]

Tolkien was no anti-feminist.

He simply portrayed a different ideal of feminism- one that didn't reinforce the myth of 115lb females destroying a dozen 200lb professional warriors in hand-to-hand combat.