You're very right that the Eowyn strength comes at the price of constant comparison to men. If she fails, it's because she's a woman, not because she hasn't been taught how to do something, or is inexperienced or something, like a man could just as easily be. And if she succeeds, well, it must have been luck or favoritism or because she's a freak or something.
It's too easy to jump on the "girl power" bandwagon with this type of strength, imo. To get excited over images of Xena or Starbuck or movie!Eowyn and not see the prices they often have to pay to get where they are, and to judge other women as less because they can't or don't do the same.
Not only is it difficult to express the Arwen strength, but it too comes at the cost of comparisons-to men and to Eowyn!women. Since it *is* perceived as "womanly", it's therefore more passive (not in any negative way) and receptive/reactive to others' actions, rather than aggressive. So, an Arwen!woman is too-often considered weak. Yeah, but just wait until your ass is sick and needs nursing, or until you really need that heart-to-heart talk...who you gonna call then?
It reminds me of the debates among traditional homemakers and working women; both seeking validation so hard that they would undervalue and tear apart what the other type had to offer.
That's why I find the changes that Alan Jackson made to the LOTR scripts so very irritating. He meant well, but he conformed to the idea that Eowyn was better, because she fought with a sword-that's why he had to give Arwen one, too. Overlooking the fact that Eowyn abandoned her post and royal responsibilities, ignoring the *reasons* she was infatuated with Aragorn and why it passed when she met with Faramir's greater understanding/appreciation for her, and re-writing her personality from cold and controlled to perky and charming...movie!Eowyn was admirable in many ways, but she was *not* the woman that Tolkien created with such tenderness and compassion. And she didn't even get her romance with Faramir (poor, gutted fellow that he was, to talk about bad changes).
When I heard they cast Liv Tyler as Arwen, I thought she was a perfect choice-she has that sweet, melancholy beauty; and given how limited the role was, even a poor actress really couldn't do much to mess it up...and she's not a poor actress. The backstory of Aragorn & Arwen is so romantic, it was nice to see it brought more to the forefront. And then...there she was, tearing around on a horse (a better rider than the hero, of course) with a sword (because she had to be a warrior, too) and then with visions and lord, I was irritated. I don't know how she was perceived at the time the books were written; but I know in many circles now she's undervalued-overshadowed & sissified, as you say. Feminists are often the worst critics and it's sad to me that they'd regard her that way. No, Tolkien didn't write a lot about her, since the books weren't from either Elvish or Aragorn's pov; but what we know of her is very positive and loving. Why isn't that enough? Why does a sword (or gun, or any other penis-substitute) make a female character worth more?
I meant to reply to this a long time ago, but wanted to think about it first. I hope it makes sense...I'm not feeling good and having a hard time concentrating. These things always sound better in my head, anyway.
How do you like Ruby and Bela, now that they've been on the show for a bit?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
women's strengths: Eowyn vs Arwen
Date: 2007-11-18 06:41 pm (UTC)You're very right that the Eowyn strength comes at the price of constant comparison to men. If she fails, it's because she's a woman, not because she hasn't been taught how to do something, or is inexperienced or something, like a man could just as easily be. And if she succeeds, well, it must have been luck or favoritism or because she's a freak or something.
It's too easy to jump on the "girl power" bandwagon with this type of strength, imo. To get excited over images of Xena or Starbuck or movie!Eowyn and not see the prices they often have to pay to get where they are, and to judge other women as less because they can't or don't do the same.
Not only is it difficult to express the Arwen strength, but it too comes at the cost of comparisons-to men and to Eowyn!women. Since it *is* perceived as "womanly", it's therefore more passive (not in any negative way) and receptive/reactive to others' actions, rather than aggressive. So, an Arwen!woman is too-often considered weak. Yeah, but just wait until your ass is sick and needs nursing, or until you really need that heart-to-heart talk...who you gonna call then?
It reminds me of the debates among traditional homemakers and working women; both seeking validation so hard that they would undervalue and tear apart what the other type had to offer.
That's why I find the changes that Alan Jackson made to the LOTR scripts so very irritating. He meant well, but he conformed to the idea that Eowyn was better, because she fought with a sword-that's why he had to give Arwen one, too. Overlooking the fact that Eowyn abandoned her post and royal responsibilities, ignoring the *reasons* she was infatuated with Aragorn and why it passed when she met with Faramir's greater understanding/appreciation for her, and re-writing her personality from cold and controlled to perky and charming...movie!Eowyn was admirable in many ways, but she was *not* the woman that Tolkien created with such tenderness and compassion. And she didn't even get her romance with Faramir (poor, gutted fellow that he was, to talk about bad changes).
When I heard they cast Liv Tyler as Arwen, I thought she was a perfect choice-she has that sweet, melancholy beauty; and given how limited the role was, even a poor actress really couldn't do much to mess it up...and she's not a poor actress. The backstory of Aragorn & Arwen is so romantic, it was nice to see it brought more to the forefront. And then...there she was, tearing around on a horse (a better rider than the hero, of course) with a sword (because she had to be a warrior, too) and then with visions and lord, I was irritated. I don't know how she was perceived at the time the books were written; but I know in many circles now she's undervalued-overshadowed & sissified, as you say. Feminists are often the worst critics and it's sad to me that they'd regard her that way. No, Tolkien didn't write a lot about her, since the books weren't from either Elvish or Aragorn's pov; but what we know of her is very positive and loving. Why isn't that enough? Why does a sword (or gun, or any other penis-substitute) make a female character worth more?
I meant to reply to this a long time ago, but wanted to think about it first. I hope it makes sense...I'm not feeling good and having a hard time concentrating. These things always sound better in my head, anyway.
How do you like Ruby and Bela, now that they've been on the show for a bit?
Pesti