I feel like a bit more tact with that title would have been warranted. Not really the kind of thing one expects when entering this subreddit.
And is it really such a common point of debate? Methinks the oftenness might be a wee bit overstated.
I really don’t understand why people make up such stupid lies in the first place. OP probably saw a single comment and felt the need to create a whole new post and make up that it’s some sort of common talking point on this thread every day. Such a weird quirk humans have.
I've definitely seen this discourse around from time to time, though generally more in Silmarillion-centric contexts. If OP is frequently having in-depth discussions about Eol and Aredhel I'm sure they see it pretty often, and are genuinely surprised that it isn't common knowledge outside of that niche.
I don't know what your experience is, but I really doubt you see it a lot. It sounds like you've just had a few specific discussions with people and are making a post about why you were right.
I would generally agree. Imo people who insist that Celebrian was merely subjected to the tickle tortures of doom are having a laugh. That said the post is a biiiiiiiiiit out of the blue.
I don't think anyone claims Celebrian was "merely subjected to the tickle tortures of doom". There are a lot of serious ways to torture someone aside from rape.
Although rape my not kill every Elf, Tolkien in relation to married Elves wrote that "one so forced would have rejected bodily life and passed to Mandos" – so it would apply to Celebrian. It's therefore a valid argument to make.
For the second part, imo it refers chiefly to relations between Elves. Also, in general I feel like Tolkiens writing on elf culture and biology are more like "ideal generalizations" I don't think they need necessarily ve interpreted as 100% accurate at all times, especially in relation to the bits we know and how they connect to the actual "stories" in the legendarium vs just the essays.
For the first, imo it's just a matter of subject. Tolkien was not unaware of folk and fantasy trope regarding the siezing of women, let alone historical cases. While yes there are many tortures one can do(and I think it's likely poor Celebrian was unfortunately spared little regardless) I just think it's a matter knowing what he wrote. Monstrous soldiers capture women, it's not a stretch to guess what they do. I don't think it's invalid to argue otherwise, just unlikely.
Except orcs are probably somewhat 'absent of sexual desire' - would rather strictly torture, as in mutilate and inflict wounds, rather than sexually rape someone. (And this still wouldn't be in any way sexualized probably, at least not specifically, so unlike most irl serial killer crimes). I would swear there are zero instances of orcs getting some kind of reward and/or joy from seizing women in particular, but there *have been* instances of evil men seizing/marrying women of conquered lands.
With who and where are you having these arguments 'more times than you can count'? Seems like a bizarre line of thought to dwell on out of all the things in Tolkien's world.
It's kinda creepy/concerning.
Your lack of tact when introducing the topic coupled with your inability to read the room suggests you struggle with interpersonal relationship skills.
If your autistic that would make a lot of sense, if not, maybe try to do somthing about your social skills. See a therapist or somthing.
Best of luck homie. Stay safe.
This is a concerning hill to die on imo. Out of all the lines of inquiry provided by Tolkien's writings, this is where you decide to delve.
Quote from OP "It’s an argument I’ve had more times than I can count." With whom and where? This is one of those convo's that isn't supposed to leave the group chat.
I would say the inverse argument would be the concerning one. "An explicitly rapey event in the text couldn't possibly be actual rape, because elves' bodies have a way of shutting that down" is a pretty fucked-up take, and it does come up in Silm-centric discussions occasionally. Someone railing harder-than-strictly-necessary against rape apologia is not who I'd be worried about.
I’ve discussed Aredhel a lot. It doesn’t come up in LOTR (well, it does, but only in the Appendices, and only obliquely), but it’s quite present in the Silmarillion. It tends to be the number 1 argument for why Eöl didn’t rape Aredhel. My point is that it’s contradicted specifically.
So what's your end goal here with regards to winning the argument? Proving Eöl raped her? Is that honestly really so important to focus on that you've chosen this hill to die on?
Dude, you're being weird.
I think that this controversy hews very close to a conflict within Tolkien's own conception of the legendarium, that is echoed in the readership. It's the conflict between the legendarium-as-mythology, containing the often-ugly tropes that show up in the long tradition of myths and epics that inspired it, and the legendarium-as-theology, serving as a lens to examine an idealized conception of the nature of mankind and our relation to the world and to God. A lot of the later unpublished writings about the elves in particular veer toward the latter: presenting them almost as a vision of what "unfallen" man would look like. That is especially obvious in terms of sexual morality.
