|
|
Post by aramel on Sept 11, 2005 10:51:06 GMT -5
Ok, this will be a pretty short post, for me at least. It's 11:40 pm already, and I'm rather sleepy and not making much sense. Um...
I strongly dislike Arwen. Mostly movie!Arwen, but I've got problems with Book!Arwen too.
One thing I disliked is that she had it too easy. All the other outstanding women in Tolkien's mythos achieved power the hard way. Look at Galadriel, who rebelled against the Valar and led her people across the Helcaraxe, who saw through Sauron and bore one of the Three. Look at what she had to go through to achieve her desire, only to relinquish it at the end.
Then look at Eowyn. She grew up an orphan, stalked by Wormtongue. Her prowess wouldn't have come easily; she would have had to work hard every day to keep up her skills. Then her uncle fell into dotage, her cousin died, her brother was imprisoned, and the one man she thought might love her rejected her. Then she rode into battle and almost died. That was the price she paid for her renown.
As for Luthien, she defied her father and king, and went into the wilderness with Beren, aiding him. She faced down Sauron to rescue Beren, and put one over on Morgoth himself. This, and the sacrifice she made in exchange for Beren's life, was what won her her fame.
Goodness, look at the men! Glorfindel fought a Balrog and laid down his life; Elrond fought in the Last Alliance, and withstood Sauron; Beren got a Silmaril from Morgoth; Turin killed a dragon; Earendil sailed west, risking his life; Fingolfin wounded Morgoth multiple times... even when their deeds are not warlike, most of them, men and women, still accomplished more than Arwen.
What about Arwen? She lived a sheltered life in Rivendell and Lorien, under the protection of her father and grandmother. She made Aragorn wait for sixty years, and stayed home sewing. Then, when everyone else has fought and bled and paid for the victory over Sauron, she shows up and marries Aragorn, thereby becoming queen, and lording it over everyone else. And even in the end, when the inevitable price of this came, she would not pay it. Instead she moaned about the doom of Men, wandered off, and commited suicide.
I'm astonished at the contrast. And this is only Book!Arwen. *twitches* Don't get me started on Movie!Arwen...
Oh, and another note. Some plead that Arwen didn't have enough lines in the book to fully reveal her character. In my opinion, this is not the issue. Andreth in the Athrabeth Finrod ah Andreth didn't have that many lines either, and what she did have was mostly part of the argument, but her character was stunningly genuine and moving. The Athrabeth was the only bit outside of LOTR itself that made me cry. Also, Andreth too faced the problem of immortality in an Elf-Man union. Her love Aegnor never married her at all. She lived with that all her life, and she didn't commit suicide.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anaroriel on Sept 16, 2005 21:43:19 GMT -5
Holy Cow....
Gah, I should check this thing more often. Eldariel, I commend you for writing that humongous post, but I really cannot go through it tonight... *shock*
And Aramel, welcome. I'll get to your post later, but I do have to say something now: not everyone's a superhero.
|
|
|
|
Post by miniSlayer on Sept 20, 2005 16:18:46 GMT -5
*sighs a bit*
Ah... I'm here.
We don't really know if Eowyn was abnormal for Middle-Earth. For all we know, there were more women at Helms Deep/Pellenor Fields that Tolkien never told us about.
And to the point that Arwen waited too long for Aragorn:
Well, I agree that Elrond probably would have really gotten mad if she had just married him (*waits for Maka scream*) but still, the premise of LotR is that love, life, and etc overpowers evil/death. Wouldn't it be just as easy to have a strong wife of Elessar come along on the journey and give him support?
