...Tolkien lived through that earlier time, but ...he might have done it as a rejection of the current interpretation.
That is possible, of course. However, I think adding that scene to reject current interpretation was a risky venture. There could have been a massive outcry at the homoerotic overtones and the book could have been black-listed. I mean, why put it in at all? He didn't have anything faintly like it between a man and a woman. It was just a very weird scene to have in this book that was filled with traditional heroes and endless battle scenes. All the other relationships were very underplayed, except for that morning bed scene with Sam, which had the realest emotion in the book.
Another slant might be the fact that women weren't really thought that important back then. From the way he handled his female characters, I don't think Tolkein thought too much of women, if he thought of them at all. I read that the only reason he added Aowen's scenes was because his daughter asked him to. LotR was a man's story. It's filled with heroes and fighting, and all that war and chivalry stuff that stirs young men's passions. Maybe that weird morning bed scene with Sam and Frodo was so clearly fleshed out because it was the only relationship that Tolkein felt important enough to explore.
I don't really understand why Tolkein did what he did in that scene or why it's there at all. It just drives me crazy when people insist that the words don't mean what they say they do, or that the book was written in another age, because it wasn't. The experiences that inspired the book might have been WW1 period, but even if the book had been written then, that was the same age as F. Scott Fitzgerald. That scene with Sam still wouldn't have been viewed as completely innocent and platonic, not as written.
Anyway, I hope I haven't overwhelmed you with all this!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: LotR: Sam & Frodo Part 2
Date: 2004-11-17 07:47 am (UTC)That is possible, of course. However, I think adding that scene to reject current interpretation was a risky venture. There could have been a massive outcry at the homoerotic overtones and the book could have been black-listed. I mean, why put it in at all? He didn't have anything faintly like it between a man and a woman. It was just a very weird scene to have in this book that was filled with traditional heroes and endless battle scenes. All the other relationships were very underplayed, except for that morning bed scene with Sam, which had the realest emotion in the book.
Another slant might be the fact that women weren't really thought that important back then. From the way he handled his female characters, I don't think Tolkein thought too much of women, if he thought of them at all. I read that the only reason he added Aowen's scenes was because his daughter asked him to. LotR was a man's story. It's filled with heroes and fighting, and all that war and chivalry stuff that stirs young men's passions. Maybe that weird morning bed scene with Sam and Frodo was so clearly fleshed out because it was the only relationship that Tolkein felt important enough to explore.
I don't really understand why Tolkein did what he did in that scene or why it's there at all. It just drives me crazy when people insist that the words don't mean what they say they do, or that the book was written in another age, because it wasn't. The experiences that inspired the book might have been WW1 period, but even if the book had been written then, that was the same age as F. Scott Fitzgerald. That scene with Sam still wouldn't have been viewed as completely innocent and platonic, not as written.
Anyway, I hope I haven't overwhelmed you with all this!
Hope this finds you happy and healthy. Cheers.