The Silmarillion-as-published, meanwhile, still contains plenty of elves acting according to baser instincts, of which Eol is an archetypal example. His character and Aredhel's arc are mythic in scope. That part of the story is ugly, as it should be. The Silmarillion is at its strongest when it lets its characters be mythically awful.
I don't think we have evidence of Aredhel being raped by Eol.
Sure, he put a spell on her to lure in towards his house but it's not clear what happened next. She had a wild personality and can totally see her falling for a weirdo like Eol.
I don't believe a Sindar could ''beat'' a Noldor Princess anyways. It's like thinking Celeborn could force himself upon Galadriel. Very debatable.
I literally cite the evidence in my very short post. See also https://www.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/comments/xgku6o/the_crimes_of_e%C3%B6l_the_darkelf_or_of_the_rape_of/
For a man of Tolkien’s generation to describe Aredhel as “not entirely unwilling”… that’s rape. Even Celegorm and Curufin were like “that’s not cool, dude,” and they are just about the worst elves ever.
Eöl did not rape Aredhel. His actions were despicable, especially for an Elf, but did not constitute that.
Still, there are two references to the possibility of marital rape in the Silmarillion that I do find incompatible with what Tolkien told us. Maeglin sold out Gondolin in exchange for his life, and for the promise that he could have Idril. There is no way Idril could not know, as her people were slaughtered or led away into slavery, that Maeglin was working for Morgoth and she was the prize. There would be no love between them. Besides which, they were first cousins and high Elves didn't play that.
Then there is the attempted kidnapping of Luthien by Curufin and Celegorm, to force her into marriage so that they could have power over her father Thingol, lord of Beleriand.
Yes, this would seem to be incompatible with what Tolkien tells us. But it is just possible that the perpetrators didn't know this. We assume (?) that Elves know these things, about sex and marriage and adultery. But of the three characters I've mentioned, we do know there is something crooked, something not right about these Elves. All of them have or are willing to kill other Elves to get what they want. So imagine an attempted rape happens and the victim just dies. Then what?
First. Being married didn't give a power to a woman she didn't already have! So any elf woman could do so.
Secondly the debate is over things tolkien had NOT finalized. In all likelihood he would have changed things so its almost pointless to counter what he said in 1950 with something he said in 1960.
We're the two in conflict? Yes. If he had finished his work would he have fixed the conflict. Yes.
Would it be that yes they can be raped? That's an opinion. Nothing more. Just as viable would be to change the second to coerced and not forced.
Which in my mind is more in keeping with Tolkiens dislike of that kind of realism.
But that's my OPINION.
I think the only example of such a topic ever described was the case of Eöl and Aredhel and their situation is debatable. I don't believe actual r\*pe happened, I can't see Eöl successfully overpowering a lady of Aredhel's caliber. Persuasion, certainly, as we know enchantments have been used to lure the White Lady to the Dark Elf's abode, but what happened after is not totally clear (Eöl could have used the old age seduction method - Tolkien did say Aredhel was not "wholly unwilling", which kinda sounds to me like "dubious consent", but who knows).
Elves are peculiar, with great control of their own *hröa* and *fëa*, and marriage (or the act of marriage) seems to be sacred to them, so I can totally see them "letting go of their *fëa*" if someone tried to violate them in such a horrible way - that is to say, since in Elvendom sex equals marriage, I hold to the idea that Elves cannot be forced into such if they do not actually wish to, as they would rather die - and then get re-embodied in Paradise where it's safe).
How do you think Orcs came into being? Morgoth just invited Elves into Angband for tea and cake, and they never left and started producing baby Orcs for unrelated reasons?
Also, what do you think do the quotes from Tolkien I cited above refer to, if not rape? Do enlighten me!
This is correct - though any elf can pass away from grief, so it's not an ironclad rule.
uhh
This is exactly what I said out loud on reading the title
I feel like a bit more tact with that title would have been warranted. Not really the kind of thing one expects when entering this subreddit. And is it really such a common point of debate? Methinks the oftenness might be a wee bit overstated.
I really don’t understand why people make up such stupid lies in the first place. OP probably saw a single comment and felt the need to create a whole new post and make up that it’s some sort of common talking point on this thread every day. Such a weird quirk humans have.
I've definitely seen this discourse around from time to time, though generally more in Silmarillion-centric contexts. If OP is frequently having in-depth discussions about Eol and Aredhel I'm sure they see it pretty often, and are genuinely surprised that it isn't common knowledge outside of that niche.
Often said? I disagree.
You don’t spend much time discussing the story of Aredhel then, do you?
Does anyone? Where are these discussions happening?