|
|
Elbereth
Ranger
~The light of Il?vatar lives still in her face.~
Posts: 190
|
Post by Elbereth on Sept 20, 2005 23:47:18 GMT -5
Okay, I don't have time to get really into this... But to aramel, it depends on what we as individuals see as trial. Watching your love ride away, knowing that possiblities remain that you will never see them again, is trial enough - it hurts like hell; it really does. People suffer and work in different ways. And as Elwen has so often pointed out, we don't know enough to make the official discretion that Arwen did naught but sew. For all we know, she put Imladris to work and did her share there. We don't know for sure. And miniSlayer, perhaps it would have been easier to have a strong wife of Elessar go with the Fellowship, but let's consider the position of women at the time... It was highly unusual for women to have a battlefront position - Eowyn did, yes, but she was raised that way and she was a highlight exception. Galadriel fought, yes, but in different ways. She fought primarily because she had little else to choose from. Arwen, on the other hand, as the sole woman in a company of 9 men would have raised eyebrows and been seen as highly improprietous. The point of Elessar's wife was, in my opinion, not to fight alongside him, but rather to give him something to hope for when it was all said and done. Anyway, I'll come back to these nice long posts in a bit.  Nice arguments!!! Very fun to read! ~ Elbereth |
|
|
|
Post by Mithwen Delbaeth on Sept 21, 2005 16:45:00 GMT -5
She doesn't have to go with the Fellowship. I think Tolkein would have said something if Rivendell had been helping the war effort. Maybe somewhere in the Appendix's timeline thingy.
|
|
Angel
:~TOA~: Fellowship 
.+*Elven Beauty*+.
Posts: 60
|
Post by Angel on Sept 25, 2005 3:16:58 GMT -5
Wow, havent read thru every post, but by what i've read, these are good arguments - both pro/anti Arwen.
Well, i see Arwen more of a 'background' or 'behind the scenes' character, for she has no direct link to the main storyline of Frodo and the ring. But yet, she still has her own story, one many mistake for trying to get into the main storyline.
And i wont add anymore, i'm dead tired, and you already know my opinions on her.
~ Angel ~
|
|
Lady Adara
Dwarf
.:~:. Adara's Rose .:~:.
Posts: 71
|
Post by Lady Adara on Sept 29, 2005 0:41:53 GMT -5
Wow... Really good debates... Unfortunately, at this hour, I'm not much of one for eloquence, but I can try... She doesn't have to go with the Fellowship. I think Tolkein would have said something if Rivendell had been helping the war effort. Maybe somewhere in the Appendix's timeline thingy. Right, but the fact that it isn't stated is just what gives us license to debate. She may have or may not have - what's under debate is whether it's at all definite. No, it's not, and none but Tolkien himself will ever know, but we can speculate all we like and in the end come to the conclusion that Arwen was there. She was never meant to be a primary figure that saved the majority of the world from chaos, disaster, and destruction. She was never meant to be the Elven Shieldmaiden and ride beside her love to defeat Middle-Earth's one true enemy. She was a symbol of love and hope and the love of eternity that does not fade. She was a symbol of quiet strength - that a woman does not need to stand before her people and sacrifice herself to be considered noble. She was the love of the restored King of Gondor, and she was much of what kept him going through the long War. Not the only thing, by a long shot, but one of the major components. And let me just say about this banner argument: okay, so she made a banner. Why is that so wrong? It was, in all essential terms, likely something she could do to keep herself from going crazy. She knew, at the end, that Aragorn would get it and understand her message. That banner was perhaps much more important than we give due credit for - that banner announced him to the Gondorians and the Rohirrim and the other warriors on the Pelennor from afar, designating him as their hope, not the Corsairs. It also set the Orcs back several thousand feet, figuratively speaking. Perhaps literally, as well. So why keep carping on this bedamned banner? And trial... Oh let's avoid defining that and playing God. I'm sorry, but that really bugs me. (It's nothing personal to the author of a post that said this.) We can't define emotional situations for people. Our perceptions are going to be different, be it miniscule or vast. Mine is likely different from any one of yours - why are these characters any different. We oft act as though they were real; why not give them some of that respect? Trial to one may be ease to another and torment to still others. Sorrow may be joy to one and cause for suicide on another. We just don't know. Hardness of life is judged on how you live - what you're used to. That's all it really comes down to. We don't know, and we're hypocritical and naive to think that we even remotely do. ~ Adara |
