Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Reading Room:
Tolkien at UVM
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All

Istar Indigo
Bree

Jun 1 2009, 12:36am

Post #1 of 126 (589 views)
Shortcut
Tolkien at UVM Can't Post

Greetings all!

My UVM students have been encouraged to register and place their questions on this site. I have reminded them of the etiquette of this discussion board and all boards. I hope to have a few students take advantage (for extra credit) of the depth of knowledge and seriousness of enquiry found at this site. Students will hopefully place "at UVM" in their usernames and use this space to direct their questions.

This is the beginning of Week 3 of our four week summer course. Please attach new questions to this thread.

yours,
Chris Vaccaro
[Istar Indigo]


N.E. Brigand
Half-elven


Jun 1 2009, 1:35am

Post #2 of 126 (326 views)
Shortcut
Thanks much for keeping this up-to-date. [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm sorry I haven't had time to respond to your students' inquiries myself, but I have been reading what I can. I do appreciate your conscientousness in posting one new thread each week so that they have a place to respond on the first page.

A minor off-topic note: you might wish to read David Bratman's brief thoughts on the merits of Daniel Timmons' "Hobbit Sex and Sexuality in The Lord of the Rings", which you mentioned in your conference paper in April. Bratman was responding to my report on the conference posted here.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Hobbit in the Reading Room, Mar. 23 - Aug. 9. Everyone is welcome!

Join us May 18-24 for "Barrels out of Bond".
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.


weaver
Half-elven

Jun 1 2009, 2:08am

Post #3 of 126 (292 views)
Shortcut
I have an important reason to hijack this thread.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Happy Half-Elvenness, NEB! If there was a party when you hit 5,000 posts, I missed it...and if there wasn't I'll start it.

Congratulations and well earned!

Weaver





dernwyn
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jun 1 2009, 2:26am

Post #4 of 126 (273 views)
Shortcut
*snickers* He did try to sneak it by us... [In reply to] Can't Post

...but gramma and I caught him soon after the fateful post was made, and sador has joined in since with this gem:

"Our N. E. Brigand is a pleasnt fellow,
spot-on his questions are, and his tone is mellow.
None has ever caught him yet, for neb, he is the master:
His book-lore incredible, and he finds links faster."

So, yes, hijack away, let's celebrate! Cool


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I desired dragons with a profound desire"

"It struck me last night that you might write a fearfully good romantic drama, with as much of the 'supernatural' as you cared to introduce. Have you ever thought of it?"
-Geoffrey B. Smith, letter to JRR Tolkien, 1915



weaver
Half-elven

Jun 1 2009, 3:06am

Post #5 of 126 (257 views)
Shortcut
Glad you were on the look out for him... [In reply to] Can't Post

You Half-Elven folk are all seeing, I see!

And sador's poem was perfect -- thanks for the link. And since that was a page 3 party, I think it's okay to do a reprisal here...

I can't rival sador, but since NEB is a Clevelander, here is a "slighty revised" jingle from that part of the world, in his honor...

"Mr. NEB
How he saves all things
Keeper of the the keys...

In his vault of posts
He deserves a toast
On the Reading Room floor..."


Weaver





Tolkien Forever
Gondor

Jun 1 2009, 7:32am

Post #6 of 126 (281 views)
Shortcut
Huh? [In reply to] Can't Post

I know we've been down this path before about Unsubstantiated Theories' (sorry I forget the appreoved initials), but just where in the text of The Lord of the Rings is the anything whatsover even alluding to Hobbit sex or sexuality?


Magpie
Immortal


Jun 1 2009, 2:00pm

Post #7 of 126 (255 views)
Shortcut
I'm crashing the RR just to join in these congrats [In reply to] Can't Post

I was going to try to watch for the happy event and then realized it had come without my knowing when.

huzzah, NE.