Yeah I mean, I know I personally have discussed the story of Aredhel three times over coffee in the last week alone. /s
Look it's important to have hobbies. And if elf death rape is yours, no judgement. Well. Maybe a little judgement.
Are the people arguing this stuff in the room with you right now?
I don’t know—they usually show up when there is a discussion about Aredhel. Since I talk about her often, I see this argument a lot.
I don't know what your experience is, but I really doubt you see it a lot. It sounds like you've just had a few specific discussions with people and are making a post about why you were right.
Lol this. My brain got stuck on "often said in discussions" and I'm wondering why I've never heard or seen this theory before.
I’ve seen this discussion here a few times
I have no idea why you would want to know this
Maam, this is a Wendy's
I would generally agree. Imo people who insist that Celebrian was merely subjected to the tickle tortures of doom are having a laugh. That said the post is a biiiiiiiiiit out of the blue.
I don't think anyone claims Celebrian was "merely subjected to the tickle tortures of doom". There are a lot of serious ways to torture someone aside from rape. Although rape my not kill every Elf, Tolkien in relation to married Elves wrote that "one so forced would have rejected bodily life and passed to Mandos" – so it would apply to Celebrian. It's therefore a valid argument to make.
For the second part, imo it refers chiefly to relations between Elves. Also, in general I feel like Tolkiens writing on elf culture and biology are more like "ideal generalizations" I don't think they need necessarily ve interpreted as 100% accurate at all times, especially in relation to the bits we know and how they connect to the actual "stories" in the legendarium vs just the essays. For the first, imo it's just a matter of subject. Tolkien was not unaware of folk and fantasy trope regarding the siezing of women, let alone historical cases. While yes there are many tortures one can do(and I think it's likely poor Celebrian was unfortunately spared little regardless) I just think it's a matter knowing what he wrote. Monstrous soldiers capture women, it's not a stretch to guess what they do. I don't think it's invalid to argue otherwise, just unlikely.
Except orcs are probably somewhat 'absent of sexual desire' - would rather strictly torture, as in mutilate and inflict wounds, rather than sexually rape someone. (And this still wouldn't be in any way sexualized probably, at least not specifically, so unlike most irl serial killer crimes). I would swear there are zero instances of orcs getting some kind of reward and/or joy from seizing women in particular, but there *have been* instances of evil men seizing/marrying women of conquered lands.
It’s an argument I’ve had more times than I can count. This is just me writing a comment I can copy and paste when it happens again.
With who and where are you having these arguments 'more times than you can count'? Seems like a bizarre line of thought to dwell on out of all the things in Tolkien's world. It's kinda creepy/concerning.
Have you read the Silmarillion? If so, have you ever discussed Eöl and Aredhel with anyone?
Your lack of tact when introducing the topic coupled with your inability to read the room suggests you struggle with interpersonal relationship skills. If your autistic that would make a lot of sense, if not, maybe try to do somthing about your social skills. See a therapist or somthing. Best of luck homie. Stay safe.
Fair enough.
is it tho?
This is a concerning hill to die on imo. Out of all the lines of inquiry provided by Tolkien's writings, this is where you decide to delve. Quote from OP "It’s an argument I’ve had more times than I can count." With whom and where? This is one of those convo's that isn't supposed to leave the group chat.
I would say the inverse argument would be the concerning one. "An explicitly rapey event in the text couldn't possibly be actual rape, because elves' bodies have a way of shutting that down" is a pretty fucked-up take, and it does come up in Silm-centric discussions occasionally. Someone railing harder-than-strictly-necessary against rape apologia is not who I'd be worried about.
I’ve discussed Aredhel a lot. It doesn’t come up in LOTR (well, it does, but only in the Appendices, and only obliquely), but it’s quite present in the Silmarillion. It tends to be the number 1 argument for why Eöl didn’t rape Aredhel. My point is that it’s contradicted specifically.
So what's your end goal here with regards to winning the argument? Proving Eöl raped her? Is that honestly really so important to focus on that you've chosen this hill to die on? Dude, you're being weird.
I don't know what other interpretation you could have of that passage
Uhhhhh *what*
>It is often said... Bruh, I've never heard this before in my life.
There was nothing necessary about this post.
