Homosexuality and LotR

Those who succeed follow there hearts rather than their heads, perhaps allowing them to break out of the structure society imposes on them, but not always.  Sam put it best in what has to be my favorite spoken line from the books: "Don't ever follow your head, Sam, it's not the best part of you.  In your heart you knew he was alive..."

Denethor knew almost mathematically they couldn't win, and it contributed to his madness.  Boromir knew the ring was a mighty weapon, while Faramir felt it would be wrong to use something of pure evil. Saruman simply picked the side he saw would win, not the side he cared about.  Aragorn was motivated not so much by knowing he had a claim to Kingship, but from his love of Arwen which led Elrond to impose the requirement of Kingship.  Gandalf succeeded not by logic and strength, but by hope.

Full Disclosure edit: this point of view is derived from Tolkien's Sanctifying Myth by Balzir.

I think in that case that maybe its Sam who most fall under the (those who look Beyond their personal identity to succeed) and it happened in the tower of (Barad Dur?) he had always seen himself as little and meek gardener. Losing Frodo turned him into a warrior.

But you are saying he didnt look beyond it?- Mrs Figg

No, I am saying you cant ignore it if you are going to discuss Aragorn in this context.
If you are going to write about seeing beyond their identity you have to first nail down what that identity is and where it comes from.
And you could argue that Aragorn only fulfills an identity he was always heading towards.

Self belief is probably his biggest driving factor, what sees him through all he does is that certainty, and what he discovers about himself by doing those things is what eventually allows him to rise beyond 'all his ancestors' and be the King he is- one of the most important scenes we have of Aragorn as King for me comes when he sends the untrained terrified men back to guard the crossroads, a task that allows them to back out whilst still preserving their honour and manliness. It demonstrates what sort of King he will be to his people- shame PJ and the Coven didnt think it important to include  




Halfy -Id only dispute the Aragorn one- not that it wasn't a factor, but the overriding one was a sense of having the right- he believed that already before he met Arwen- the ban imposed on him by Elrond changed nothing, he believed it most likely that he would, as his forefathers did, live out his life without Sauron returning and a chance arising- as it happened he was holding the parcel when the music stopped, giving him the opportunity to fulfill a destiny he always believed he had the right to if it was in his time, and at the same time claim Arwen as wife.  She was as important to him, but it wasnt the older and original motivation which lasts throughout his life.

And in the text Tolkien gives us many more examples of Aragorn reaffirming or claiming his right than it does him being motivated by Arwen.

she was just the cherry on the cake in the book. Thats why PJ's version was so great, it gave Arwen a real and important role in Aragorns life.

However you view on PJ's take (I for one prefer Tokiens version in the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen to PJ's clumsy hamfisted attempt) I assume it is book Aragon Tin is discussing for her paper.

It may only be happenstance that immediately after Elrond placed upon him the conditions for Arwen's hand, Aragorn began his great journeys.  I wouldn't say the Arwen situation caused him to undertake winning the Kingship, but I always had the deep feeling that without her as motivation he wouldn't have succeeded.  After generations of heirs of Isildur while Gondor was ruled by stewards, why now?

Arwen may have fallen for him because she saw the greatness in him, but I think it was symbiotic, not just the cherry on top.   I think without the love for Arwen guiding him, he would have lost heart.  

Tolkien doesn't make a big deal of it simply because it's too deep.  He never mentions Melkor either, or why the Eldar are in Middle Earth, or how exactly the Kingship failed in Gondor or any number of deep things.  Part of the genius of LotR is how much is left to be discovered upon reading the appendices.  The fact that Aragorn never mentions how closely he's entwined with Arwen makes him that much deeper.

After generations of heirs of Isildur while Gondor was ruled by stewards, why now?- Halfwise

Because now the Ring has reappeared and he as an opportunity none of his ancestors since Isuldur has had.

