I am a confirmed
(re: obsessive) Tolkien fan, both of the original books about Middle
Earth and of the Peter Jackson movies. I thought that, for the most
part, Mr. Jackson and his team have done a masterful, beautiful job
at bringing the books to film despite the difficulties the books
present to that medium. While I swear first loyalty to the books, I
am not so protective of their narrative integrity that I cannot
understand (or at least tolerate) changes to the plot made for sake
of a good film. I understand that while I
would completely adore a scene-for-scene filming of the books--
complete with every single poem or song in all verses-- that you
can't fill movie theaters with slow, dense plots and poetic trees.
(Sorry Treebeard).
When
I went to see the film version of the Hobbit, I came expecting
differences from the books. I knew that the film drew from the
appendixes heavily and altered events of the book in a few places. I
accepted these alterations because they made sense within the story
and seemed faithful to Tolkien's story. With this in mind, I enjoyed
the movie immensely, though I did engage in a bit of detail-oriented
grumbling at the end. Such is the right and privilege of geeks.
But
then I learned about Tauriel.
She
is a character invented solely for the movies, an elf warrior who,
along with Legolas, sticks it to the Mirkwood spiders. She is a “high
ranking” member of the elf army and “knows how to wield any
weapon.” I am a bit irritated that they changed the nature of the
Mirkwood elves (I always enjoyed the counterpart they provided to the
notion that all Middle-earth elves are inherently noble, and sociable
creatures) but I can tolerate that. I can tolerate Legolas appearing
and even the character of Tauriel herself were it not for one thing--
why she was created at all. The buzz around her character online, and
the descriptions given by the movie creators, were that she was added
to rectify the “lack of female characters” in the book.
Now
I'm mad.
Feminist
critics have attacked Tolkien for the supposed bias in his writing
towards male characters and away from female characters. Clearly they
are ignoring Eowyn, Luthien, and the Galadriel of the Silmarillion,
but it's true that
the majority of major characters in The Hobbit and The Lord of the
Rings are male. The myths
that inspired Tolkien were also male-driven. But why is that such an
offense?
Writers
should be allowed the creative freedom to choose their own
inspirations and create their own worlds without having to be
shackled by adherence to some politically correct ratio of men to
women. I have read and loved stories in which there were no
male characters period. I have
read and loved stories in which there were mostly male characters. I
have loved the stories in which there has been a mix. But
artificially reshaping narrative so women can feel “included” is
censorship by way of revision and-- if I may say so-- is insulting.
I
am not fond, Mr. Jackson, of your insinuation that a woman cannot
enjoy a fantasy movie unless she sees another women swinging daggers
and rescuing men. Give my mind more credit than that. Don't patronize
me by adding a feminist elf to pacify me. It's like adding a female
soldier to Saving Private Ryan. It is awkward and untrue to the world the story inhabits.
No
one is forced to read Tolkien. If a reader decides that the gender
politics of his world (and of most of ancient mythology) are too
offensive, he or she may find entertainment elsewhere. There are some
great female-oriented fantasy books, which I have read and love. I
would not want to alter those books by adding random men. Nor do I
want to politicize Tolkien by adding random women.
Tolkien's
female fans love his work on its own terms and we have no trouble
identifying with the characters of the movie despite the fact that
they are men. I search for goodness with Gandalf, discover unexpected
courage with Bilbo, and long for home with Thorin and his band.
That's what the best storytelling does.....it stirs the part of our
souls which are all the same. It is a cheap and unnecessary bargain
to trade that power to quiet a few grumpy feminists.
1 comment:
Wow. That is stupid.
I heard an actress on "The View" once say she was part of a whole charity organization dedicated to "gender equality" in fiction. She specifically said that stories shouldn't just star a female character who is surrounded by male characters (i.e. my novel), but that there should be an equal number of male and female characters.
Can you you say artificial constructs?
Post a Comment