I’ll admit it’s a long, long time since I read LotR, and I haven’t read any of the additional books that some of you may have done; so if my information is lacking, then fair enough. But I don’t recall any impression of her being a superwoman. Glancing at wikipedia, it seems Tolkein said "“Though not a ‘dry nurse’ in temper, she was also not really a soldier or ‘Amazon’, but like many brave women was capable of great military gallantry at a crisis.”
But if there’s additional evidence that she’s somehow special (either due to my poor memory, or from additional sources), I’m happy to back down on this one.
That was me. Couple of posts back, remember?
She lopped its head off with one blow. Again, if we go with the superwoman interpretation, then maybe they are tougher than they seem; but going with the “normal, well-trained, brave woman but not a soldier” interpretation, they don’t seem so.
I’m guessing you are confusing the movie with the book.
IOW Gandalf admits that he may have been outclassed by the Witch King, and that he couldn’t have defeated him if they had faced each other because of the prophecy.
When Gandalf was called away he hadn’t been going to fight the Witch King. He had been spurring men into action and counteracting the fear of the Witch King. It had already been noted that the forces of Sauron couldn’t face Gandalf the White, so basically the Witch King was driving the forces of Mordor before him and terrifying the forces of Gondor, and Gandalf was driving the forces of Gandalf before him and terrifying the forces of Mordor. Both were “ruling from the rear” and neither intended to get into a fight unless it was essential.
Gandalf did eventually face the Witch King at the breach in the gate, but there’s no evidence that he intended to fight him.
All Gandalf did was stop the Witch King, and his soldiers, from entering the city. Once again, there seems to be prophecy at work here, the prophecy that enemies can never enter Minas Torith while men defend the walls. Gandalf is playing his role in ensuring that happens by delaying their entry until they are forced to retreat, but there’s no evidence he intended to fight the Witch King, or that he thought he could win if he did.
Well, yeah. From a dramatic point of view, in these cases, you have two options: the (hopefully) surprising single cleave or the desperate hacking at the sinews of the neck. The former connotes a sudden realization of fortitude and power. The latter is usually reserved for those fighting in hidden areas unbeknownst to their compatriots so that the tension is higher.
I am guessing from this that you’ve only watched the movie and never actually read the book. In the book the fight is never described at all.
In the LOTR mythos people have ‘power’. It’s not training or ability, it’s actual power based upon their stature that is reflected in everything they do. It’s based on the primitive animist concepts that are best reflected to day in societies that are stil’ largely animist, such as Shintoist concepts of 'size" or Polynesian concepts of mana. A great man is literally more powerful, and a man with a mission is literally more powerful, to the point that someone fighting for a cause can become so fierce that weapons can’t affect him and enemies can’t even stand and face him, much less hope to defeat him.
That is what powerful means, and Aragorn was literally the most powerful Man in the world. He was surrounded by prophecies was the culmination of lineage stretching back literally to the beginning of the world. His ancestry included lesser angels.
Sauron feared Aragorn as the heir of Isildur, the badass that cut Sauron’s finger off last time. That is how powerful Aragorn was, or at least was destined to become How powerful he was at the time of the Weathertop incident is unknown, but he was certainly no commoner.
We aren’t talking about skill or training here, we are talking about literal power. Power of command, power to inflict damage, power to terrify his enemies. He had all that. And the Nazgul were ambushed by him in fight over the One Ring, that was both his by descent from Isildur and his ancestral burden. They stood to gain nothing at all from fighting it out. And yet you seem to think that their retreat was indicative of them not being badass enough.
Eowyn was a grown woman, a shieldmaiden, not an untrained girl. She was also a member of a great royal family, fighting for her Lord, backed by an ancient prophecy and helped by a Hobbit (counted amongst the great) magic sword specifically designed to kill the Witch King.
That’s a teensy bit different to "an untrained girl.
She wasn’t a soldier because the Rohirrim didn’t have organized female troops, but she was definitely not an “untrained girl”: she refers to herself as a “shieldmaiden” and remarks at some point “I can ride and wield blade” or something of the sort.
In other words, she’s trained in the arts of war, and considering the standards of horsemanship and swordsmanship evidenced in her family, there’s every reason to suppose that she’s pretty damn good at them.
Well, at least you seem to be letting go of the “untrained girl” canard now.
The rest of your reasoning seems to be not much more than a classic sexist vicious circle. “If a normal woman could kill the Witch King then he must not have been so tough, and if he was in fact so tough, then she must have been more than a normal woman.”