"I think without the love for Arwen guiding him, he would have lost heart."- Halfwise

I would certainly agree she was hardened him into the man we meet at Bree- who sounds fair but looks foul- the hardship of his life I think as sustained in large part by love for Arwen, but before the Ring came what made him seem 'grim' was the apparent futility of it all- it was a love with a price on it that he could not claim unless circumstances outwith his control arose- fortunately for him they did.

But when they did it was his certainty in his right to make that claim that drove him on.
The fact that if he succeeded he got the love of his life too was the other part of that that gave him the ability to persevere the trials ahead of him.

But it was still the certainty that no other but him had the right to make his claims that underlines everything he does I'd say.

Enh, anyone of those rangers over the last thousand years could have shown up at Minas Tirith making the same claims to be King. I'm not convinced he'd be trying in the first place (before the ring was identified) if not for Arwen. He'd just try to uphold his lineage the way all his ancestors had, without ever claiming the throne.

I have no proof, just the way I read the character.

halfwise wrote:Tolkien doesn't make a big deal of it simply because it's too deep.  He never mentions Melkor either, or why the Eldar are in Middle Earth, or how exactly the Kingship failed in Gondor or any number of deep things.  Part of the genius of LotR is how much is left to be discovered upon reading the appendices.  The fact that Aragorn never mentions how closely he's entwined with Arwen makes him that much deeper.

Characters in Tolkien seem real because there is always the sense that we are only seeing a small part of their lives. Things happen in the real lives of people and we go through these things, whether in real life of in the realms of suspended disbelief, without analyzing as we go. We just accept that the folk around us - or good fictional characters - are flesh and blood. In other words, Tolkien's characters already have depth but we understand that depth better if we read an appendix two.

"Enh, anyone of those rangers over the last thousand years could have shown up at Minas Tirith making the same claims to be King."- Halfwise

I always got the impression after the fall of the northern kingdom they choose self exile until the day came when they could avenge themselves on Sauron and restore Gondor and Arnor- and that chance never happened until the Ring reappeared.

So I suppose a forebearer could have claimed to be King, but to what end? They still could not defeat Sauron.

If the Ring had not reappeared Aragorn would just have grown old and died as the rest of his line had done, and because of his choice of Arwen it would have ended there with no children- and from the point in his life onwards where he falls in love with Aragorn thats what makes him grim.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:If the Ring had not reappeared Aragorn would just have grown old and died as the rest of his line had done, and because of his choice of Arwen it would have ended there with no children- and from the point in his life onwards where he falls in love with Aragorn thats what makes him grim.

A little narcissistic of him, what?   Self-love can be quite grim. Makes one wonder how Arwen fell for him. Though some women do go for self-absorbed men. {{{My Missus might be a case in point!   }}}

Just make the usual allowances when reading my posts for buckie consumption   

Pettytyrant101 wrote:However you view on PJ's take (I for one prefer Tokiens version in the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen to PJ's clumsy hamfisted attempt)  I assume it is book Aragon Tin is discussing for her paper.

well its only your opinion that PJ's version is clumsy, and I think you are totally wrong, It was actually very well done, subtle and engaging to watch. I would much rather see Arwen as PJ described her than some shadowy silent and absent character. Liv Tyler brought her to life.

I have said before and will restate now, if you are going to adapt Tolkien for the screen, big or small I think you have to bring the story of Arwen into it.

Its just PJ didnt bring the story in- he just made one up-instead of them pledging their love in Lorien (why not have a flashback scene as they enter Lothlorien- the bloody book even has one given as a vision to Frodo) she pledges her love in Rivendell, worse Elrond's price, that she can marry no man who is any less than King of Gondor and Arnor (a parallel to the Luthien Beren story were the price of marriage is set at a seemingly impossibly high bar) is gone and replaced with the terrible cringeworthy "I will not leave my daughter here to die." From Elrond, who seems in PJ's to hate men and have no faith them whatsoever, it makes one wonder why he shelters the Kings in that case.