|
|
|
Post by Lady Elwen on Nov 9, 2005 19:47:57 GMT -5
So I'm responding to Mithwen's big huge post... From three months ago... Sure, he couldn have gotten a banner anywhere, but not without prematurely declaring himself king. When Arwen made the banner, she made it with symbols that openly declared him as closely affiliated with Gondor. And the element of surprise would probably have already died just by coming up so quietly. And as I said, Eomer WOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED HIM. The Orcs, on the other hand, regardless of whether they knew what the White Tree looked like or not, probably could have used that little nudge. Then what? If all the women who have brothers/husbands/cousins/fathers/etc. in the current war aren't out working for the Red Cross or following them out to the frontlines, are they useless? The acts that one performs don't have to be recognized the world over to mean something. Arwen sent her love to war, knowing what they both stood to lose, and didn't fight it. And by that token, she isn't that much different from Morwen. She didn't think Aragorn was dead, and she didn't run off to marry whomever was handy. Did she leave by the films? Yes. Why? Because now-mortal-hating Daddy told her to. Whoever said there was anything wrong with wanting something you can't have? And we all say stupid things. It's a fact of life. She was being honest, in any case, and it beats her trying to save her honour by randomly saying how wonderful the people are and how much she's always admired them... I'm speaking of prior to her decision to marry. Aragorn was BORN after my points on her mother. She knew she'd never see Elrond and Celebrian after she made her decision, but it was HER DECISION. She didn't choose to have Aragorn die at whatever given time - she knew he would, but how does that sort of thing sink in? Some concepts can't be grasped until they're lived. Can you - or any of us, for that matter - understand what it's like to live forever? To lose everyone you've ever loved? Not likely, and that's the same principle. Should she have understood that? Perhaps. Was it necessarily possible for her heritage? Not really. Oh really now? Have we ever known anyone to die from grief? *raises hand* Yeah. It's terrible, but it's possible. Were her children and grandchildren gains? Of course. But by that reasoning, she would have lived forever to see her legacy. Not happening. Let's reason by direct gains. Can't we all make better use of our time? Um, no. It's pretty much the difference between discussing sex and having it. Excuse me for being so blunt, but there you are. Was Elrond too possessive? Oh yeah. But as I said, he didn't stand to lose his only daughter to the next country. He stood to lose her to eternity. I'd be pretty possessive in that case, too. And pledging is a promise, not an action. Right, and even by OUR standards today, they could have legally married. And adopted siblings who meet when they're both past majority don't have the same bonds of closeness. Related or not, it's still verily nonexistent. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT REGRET?  Of course she didn't want to lose him!! No shoot, Sherlock... Who wants to die? Who wants to lose their loved ones? Do you? I mean, I wish I could have had more time with certain people. Does that mean I wish I'd never met them? I certainly hope not. If you mean regret by sorrow that they were to be parted, sure, why not. But that's not wishing she'd never made her choice and that she felt she'd been stupid. No one said she was the only thing. But Aragorn stood to watch everything else fall - Arwen was the only thing that he could have theoretically hoped was safe. Or as safe as anyone can be in the midst of a warring country. But it helps to have something to hold on to - it helps even more to have more than one thing. *~*~*~*~*~* Okay then. Who else would have come? Elrond? When he's supposed to be setting things in Rivendell? The twins? Who don't even come into existence? Erestor? Who has as much book time as Glorfindel? Legolas? Who theoretically wasn't even available? Gandalf? Who was trapped in Isengard? Galadriel? From Lothlorien? Who else? That's also your opinion. People did come in after the first movie and then decide to go see FoTR. Movies will be movies, and sometimes movies get people into books. They can enjoy the movies without knowing the books off the top of their heads. Your last statement just comes off as rude. No, really? *end sarcasm* And there's always