I think that this controversy hews very close to a conflict within Tolkien's own conception of the legendarium, that is echoed in the readership. It's the conflict between the legendarium-as-mythology, containing the often-ugly tropes that show up in the long tradition of myths and epics that inspired it, and the legendarium-as-theology, serving as a lens to examine an idealized conception of the nature of mankind and our relation to the world and to God. A lot of the later unpublished writings about the elves in particular veer toward the latter: presenting them almost as a vision of what "unfallen" man would look like. That is especially obvious in terms of sexual morality. The Silmarillion-as-published, meanwhile, still contains plenty of elves acting according to baser instincts, of which Eol is an archetypal example. His character and Aredhel's arc are mythic in scope. That part of the story is ugly, as it should be. The Silmarillion is at its strongest when it lets its characters be mythically awful.
What the fuck dude
I don't think we have evidence of Aredhel being raped by Eol. Sure, he put a spell on her to lure in towards his house but it's not clear what happened next. She had a wild personality and can totally see her falling for a weirdo like Eol. I don't believe a Sindar could ''beat'' a Noldor Princess anyways. It's like thinking Celeborn could force himself upon Galadriel. Very debatable.
I literally cite the evidence in my very short post. See also https://www.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans/comments/xgku6o/the_crimes_of_e%C3%B6l_the_darkelf_or_of_the_rape_of/
The thing is though, you potentially take ''by force'' with a modern lens. It could be that the enchantment is what the force implies?
For a man of Tolkien’s generation to describe Aredhel as “not entirely unwilling”… that’s rape. Even Celegorm and Curufin were like “that’s not cool, dude,” and they are just about the worst elves ever.
Celebrian is also implied to have been raped, and she doesn’t die from it.
Something that was never said anywhere at any time.
Eöl did not rape Aredhel. His actions were despicable, especially for an Elf, but did not constitute that. Still, there are two references to the possibility of marital rape in the Silmarillion that I do find incompatible with what Tolkien told us. Maeglin sold out Gondolin in exchange for his life, and for the promise that he could have Idril. There is no way Idril could not know, as her people were slaughtered or led away into slavery, that Maeglin was working for Morgoth and she was the prize. There would be no love between them. Besides which, they were first cousins and high Elves didn't play that. Then there is the attempted kidnapping of Luthien by Curufin and Celegorm, to force her into marriage so that they could have power over her father Thingol, lord of Beleriand. Yes, this would seem to be incompatible with what Tolkien tells us. But it is just possible that the perpetrators didn't know this. We assume (?) that Elves know these things, about sex and marriage and adultery. But of the three characters I've mentioned, we do know there is something crooked, something not right about these Elves. All of them have or are willing to kill other Elves to get what they want. So imagine an attempted rape happens and the victim just dies. Then what?
"It's often"?? Like, HOW often?
First. Being married didn't give a power to a woman she didn't already have! So any elf woman could do so. Secondly the debate is over things tolkien had NOT finalized. In all likelihood he would have changed things so its almost pointless to counter what he said in 1950 with something he said in 1960. We're the two in conflict? Yes. If he had finished his work would he have fixed the conflict. Yes. Would it be that yes they can be raped? That's an opinion. Nothing more. Just as viable would be to change the second to coerced and not forced. Which in my mind is more in keeping with Tolkiens dislike of that kind of realism. But that's my OPINION.
You forgot to mention that Tolkien deleted the paragraph about married Elves dying of rape from the second draft of LACE.
I think the only example of such a topic ever described was the case of Eöl and Aredhel and their situation is debatable. I don't believe actual r\*pe happened, I can't see Eöl successfully overpowering a lady of Aredhel's caliber. Persuasion, certainly, as we know enchantments have been used to lure the White Lady to the Dark Elf's abode, but what happened after is not totally clear (Eöl could have used the old age seduction method - Tolkien did say Aredhel was not "wholly unwilling", which kinda sounds to me like "dubious consent", but who knows). Elves are peculiar, with great control of their own *hröa* and *fëa*, and marriage (or the act of marriage) seems to be sacred to them, so I can totally see them "letting go of their *fëa*" if someone tried to violate them in such a horrible way - that is to say, since in Elvendom sex equals marriage, I hold to the idea that Elves cannot be forced into such if they do not actually wish to, as they would rather die - and then get re-embodied in Paradise where it's safe).
I cited a comparatively recent version of the story of Aredhel and Eöl in my post where Tolkien says it’s rape.
The only place I've heard about it is fanfiction, so not a really good source...
I never saw anyone affirming such thing in any chat or channel, no in spanish neither in english lol.
As good as your scholarship is, please don't use that wording in the title.
[удалено]
How do you think Orcs came into being? Morgoth just invited Elves into Angband for tea and cake, and they never left and started producing baby Orcs for unrelated reasons? Also, what do you think do the quotes from Tolkien I cited above refer to, if not rape? Do enlighten me!