Master of his universe: the warnings in JRR Tolkien's novels

[Steve Hayes]

"So, how do we now respond to Tolkien’s imagined world, a world that
is hierarchical, notoriously short on female agents, and which was
accused by the poet Edwin Muir of being populated exclusively by
different-sized schoolboys? As with Lewis, the complaint about implied
misogyny is regularly coupled with worries about racial stereotyping,
the romanticising of violence and the reduction of moral issues to
cosmic battles between absolutes."


This article by an Anglican bishop and academic is worth reading.

https://t.co/nQ5cQYg8NB

[Paul S. Person]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:37:35 +0200, Steve Hayes

"So, how do we now respond to Tolkien’s imagined world, a world that
is hierarchical, notoriously short on female agents, and which was
accused by the poet Edwin Muir of being populated exclusively by
different-sized schoolboys? As with Lewis, the complaint about implied
misogyny is regularly coupled with worries about racial stereotyping,
the romanticising of violence and the reduction of moral issues to
cosmic battles between absolutes."
This article by an Anglican bishop and academic is worth reading.
https://t.co/nQ5cQYg8NB

Frankly, it sounds like hyper-PC tripe to me. No, I didn't read it; I
am going with your summary.

Apparently, the Eowyn, Shield Maiden of Rohan, made no impression on
Muir and the bishop/academic at all.

That said, a version in which /all/ the characters were played by
persons of the female persuasion might be worth seeing ... unless, of
course, it was an R-rated gross-out "comedy".

And a version using various-sized dark-skinned locals as Hobbits,
Dwarves, Men, Elves, and Istari and rabid Afrikaners as Orcs, Trolls,
and Sauron would /definitely/ be worth watching!

[Julian Bradfield]

Post by Paul S. Person
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:37:35 +0200, Steve Hayes

"So, how do we now respond to Tolkien’s imagined world, a world that
is hierarchical, notoriously short on female agents, and which was
accused by the poet Edwin Muir of being populated exclusively by
different-sized schoolboys? As with Lewis, the complaint about implied
misogyny is regularly coupled with worries about racial stereotyping,
the romanticising of violence and the reduction of moral issues to
cosmic battles between absolutes."
This article by an Anglican bishop and academic is worth reading.
https://t.co/nQ5cQYg8NB

Frankly, it sounds like hyper-PC tripe to me. No, I didn't read it; I
am going with your summary.

This is cretinosity worthy of Twitter. Steve didn't summarize it - he
*quoted* a paragraph. Unsurprisingly, since Steve (and I) think it's
worth reading, Williams goes on to refute the criticisms he too has
*quoted*, and explain his view of why Tolkien is very much worth
reading.

[Paul S. Person]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 18:38:46 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield

Post by Julian Bradfield

Post by Paul S. Person
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:37:35 +0200, Steve Hayes

"So, how do we now respond to Tolkien?s imagined world, a world that
is hierarchical, notoriously short on female agents, and which was
accused by the poet Edwin Muir of being populated exclusively by
different-sized schoolboys? As with Lewis, the complaint about implied
misogyny is regularly coupled with worries about racial stereotyping,
the romanticising of violence and the reduction of moral issues to
cosmic battles between absolutes."
This article by an Anglican bishop and academic is worth reading.
https://t.co/nQ5cQYg8NB

Frankly, it sounds like hyper-PC tripe to me. No, I didn't read it; I
am going with your summary.

This is cretinosity worthy of Twitter. Steve didn't summarize it - he
*quoted* a paragraph. Unsurprisingly, since Steve (and I) think it's
worth reading, Williams goes on to refute the criticisms he too has
*quoted*, and explain his view of why Tolkien is very much worth
reading.

I agree that I do not know that whether it is a summary or not, since
I did not bother to read the article.

And I /still/ do not know this, for I /still/ have not read the
article, and have no plans to do so.

And "explain[ing] his view of why Tolkien is very much worth reading"
is not the same as "refut[ing] the criticisms".

JRRT is very much worth reading whether these, or any other,
criticisms are valid or not.

Since when did the worthines of an author to be /read/ depend on
whether or not the criticisms of his work had been refuted?

[Steve Hayes]

On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:15:17 -0700, Paul S. Person

Post by Paul S. Person
And I /still/ do not know this, for I /still/ have not read the
article, and have no plans to do so.

Whether you read the article is neither here nor there.

I don't know whether Trowesch Forschhammer is still doing his Tolkien
Transactions, but if he is, it would probably be worth including
there.

[Paul S. Person]

On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 05:43:14 +0200, Steve Hayes

Post by Steve Hayes
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:15:17 -0700, Paul S. Person

Post by Paul S. Person
And I /still/ do not know this, for I /still/ have not read the
article, and have no plans to do so.

Whether you read the article is neither here nor there.

Glad to hear it.

The person I was responding to appeared to consider it a big deal.

Post by Steve Hayes
I don't know whether Trowesch Forschhammer is still doing his Tolkien
Transactions, but if he is, it would probably be worth including
there.

I thought the first name was "Troels". But perhaps my mind wanders.

I presume you are talking about the original article. You can judge
that better than I can.

Then again, if you don't know whether he is still doing his Tolkien
Transactions, how do you know it isn't already there?

[Steve Hayes]

On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 10:22:11 -0700, Paul S. Person

Post by Paul S. Person
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 05:43:14 +0200, Steve Hayes

Post by Steve Hayes
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 09:15:17 -0700, Paul S. Person

Post by Paul S. Person
And I /still/ do not know this, for I /still/ have not read the
article, and have no plans to do so.

Whether you read the article is neither here nor there.

Glad to hear it.
The person I was responding to appeared to consider it a big deal.

No, the person you were responding to was not complaining that you
didn't want to read it, but rather that you mischaractersised it.

Whether you personally read it or not doesn't matter, but it *is*
worth reading, and would be of interest to Inklings fans in general
and Tolkien fans in particular.