the chance of failure. Things don't always work when we need them to. Oh, right, and fear, like any other emotion, is just SO easy to repress when you're staring at what are essentially ghosts bent upon killing you if you don't kill them first. Sure. I'm sure I'd be able to smile and laugh and have NO fear whatsoever in that situation, wouldn't you? She's an Elf; I think she'd have known about the Nazgul. But knowing and facing are two different things. We know how strong a tiger is. We might even know how to scare one off. But knowing and doing when pressed are very different. Yeah. But Sting was carried by magic-less Frodo. And defensive or not, it's still magic. Using magic to drive off Orcs or whatever else would have been considered defensive, too. So because you don't use it you shouldn't have one? Oh, well, that's news... So I guess I should get rid of that spare bridle I'm not using right now, right? And how do we know she never used it? Am I missing something here? She was powerful in different ways. And who was going to walk up and go "here Arwen, I found a pretty ring! Take it!" She did live with a lot of wise people... One would hope conversations occur on occasion. Well, whatever amount of time it was. Essentially, it doesn't matter. Watching even a stranger dying is very, very hard. Watching animals die is hard. Elves feel more innately than mortals. Quite frankly, I'd be more disturbed if she wasn't crying. And she did get him back to Rivendell. Without her strength, he would have died. See my above response on knowing those types of concepts. Is eternity defined by physicality? And it could have been the eternity available to them, to be carrie don in spirit. Sure, she expected it. Does that make it any easier? Of course not. Um, not necessarily. If he married another woman, it would have been because Arwen was GONE, hence, vision. Of the future. As in it hasn't happened yet. So why would he have given the token of a woman he loved to a child? Loving someone as a sibling is entirely different. You can love someone as much as you'd love a brother or sister and get married. Some bonds between married couples are just that strong. And she didn't do it in the books; it's artistic license and Jackson taking advantage of what isn't explicitly stated. Sure, she knew that an heir would be needed. But Evenstar on random child doesn't fit well. ~ Elwen |
|
|
|
Post by Ahrianna on Nov 14, 2005 2:05:39 GMT -5
May I just say that, Lady Elwen, you have some of the most articulate forms of lengthy debate that I've ever seen. ;D One thing I disliked is that she had it too easy. All the other outstanding women in Tolkien's mythos achieved power the hard way. Look at Galadriel, who rebelled against the Valar and led her people across the Helcaraxe, who saw through Sauron and bore one of the Three. Look at what she had to go through to achieve her desire, only to relinquish it at the end. Okay, but look at whom you're comparing her to. Does it make sense to expect her to go to war and be someone she's not? I don't think that Tolkien even intended for her to be some overly powerful woman in the slightest, and comparing to her ancestors, be they direct or no, isn't fair. It's like expecting the son of a famous artist to be one, as well, and that sort of thing isn't usually inherited. Her ancestors were who they were. Arwen is who she is. Is it really fair to dislike her because of the character given to her? Goodness, look at the men! Glorfindel fought a Balrog and laid down his life; Elrond fought in the Last Alliance, and withstood Sauron; Beren got a Silmaril from Morgoth; Turin killed a dragon; Earendil sailed west, risking his life; Fingolfin wounded Morgoth multiple times... even when their deeds are not warlike, most of them, men and women, still accomplished more than Arwen. What about Arwen? She lived a sheltered life in Rivendell and Lorien, under the protection of her father and grandmother. She made Aragorn wait for sixty years, and stayed home sewing. Then, when everyone else has fought and bled and paid for the victory over Sauron, she shows up and marries Aragorn, thereby becoming queen, and lording it over everyone else. And even in the end, when the inevitable price of this came, she would not pay it. Instead she moaned about the doom of Men, wandered off, and commited suicide. Again, is it fair to compare her to the men of the "family"? This is a time period when it was truly considered improprietous for a woman to step outside of her set limits. Galadriel was a Queen, and one of the First, and as such was made an exception. Eowyn defied decorum to do what she did. We hear about the other woman because they were the exceptions to the rule. Arwen? No, she didn't join the men in battle and fight her way to her love and destiny, but she helped fortify the line of Isildur. Perhaps that was part of her strongest contribution to ME history. And actually, Arwen didn't make Aragorn wait for 60 years... Elrond did. Irritating as that was of him, it WAS he who enforced that. Lovely, fatherly love...  