:-)


2009 Tolkien Computer Monitor Calendars
LOTR soundtrack website : CD Editions & Similarities Updates March 08
magpie avatar gallery ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


N.E. Brigand
Half-elven


Jun 1 2009, 4:23pm

Post #8 of 126 (279 views)
Shortcut
Well, they do have children. [In reply to] Can't Post

Most of them. Frodo doesn't, though. And Sam is "torn in two" between his love for Frodo and Rosie. That sets lots of readers wondering: ideas like "Brokeback Mount Doom" come from somewhere, even if they rely on a reading of the text that Tolkien himself never imagined.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Hobbit in the Reading Room, Mar. 23 - Aug. 9. Everyone is welcome!

Join us May 25-31 for "A Warm Welcome".
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.


Istar Indigo
Bree

Jun 1 2009, 4:44pm

Post #9 of 126 (243 views)
Shortcut
Thanks and Congrats! [In reply to] Can't Post

I'll check out the discussion on sex in LotR. Hopefully, my students are thinking of some great questions to ask this week.
II


Tolkien Forever
Gondor

Jun 1 2009, 6:52pm

Post #10 of 126 (262 views)
Shortcut
OF Course [In reply to] Can't Post

I know the Hobbits have children & that means they have sex, no big deal. It's just not in the texts & is therefore total speculation as to anything that they might do..

As for Frodo & Sam, it's total revisionist history to imply Tolkien inferred any type of relationship besides a servant serving his master with his whole heart.......

But, UUT's (I rememberd!) will run wild & there's no stopping them I guess.

Rant over. Mad


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 1 2009, 8:03pm

Post #11 of 126 (250 views)
Shortcut
Pedantic grammar point. [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
As for Frodo & Sam, it's total revisionist history to imply Tolkien inferred any type of relationship besides a servant serving his master with his whole heart.......


I think you mean "to infer Tolkien implied." Smile

Substantively, I agree that the text does not support a physical sexual relationship between Frodo and Sam.

Indeed, I have argued that the text does not support any physical sexual relationship other than marital heterosexual relationships for the purpose of making babies -- in other words, it is a Roman Catholic fantasy. Now, it may be that Tolkien was just unusually delicate about discussing sex, but by avoiding even the implication of extramarital sex, even in extensive genealogies and histories, even to the extent of creating shot-gun weddings in lieu of rape, in a fantasy world where Tolkien is our only source of information, he effectively created a fantasy world in which extramarital sex does not exist, whether or not that was his intention. Of course, we can argue that Tolkien's history of Middle-earth has been sanitized by fictional historians, but then we are reduced to speculative UUTs and fan fiction about what really happened.

At any rate, in a fantasy world where even extramarital heterosexual sex is doubtful, I don't see any evidence of homosexual sex.


Tolkien Forever
Gondor

Jun 1 2009, 9:24pm

Post #12 of 126 (247 views)
Shortcut
I Wish [In reply to] Can't Post

I knew what 'pedantic' meant.... Wink

But I get the point.

I think where the problem comes in is when 'we' (society as a whole) try to take the changing moral conditions and super-impose them back onto another time period where they just don't fit (take the movie 'Titanic' for example).

Tolkien lived in a time before the 'sexual revolution' of the Sixties, or at least wrote TLOR long before that, aside from the fact of his staunch religious beliefs.
Yes, I realize some other authors at the time wrote about Homosexuality & 'permiscuous sex' if you will, but to think or imply Tolkien did when you know anything about his life is truely bringing your own agenda to the table since the is not one iota of evidence within the text to back you up.


sador
Half-elven

Jun 2 2009, 5:05am

Post #13 of 126 (253 views)
Shortcut
Have you read N.E.B.'s report? [In reply to] Can't Post

According to his report, Timmons (whose essay, btw, is called in that report "Hobbit sex and sensuality...") actually refered to Frodo's not getting married; in fact, if you see Bilbo and Frodo as exemplars of abstinence without the advantages of a cloistered life, this might be seen as a comment by Tolkien's on the pure life of Roman clergy.

I agree that the gender-studies advocates today sometimes try too hard to find things which really aren't there, but I must point out that most of the studies labelled 'sex' are not at all ex-rated, but rather discussing the respective roles (and rules) of males and females in different societies. Seen as such, the hobbit-women we see in Tolkien are intriguing: the famous Belladonna Took, Lobelia, Mrs. Maggott, Mrs. Cotton, Rosie - as well as the Bilbo and Frodo remaining bachelors (and being considered strange for this reason, even though hobbits seem not to know about homosexuality).

