Yes. Compare “Galadriel” = “galad-” (radiant) “-iel” (woman), although she was sometimes called “Galadhriel” (tree-woman) through confusion with her Silvan subjects and the mallorns that grew in Lothlorien.
Please dear lord, do not let the love interest be Bilbo or Thorin…I beg of you.
Bard. And she gets the kill shot.
Not sure how he could have. The original claim was a combination fo vague and specific points. In theory, some of them could be positively disproven, but only if there’s a specific counter-example. And Tolkein wasn’t an autobiographer.
She’s the captain of the guard, right?
Far as I know, all she gets is a drunken tete-a-tete with the Butler … 
On the more general topic of adding in a character that wasn’t there before, here’s what Viggo Mortensen has to say on the subject.
I always knew I liked him.
(I liked the first 3 movies but Hobbit 1 left me cold, and the more I think about the movie the more annoyed I get. Not sure if I’ll bother seeing Hobbit 2: Electric Bugaloo)
It’s easily concievable that Tolkien wrote passages about women which are in tension with, or incompatible with, the characterization Wendell Wagner objected to. Indeed Wendell Wagner seemed so postive that that the characterization was wrong, I’m surprised if he doesn’t have some particular writings by Tolkien in mind.
Anyway, it would have been interesting but of course it’s not obligatory. I’m particularly interested in seeing what Tolkien is supposed to have written which paints him has having the “odd” views about women ascribed to him above.
sehmket gave her impression after reading/studying Tolkien-Lewis letters; it’s lame to just answer “that is totally wrong and I’m not going to say why I think that”.
I don’t agree. If someone makes a positive claim about a person’s stated beliefs, it isn’t “lame” to ask what they are basing it on, stating that it seems to you out of character from what you know about that person generally.
Not that I have an opinion one way or the other about Tolkien’s personal beliefs about women. I’ve never read any of his letters, other than some (admirable) responses he gave on the subject of anti-semitism.
A few years back I read Humphrey Carpenter’s collection of JRRT’s letters (Amazon.com: The Letters Of J.r.r. Tolkien: 9780618056996: Tolkien, J.R.R.: Books), which I really enjoyed and highly recommend. I don’t remember anything out of the ordinary for his generation as to his views on women. He disapproved of C.S. Lewis’s wife because he thought she was gauche and pushy.
One of my favorite letters of his. Not even Churchill bashed Nazis better in print: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/03/i-have-no-ancestors-of-that-gifted.html
Aiyeee! Kill me now!
That’s the one!
Lewis did have at least one lesbian character, though she was a villain, and absolutely depicted as a dirty, loathsome pervert: the chief of the secret police in That Hideous Strength.
Right. You know, one thing I hate is “presentism” which is judging the heroes of the past by today’s moral standards. A couple centuries from now we will be castigated for not giving Dolphins the right to vote.
Good cites.
He didnt just ask what it was based on, he said “I believe this is hopelessly wrong as a summary of Tolkien’s opinions” and like it or not, that is a positive claim too.
He or she is simply saying that s/he believes the previous assertion is wrong as a generality. The person who is to provide the proof is the one who made the specific assertion that is under attack. It isn’t up to the person questioning the assertion to provide disproof.
“I know from my reading of X that X believed A”
“Really? I think that’s wrong”
“No, it is correct. Here is my evidence - X”.
“Oh, I guess you are right” or “X doesn’t say what you think it says” or whatever.
[QUOTE=jayjay]
(Sindarin elves were considered Calaquendi because of Melian’s presence in Doriath, despite their never having seen the Trees.)
[/QUOTE]
Cite? IIRC (and I bet I do), only Thingol was considered calaquendi. Because he saw the trees. The rest of the Sindar of ME were considered far above the sylvan and Avari because they learned from Melian. But they were still Moriquendi.
I have limited connectivity or I would provide a cite.
So how about this then. Sehmket- Do you have any cites at all for you opinions, as nothing I have seen from the Professors works/letters indicates anything liek this at all, other than the fact he was a man of his times. (Actually, a quite forward thinking man of his times).
I beleive your opinion is unsupported by facts. Cite?
No, you’re right. I was conflating the Sindarin with the Teleri (since they are a subset of them) and made the connection without actually thinking about it.
I think adding a female character with a romance subplot is a bit more than just straying one single jot. Other than a marketing ploy to attract women viewers I’m not sure why the addition of this character is necessary or even to be desired.
My money was on bachelor Bard being her love-interest. Anyone else would be unworthy of an elf–Bilbo needs to remain unknown to the elves in order to effect the escape, and she sure as hell ain’t gonna get soggy for a dwarf unless she’s a real kink of an elf.
And I was going to express my dearest desire they don’t tinker with Bard getting the kill shot–he’s all frosty brass balls and it’d be a shame to weaken him. She’d better not even so much as hand hand him a magic arrow or I’ll likely geek all over the theater.
Elven wimmin digging on epic human dudes is already a precedent: Luthien, Eowyn, now Tauriel. I’m cool with her as a side story. But the big question is, if she’s such a ruthless badass–how’s she going to show it? Ain’t nobody in her section of the story as needs killin apart from the spiders (and who cares about them), she’s no threat to Beorn, maybe she orchestrates the capture and interrogation of the dwarves?