And how did she "lord" being queen over everyone else? I really don't see the proof of that anywhere. The price? She did pay it. She married Aragorn, bore their children, stood by him to rule the realm, raised said children, and accepted Aragorn's death. With that, she chose to take her own leave, and that was her price to pay, that she would indeed lose and forsake her life to marry Aragorn. Sure, she "moaned about the doom of Men", but, as I believe it was Lady Elwen, said, that kind of reality is hard to accept until it is shoved in your face and YOU are the one living through it. Did she go out and commit suicide? In a way, but she took her time about it and let time run it's course. ~ Ahrianna |
|
|
|
Post by Lady Elwen on Dec 5, 2005 2:05:43 GMT -5
Thank you, Ahrianna, though I rather lost my temper in my last post...  Working off what you said here: Very true. Perhaps the entire point of Arwen's existence was to fully express the price that one of the Firstborn had to pay in marrying one of the Edain. Why compare her to someone she is not? Why does she have to be some overly powerful, sword-wielding, speech-giving, battle-fighting superwoman for people to like her? Why does she have to go against everything to be understood? The people who fight restriction are noted because of that - because what they have done is outlandish. Those who understand and comply with regulation rarely are, because they have done just that. But does that make them bad people? Does that mean we all have to hate them? I really don't think so. ~ EL |
|
|
|
Post by Mithwen Delbaeth on Dec 22, 2005 17:25:23 GMT -5
She doesn't. Look at other women in Tolkein's work, they didn't nessicarily go to war, but they did do something at least. Idril helped her people by making an escape rout, Aredhel sacrificed herself to save her son, Galadriel offered shelter and great aid to the Fellowship and led Lothlorien through a hard time of war. Arwen didn't do anything. (something makes me think I've said this before...)
And Arwen wasn't the only Firstborn who payed the price of marrying a Man. Luthien did that as well and went against her father's wishes to help Beren recover the Simaril so she could be with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by miniSlayer on Jan 14, 2006 10:40:24 GMT -5
My teachers in school always tell me that when we write a story, every character should have a purpose, or you should just cut them. In the books, I don't really seem too much purpose of her character. Aragorn rarely thinks of her, and she doesn't follow him or help anyone other than sewing that banner.
However, I do have to think of LotR as more of a history rather than a story, and in histories there are plenty of unimportant characters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lady Elwen on Feb 18, 2006 15:01:15 GMT -5
I begin to feel like I am repeating myself, but let's try this again:
Luthien pledged herself to Beren against her father's wishes to aid him in reclaiming the Silmaril. Yes. No argument.
Arwen pledged herself to Aragorn out of, it is assumed, love, also, to some extent, against her father's wishes. Again, no argument. This is fact, plain and simple.
Now, when Tolkien wrote Luthien, he never showed the relationship without the price. What would have happened if the Silmaril hadn't been part of their story, if their relationship hadn't revolved around the price of a Jewel to win acceptance?
Perhaps this is where Arwen's relationship with Aragorn comes in, allowing readers of Tolkien to see a highlighted relationship between man and elf that didn't involve both sides directly involved in a war or fighting to gain approval. Yes, Aragorn was working for Elrond's approval to wed Arwen; that was not the main point of the plot. Yes, the world is immersed in war; no, Arwen is not on the frontlines with Aragorn to fight. Perchance this was written to show simple devotion. What crime is there in that? Why must a character be hallowed and served with endless encomium to be liked?
Moreover, having a purpose, I suppose I sort of answered that already. Yes, Arwen is certainly underdeveloped compared to, say, Frodo or Faramir. But not every character in a good novel is heavily developed: Galadriel, for example, we do not see change at all. For her, there is no growth, unless one goes beyond the Rings. Similarly, Elrond: no change. He is who he is and never do we see a learning process. Yet, we do not fault them for this because they are powerful.