Perhaps the most interesting thing for me in that realm is Sam's not mentioning Rosie at all - not even when looking in the mirror of Galadriel, and wanting to leave the Quest and save his Gaffer! - untill he finally escapes the orcs and turns towards Mount Doom. Perhaps Modtheow could enlighten me on that subject?

Once again, it does irritate me that every conference reported here, seems to have gender-related topics as a major focus - because this really seems blown out of proportion; and I also agree that a lot of those engaged in gender studies have a certain agenda, which Tolkien himself would probably disapprove of; but that does not mean that an essay on "Hobbit Sex and Sensuality" is only projecting the author's dirty mind on your favourite writer.

"And winter comes after autumn." - Bifur


Tolkien Forever
Gondor

Jun 2 2009, 6:16am

Post #14 of 126 (229 views)
Shortcut
Again.... [In reply to] Can't Post

I think that the mere fact that Frodo and Sam happened to not be married is a very far leap for somebody to superimpose the Roman Catholic clegy's marital prohibition's onto. But, there we go again with the UUT's...

And I'm not so sure that having essays or speeches at conferences based on 'Hobbits sexual practices & Hobbit Homosexuality' 'is the product of a dirty mind as you put it' or moreso the fabric of certain more 'liberal' minded folks who just think a certain way in this century and are rewriting 'history' the way they think it must have been, despite the lack of any evidence


FarFromHome
Valinor


Jun 2 2009, 9:45am

Post #15 of 126 (256 views)
Shortcut
I'd go further than that. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Indeed, I have argued that the text does not support any physical sexual relationship other than marital heterosexual relationships for the purpose of making babies



I would argue that the text doesn't even mention sex for the purpose of making babies. The only evidence we have that such sex took place is the babies themselves! Heck, we saw this week that neither Beorn or Thranduil even has a known sexual partner, despite each having a son.

So I'd say that sex is simply not an issue in LotR, in any context. I would suggest this may be simply because sex is mundane, an earthly delight that simply isn't what Faerie is all about. Faerie is about the emotions - the love, the transcendence, the sense of timelessness - that may be associated with sex, but are not necessarily limited to the physical mechanics of sex itself. In fact, if anything, it's about reaching those levels of transcendence without sex - and indeed, the real "Catholic fantasy" isn't about married love, but about the pure and intense love of God and man that celibate saints can achieve. I tend to think that that's mostly about sublimation, but it's a very powerful force nevertheless.

Personally, I find the idea of Frodo and Sam's deep love much more moving without imagining that it has a basis in physical gratification. But to each his own, I guess - since sex isn't specifically mentioned in any context at all in LotR, yet "must" take place at least in the creation of babies, then you fill in the blanks in whatever way works for you....


They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled, the sigh and murmur of the Sea
upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 10:42am

Post #16 of 126 (240 views)
Shortcut
That's going too far, I judge. [In reply to] Can't Post

Babies imply a sex life, and there is no counterevidence to that implication. But there are no illegitimate babies, or other implication of extramarital sex.


FarFromHome
Valinor


Jun 2 2009, 11:38am

Post #17 of 126 (219 views)
Shortcut
How do you know? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
But there are no illegitimate babies, or other implication of extramarital sex.



What do we know about Beorn's son, for example? And it appears that there's no "illegitimacy" among the Elves simply because they don't have a concept of legitimacy/illegitimacy at all - they just fall in love, and are faithful for life (naturally, because they represent the ideal condition of humanity).

You've also quoted descriptions of orc reproduction in the past that are at the very least amibiguous about exactly how the offspring are produced.

In a heroic romance such as this, sordid details about illegitimacy are unlikely to make it into the story, but I don't think we have to assume from that (if we want to try to impose a modern scientific or psychological view onto Middle-earth) that no such sex ever happened at all.