That subtly excludes the very possibility that Tolkien seems to have chosen: namely, that a normal woman with well-developed fighting skills and remarkable personal bravery, assisted by the recklessness of despair and a massive dose of good luck in the combat circumstances, could in fact have achieved a truly extraordinary feat of battle.
You seem to be operating on the premise that if a woman can do it, that means it must be easy, unless the woman is some kind of superhero. Tolkien, being familiar with lots of ancient Norse, Saxon etc. sagas and legends where some of the most remarkable and renowned warriors are female—even if they never officially served in organized armies—was much less dismissive about the potential for female warriors’ achievement.
Holy crap. Nasty. That may be what went through your head, but it certainly wasn’t what went through mine.
I’m out of here. This conversation has gone from discussing a book to aspersions about personal character. It’s a decent book, but it doesn’t warrant being nasty to each other about.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I said that the argument you’re using seems to be based on sexist assumptions, not that you personally seem to be a sexist.
We all fall into the trap of conventional biased thinking from time to time, and we are all liable to be affected by pervasive cultural stereotypes. Pointing out instances of that is not “nasty”, nor is it a reflection on anyone’s “personal character”.
If you like, you can contest my argument that your reasoning about Eowyn’s slaying the Witch King seems to invoke sexist assumptions. Or if it seems to you like a valid point, you can agree with me. Or if you prefer, you can just drop the subject and leave the thread (whose ostensible topic has nothing to do with this subject anyway). But what you don’t need to do is worry about aspersions on your personal character, because nobody’s casting any.
One shouldn’t read Lord of the Rings with the filters of World of Warcraft and Dungeons and Dragons. In the world of Tolkien, bloodline, destiny, prophecy and character trumps training and abilities. It is written as a myth, not as a justification for a game.
Aragorn is one of the mightest men ever lived because of his bloodline and character, not because he has +6 Strength modifier or what not. Eowyn and Merry killed the Witch King not because they out-level Gandalf, but because they are destined to do so by a prophecy.
Likewise the eagles are not just mere tools to be used and besides, it will make a for a boring story (at least from Tolkien’s point of view)
On weathertop, the Witch King’s objective wasn’t to get the ring. Sauron didn’t want that to happen, the witch king in possession of that ring. No, his objective was to turn Frodo into a mini ring wraith. If Frodo hadn’t invoked the name Elbereth, he would have been stabbed in the heart. There wouldn’t have been a need to defeat Aragorn at all. At that point, Frodo would have been under the ring wraith’s control. Slip the ring on, disappear, and do as we command. Easy Peasy. So I suppose I think it’s Frodo’s strength of character that mattered in that incident, not Aragorn’s.
As far as Eowyn goes, she was well trained as others have said. She was the only woman in an all men’s family. She also had decided she wanted to die in battle. She didn’t really care if she died, it made her more dangerous to begin with. She was defending her King and the man who had raised her as his daughter. She figured she was going to die and wanted to make sure she took the Witch King with her.
Precisely. Better to read LOTR like Beowulf or Arthurian legend; part of Tolkien’s goal was to create a mythos for Britain. He was deliberately writing in a style that drew from Norse epic poetry and other northern European medieval writings, and employing similar motifs and conceits. Plus, if you want to go even deeper, the conceit is that the “book” was written mostly by hobbits, with some additions and editing by later Gondorian scribes. It is to be viewed as their account of the end of the Third Age, and thus is not wholly accurate the way we think of histories as being accurate. The hobbits’ views of some events would come from a place of “smallness” and ordinariness; the Gondorians would likely have done some polishing of Aragorn and some of the other men. Propaganda might be too strong a word, but you get the idea.
It’s a remarkably layered, intricate and complicated work. Whether you enjoy it or not, I don’t think it’s easy to dismiss the amount of effort that went into its creation.
The simple answer to the OP is, it would make for a terrible story with all the dramatic tension of wet string.
Looking for story internal reasons: Can the Eagles be trusted with the One ring? Are they willing to undertake what they might see as a suicide mission? We know the Nazgul ride fell beasts, but there are more than nine of them in Mordor. One is replaced after Legolas shoots it.
Didn’t Quentin Tarantino make a documentry film about this?
Incorrect. Sauron didn’t care if his Nazgul got the Ring; they were completely domianted by Sauron’s will, and the Ring is really no more than that. Of all the beings in Middle Earth, the Nazgul were completely harmless to Sauron no matter what. Turning Frodo into a wraith was just another dick move, and a favorite trick of 'ole Witchy.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I said that the argument you’re using seems to be based on sexist assumptions, not that you personally seem to be a sexist.