Aragorn we see develop, going from hidden Ranger, running from destiny, to the king fighting to defend his country. Faramir, drowned by Denethor's rejection, breaking free of his father and becoming his own person, without brother, without father, and allowed to "show his true colours," so to speak.
Now, Arwen: she doesn't develop, unless one reads the Tale in the Appendices, and even then, the level of her development is not as strong as one of the Fellowship. Her character is, for all that is given, just there, immersed in the background and serving as a hidden beacon. What, I ask, is wrong with that? Sure, she serves a purpose: she is a wife to Aragorn, a ruler in the world of Men in a way unprecedented in the history of the Eldar, and she is the light towards which he works. Certainly, there is argument about how much importance that allots her, but everyone at one point or another, needs to love, and she is Aragorn's. No, she wasn't his sole reason for survival, without a doubt, but she is, also without doubt, part of a much larger reason.
So there is my final argument: Arwen was not a vastly important, strongly developed character. That isn't, however, sufficient reason to hate her, is it?
~ Elwen
|
|
|
|
Post by miniSlayer on Feb 26, 2006 18:09:55 GMT -5
Well, I have to say, while Arwen is a massively disappointing character for me in the books, I do not "hate her" so to say. I think she is pointless and irrelevant, but I do not hate her in the books. In the movies however... *blaster out of holster*  |
|
Nathron
Hobbit
~*~A Weaver of Darkness and Light~*~
Posts: 12
|
Post by Nathron on Mar 14, 2006 21:32:37 GMT -5
Wow... I will certainly come back to this argument--excellent arguments presented here. But, in the thirty seconds I have, I will say this:
Arwen in the books is a character that holds one hell of a lot more than most people give her credit for, because they see her on a superficial level. (If you like her, no, I am not calling you superficial...)
Arwen in the films, on the other hand is a character that needs to go out and come in again. Literally!!
~ Nath
|
|
Angel
:~TOA~: Fellowship
.+*Elven Beauty*+.
Posts: 60
|
Post by Angel on Apr 15, 2006 5:17:48 GMT -5
Gosh i havent been here for ages... but this kinda caught my attention yet again.
This is kinda indirectly related to this topic, but it must be said.
I'm sick and tired, and rather repulsed to think anyone would want to start an 'Anti-Arwen' or really, what you would call "Hate Sites" on anyone! It's downright sad enough to need to do this... i mean, yeah, you dont need to like everyone in the whole world but to make fun and degrade them?? 'Get a life' is what i'm thinking.
I keep seeing new ones pop up here and there, and not just against Arwen mind you, other celebrities, other 'character's of television or movies. If you have something bad to say of someone, keep it to yourself. Who knows, it might be better to the W W W that way.
~ Angel ~
|
|
|
|
Post by merilwen on Apr 2, 2008 15:06:53 GMT -5
She doesn't. Look at other women in Tolkein's work, they didn't nessicarily go to war, but they did do something at least. Idril helped her people by making an escape rout, Aredhel sacrificed herself to save her son, Galadriel offered shelter and great aid to the Fellowship and led Lothlorien through a hard time of war. Arwen didn't do anything. (something makes me think I've said this before...) She did[/b] do something. It was thanks to Arwen that Frodo was able to go the Undying Lands. After everything Frodo had done for Middle-Earth, he of all people deserved a happily ever after. And if it wasn't for Arwen, he wouldn't have gotten it. Tolkien writes in his letters " What is meant is that it was Arwen who first thought of sending Frodo into the West, and put in a plea for him to Gandalf (direct of through Galadriel, or both) and she used her own renunciation of the right to go West as an argument." I find it amazing that hardly anyone even touches on this subject. I mean, it's the only words Arwen even SAYS in the books (barring appendices); you'd think it would stand out. In the end, then, Arwen is not a helpless lazy-bones, and she did do something for the benefit of others. |
|
Nice arguments!!! Very fun to read!
Of course she didn't want to lose him!! No shoot, Sherlock... Who wants to die? Who wants to lose their loved ones? Do you? I mean, I wish I could have had more time with certain people. Does that mean I wish I'd never met them? I certainly hope not.