They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled, the sigh and murmur of the Sea
upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 12:59pm

Post #18 of 126 (240 views)
Shortcut
I know there is no mention of [In reply to] Can't Post

illegitimate babies. If you disagree, please give me your cites. Yes, we can speculate, but it's just speculation.

I think you are referring to the passage in Morgoth's Ring discussing how men interbred with orcs, and I think that supports my point. It would be easy to assume that the orcs raped the human women, and I think many readers do make that assumption, but Tolkien went out of his way to say that humans were reduced to the level of orcs so that they would willingly interbreed.

It's true that we don't see church weddings in Middle-earth, and if that is your definition of legitimacy, then perhaps everyone is illegitimate. But even the most vile characters are said to marry and maintain monogamous relationships. There's a grand total of one mention of attempted rape, and that was not a successful attempt.


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 1:17pm

Post #19 of 126 (212 views)
Shortcut
I see Bilbo and Frodo's bachelorhood as a price they pay [In reply to] Can't Post

for being so different from the other hobbits. Not only do they not marry, they also have few friends, and of course Frodo cannot even live out his life in the Shire. I think Tolkien intended their isolation to be sort of sad, although they have considerable compensations -- Bilbo manages to live a happy life despite the fact that nearly all the hobbits think he is insane, and Frodo gets to go to the Undying Lands, which should be no small treat. But I think that their bachelorhood is a note of melancholy, not quasi-priesthood.


FarFromHome
Valinor


Jun 2 2009, 3:15pm

Post #20 of 126 (207 views)
Shortcut
I'm sure you're right. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I know there is no mention of illegitimate babies.



There surely aren't any illegitimate children in the story, but it doesn't necessarily follow that there are no illegitimate children in Middle-earth. Because these are two different things, I believe.

The story itself is an epic, or heroic romance, or a fairy story, or whatever you choose to call it. It tells a tale according to ancient conventions in which there may be widows' sons, orphans and perhaps even wicked stepmothers, but "extramarital sex" is simply not part of the package.

Middle-earth, however, as Tolkien once said, represents this world we live in, but "at a different stage of imagination".

That is, the story tells us how Middle-earth seems to the people who live in it, at their own "stage of imagination". The story is an attempt to let us see the world - our world, in some imagined past - through other eyes, with other conventions than the ones commonly used today.

So to say there is no extramarital sex in the story is one thing, but to want to extrapolate this and say (for example) that extramarital sex is "impossible" in Middle-earth is confusing two different things. The story has its own conventions, and those do not include making scientific, cultural or psychological assumptions based on our modern way of thinking.

But the story also evokes a world that draws us in so compellingly that we may want to look behind the story and apply our modern assumptions to it - to imagine what Elvish reproduction might be like, for example (as Beren IV likes to do) or how well the castles and fortresses would really work (as squire sometimes does). That can be an interesting exercise, but I think you always have to bear in mind that there may be more things in Middle-earth than the story tells of. And those may (surely must) include sexual behaviour that simply doesn't fit the conventions of the story itself.

They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled, the sigh and murmur of the Sea
upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings


(This post was edited by FarFromHome on Jun 2 2009, 3:16pm)


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 3:42pm

Post #21 of 126 (286 views)
Shortcut
LotR is a feigned history, [In reply to] Can't Post

and so is The Silmarillion, and so is most of HoME and Unfinished Tales. The Hobbit is different, and originally stood alone, but since Tolkien incorporates it into the same legendarium in LotR, it becomes part of the feigned history. A feigned history that covers so much ground, including long genealogies and the most intimate details of human and elvish relationships over thousands of years, yet says nothing about babies born out of wedlock, is very different from a short story that doesn't happen to mention extramarital sex. The absence becomes quite noticeable after a while, and whether you attribute it to Tolkien's delicacy or the delicacy of fictional historians, it presents quite a contrast with real histories, which are full of extramarital sex and all the consequences thereof, particularly in ruling families.


FarFromHome
Valinor


Jun 2 2009, 5:05pm

Post #22 of 126 (196 views)
Shortcut
Good point. [In reply to] Can't Post

The genealogies are certainly hard to explain away as just part of the "fairytale convention", I have to admit. Maybe you're right, and Tolkien did want us to believe that there's no sex except married sex in Middle-earth. I don't like the idea that Tolkien may have subscribed to the "Catholic fantasy" that was actually founded on abominations such as the Magdelene Laundries or the child abuse detailed in Ireland's recent Ryan Report. But perhaps he did.