Instead of a resolute Arwen who watches over Aragorn in thought and crafts him the banner under which he will ride she sods off in PJ's version because she is afraid to die alone, and has to have a vision before she decides to stay. So much for unconditional love- Ill stay if you give me a kid but if not Im out of here!

''Instead of a resolute Arwen who watches over Aragorn in thought and crafts him the banner under which he will ride she sods off in PJ's version because she is afraid to die alone, and has to have a vision before she decides to stay. So much for unconditional love- Ill stay if you give me a kid but if not Im out of here!''


Well if you think that you have obviously deliberately misread it.

Well she leaves after Elrond tells her there is no future for her and Aragorn will grow old and she will eventually fade away too and concludes on the line "There is nothing for you here now, except death."

At which point she bursts into tears, cause she's a weak and feeble woman and cant cope with death and loss, and then he emotionally blackmails her by hugging her and asking her if she doesnt love him too (I mean what a bastard putting his own love in direct competition with her love for Aragorn, whom Elrond has supposedly raised as if a son, and making her choose) and she is too weak and feeble to stand up to this blackmail so she agrees and sobs some more.

Next thing he piles her on a horse and off she goes to the Havens.

When we next see her on her journey she is still going to the Havens and she has a vision in which she sees her future son- she changes her mind, goes back home and calls daddy out for being an emotional blackmailing bastard, and a liar because he never told her there was a child.

It seems clear the deciding factor here is the child- if there had been no child to have a vision of she would not have had a vision and she'd have been on a ship by films end.

Yeah, Elrond is kind of a dick in the movies.

Spoiler:

edit: that should probably be put in spoilers.

It should have been put in the trashcan...

tolkien at least wrote that.

Galion, yes, but what is Elros doing there?

dunno, they probably needed a name and thought it would be fun to the nerds...

Oh, okay, maybe it's another Elros (since THE Elros is a half-elf who chose to be mortal).

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Well she leaves after Elrond tells her there is no future for her and Aragorn will grow old and she will eventually fade away too and concludes on the line "There is nothing for you here now, except death."

At which point she bursts into tears, cause she's a weak and feeble woman and cant cope with death and loss, and then he emotionally blackmails her by hugging her and asking her if she doesnt love him too (I mean what a bastard putting his own love in direct competition with her love for Aragorn, whom Elrond has supposedly raised as if a son, and making her choose) and she is too weak and feeble to stand up to this blackmail so she agrees and sobs some more.

Next thing he piles her on a horse and off she goes to the Havens.

When we next see her on her journey she is still going to the Havens and she has a vision in which she sees her future son- she changes her mind, goes back home and calls daddy out for being an emotional blackmailing bastard, and a liar because he never told her there was a child.

It seems clear the deciding factor here is the child- if there had been no child to have a vision of she would not have had a vision and she'd have been on a ship by films end.

Firstly. Elrond is not a 'dick' but a father who loves his only daughter.
Secondly Arwen is not a weak and feeble woman but a strong and supportive partner to Aragorn.
In the book she is relagated to the passive female who stays behind knitting, but in PJ's version she is pro-active assertive and takes control of the situation (taking Frodo to Rivendell).
Arwen and Galadriel are gift givers, knowing what each member of the fellowship needs to succeed on the Quest. Galadriel for all of them, and Arwen just for Aragorn. She gives him her necklace for protection.
Its NOT Elrond who tells her to leave ME but Aragorn, he tells her to leave although he contiues to wear her necklace.

"Men are weak."

~ Movie-Elrond.

Sounds like a dickish sort of thing to say to me.

Mrs Figg wrote:
In the book she is relagated to the passive female who stays behind knitting, but in PJ's version she is pro-active assertive and takes control of the situation (taking Frodo to Rivendell).

Leaving Frodo to play the part of a sack of wet meal, instead of what is a signature development for him in the book.