They went in, and Sam shut the door.
But even as he did so, he heard suddenly,
deep and unstilled, the sigh and murmur of the Sea
upon the shores of Middle-earth.
From the unpublished Epilogue to the Lord of the Rings


Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 5:36pm

Post #23 of 126 (219 views)
Shortcut
Tolkien seems to have had a firm grasp [In reply to] Can't Post

of the distinction between fantasy and reality, and the role of fantasy in everyday life. It's the people who reject the role of a healthy fantasy life who seem likely to unconsciously perpetrate their fantasies upon the world, treating people as monsters, while all the while imagining themselves as heroes. Don't forget that Tolkien and his wife were both orphans, and that Edith was the daughter of an unmarried mother.


Modtheow
Lorien


Jun 2 2009, 6:42pm

Post #24 of 126 (278 views)
Shortcut
Fanfic, gender studies, and Timmons on hobbit sensuality [In reply to] Can't Post

I’m not quite sure where to stick this post, so I’ll put it here, since sador has raised some interesting points about current gender studies and I’d like to add my own thoughts on that subject (though I don’t claim to be a spokesperson for any group). Sometimes I wonder whether ideas about literary critics who study gender and sexuality aren’t getting mixed up with ideas about fanfic writers (though not in sador’s post), and I’d like to try to disentangle these threads if possible, if only to clear my own head.

Fanfic
I think it’s fair to say that fanfic writers do “impose” their ideas about sexuality on Tolkien’s text, if by “imposing” we mean that they acknowledge that they are adding to the story an explicit sexual dimension -- often a homosexual dimension -- that Tolkien was not interested in writing about. However, many fanfic writers do believe that the sexual dimension of the relationships they write about is implied in Tolkien’s text; there is something there that could turn into an explicit sexual relationship. As N.E.B. reports in one of his posts, the point has been made that the idea of a “Brokeback Mount Doom” video doesn’t come out of nowhere. (Of course, we should also remember that not all fanfic is about sex.) As for “permiscuity” -- there is something about that spelling that just seems right, isn’t there? -- some fanfic writers do play with creating promiscuous relationships, although many stories also specialize in monogamous, romantic relationships (OTP: One true pairing) in which two characters are exclusively bonded through love, which is expressed sexually. In any case, I do think that fanfic writers who write about sexual relationships are playing with and exploring ideas that are currently acceptable in our culture (well, maybe western liberal culture), but such ideas were not explicitly discussed by most people in some other times in history (like the mid-20th century), or they weren’t discussed using the same terminology that we use today (like “homosexual”) and so were seen slightly differently.

Literary criticism
Professional critics who study gender overlap to some extent with fanfic writers in that both groups are scrutinizing what is and what is not in Tolkien’s text, what is implied, what is explicit, and what all of that means in terms of Tolkien’s representation of gender, sex, sexuality. I suppose you could see the critical examination of sexuality as an “imposition” of contemporary concerns on older material, but in my opinion it’s more accurate to think of it as a way of looking at older material. In good gender criticism, the critic isn’t trying to impose any ideas on the text and is certainly not trying to rewrite history; the critic is trying to understand the text and its historical context more clearly by pursuing questions such as how did people think about sex at that time? What were the important questions to them compared to us today? How did they conduct their relationships then compared to us today? What does the difference, if there is one, tell us about our lives and our world today and in the past? Good criticism that uses sex and gender as a way of looking at older material doesn’t impose contemporary ideas about sexuality on the text; instead, it should aim to clarify what is in the text, implicitly or explicitly; to say what isn’t there; and to articulate what is different about the text compared to our present-day assumptions. Of course, I said “good criticism” – bad criticism, to my mind, is something like Catharine Stimpson’s famous article, which wants to find a certain version of women depicted in Tolkien’s work and when she doesn’t find what she is looking for, she criticizes the text for not being her idea of a good story that contains her desired heroines, without looking closely at what is actually there. That kind of criticism, I would say, is an imposition of contemporary expectations on the story.

While I find the question of sex/gender/sexuality an interesting way of looking at the text, it is true that we have come through a period in literary criticism that persistently asks the same questions: about sex and gender, about class, and about race. But then again, every period in literary criticism has its dominant questions – in the 1950s, we’d be preoccupied with unity, structure, and irony; or in the 1890s, we’d be persistently examining texts for signs of Saxon racial qualities as expressed in our myths. Recent critical questions about sex, class, and race were born out of the civil rights and feminist movements of the 20th century, a political foundation that is not to everyone’s liking, and early versions of such criticism especially were prone to identifying negative stereotypes that led to condemnations of their writers, but I think that examples of the best of these critical explorations go beyond that somewhat superficial level to try to understand the writer in his/her historical moment – the exact opposite, in other words, of trying to rewrite history according to modern views.

Questions about sex aren’t the only way that literary critics approach texts these days – thank goodness for some variety! – and just as in the Reading Room so too in professional criticism: certain questions interest some people more than others. But basically the whole critical enterprise – whether on these boards or in professional journals – involves asking questions, examining the text, discussing different interpretations, challenging ideas, and formulating a better appreciation of and greater pleasure in what Tolkien has done through such analyses. In fact, I would go further and posit that a major rewriting of history occurs when one is not willing to question or analyze any assumptions at all and remains paralyzed in an unexamined belief that clichés about past times are all true and require no further comment. But thank goodness that’s not the Reading Room that I love, which includes disagreements and debates and information and new ways of thinking about the text.

<ok, end of polemic>

A brief word about Timmons on hobbit sensuality
As sador points out, the title of Timmons's article is “Hobbit Sex and Sensuality in The Lord of the Rings.” It was published in Mythlore 89, Summer 2001 – it’s not available in my library’s online databases and I can’t find it on the internet anywhere, but I do have a print copy that I got through inter-library loan, so if anyone would like a copy, I would be happy to mail it to them (just send me an address by PM). Just to clarify: Timmons does not believe that there is any explicit sex in LotR; in fact, he states “No overt or implied sex scenes occur in Tolkien’s work.” Timmons covers various points in this article, including commenting on Partridge’s and Stimpson’s articles, Tolkien’s letters about sex, and the fact that hobbits obviously have sex because they have lots of children. I don’t agree with all of Timmons’s ideas and I think there are blind spots in his argument, but one point that I found interesting was his look at the hobbits’ sensual awareness of the feminine: their initial reaction to Goldberry; Frodo’s first sight of Arwen in Rivendell; the way Galadriel unsettles them when she looks at them. I’d be happy to discuss this article further if anyone has read it -- or if anyone has even read my post all the way to this point.

Oh, and sador, I have no particular enlightenment to offer about Sam and Rosie, though I do think it would be interesting to look at Sam’s blushes.




Curious
Half-elven


Jun 2 2009, 7:21pm

Post #25 of 126 (199 views)
Shortcut
One quibble. [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
However, many fanfic writers do believe that the sexual dimension of the relationships they write about is implied in Tolkien’s text; there is something there that could turn into an explicit sexual relationship. As N.E.B. reports in one of his posts, the point has been made that the idea of a “Brokeback Mount Doom” video doesn’t come out of nowhere.


First of all, I'm unclear on whether these or your opinions, or just opinions you are repeating. But at any rate, I disagree. Just because something "could" have happened in Tolkien's fiction doesn't mean he implied that it "did" happen. What we do have is an intimate relationship between Sam and Frodo, including moments where they huddled together for warmth, where Sam held Frodo's hand, and where Sam carried Frodo. On some level, Sam clearly loves Frodo and vice versa. But that is not enough evidence to say that Tolkien implied a homosexual relationship, unless we make the deplorable assumption that heterosexual males are unlikely to develop such a relationship.

I would also note that we also know that Sam loves Rosie, and they have many babies together. While this does not rule out a premarital homosexual relationship, it does add to the evidence against it.


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.