Are women just bored of the rings?

[Merlion]

All I saw him say was that no one but the author can make unequivical statements about might-have-beens. And this is correct.
What you said was extremely rude, period. Wether he was as well is irrelevent..I responded to what I saw.

 

[Storm Raven]

Though, most likely, that was the reason Eowyn performed the deed she did in the RotK and not a (male) hobbit as in the book. Certainly, in the cinema where I saw it, Eowyn's act and accompanying line elicited cheers from several women in the audience.

The only problem with you argument is that Eowyn killed the Witch-King in the book, with an assist by Merry. You can contort all you want, but the text makes clear that Eowyn killed the Witch-King, Merry merely distracted the nazgul long enough for Eowyn to deliver the killing stroke.

 

[Storm Raven]

I don't need to be able to speak with the dead, to have access to an unknown source of information or to have asked him when he was alive (a possibility you seem to have neglected). It's right there in the book, in black and white. The passage that I already quoted makes it perfectly clear what was going to happen. Any other interpretation is patently absurd.

Okay. Imagine Eowyn isn't there, but Merry is. How does the story turn out then?

I'll give you a hint: Wounding the Witch-King in the leg doesn't kill him. Further, the Witch-King can reform himself if he is not properly killed, and come back. Merry, being male, could not destroy the Witch-King, merely wound him.

 

[Zander]

...I note Tolkien's words. Or lack thereof - I mark that there's no explicit statement backing you up in any document of which we are aware. Anything else is interpretation.

"[The Witch King] raised his mace to kill." Tolkien's words. It's explicit.

 

[Storm Raven]

"[The Witch King] raised his mace to kill." Tolkien's words. It's explicit.

It says he raised his mace to kill. It doesn't give any indication whether or not his strike would have been delivered in time even if Merry had not been present. "He raised his mace to kill", not "he raised his mace with the certainty of a kill". You can play "would have" all you want, but in the end, you are just playing with what might have happened had the events transpired differently. The only one who knows that answer would be Tolkien, and you aren't him.

But the key point is this: the actual sword stroke that killed the Witch King, was made by Eowyn. Merry's stroke didn't kill the wraith, it merely distracted him. The killing blow was Eowyn's strike through the "head" of the Witch-King.

 

[Zander]

The only problem with you argument is that Eowyn killed the Witch-King in the book, with an assist by Merry. You can contort all you want, but the text makes clear that Eowyn killed the Witch-King, Merry merely distracted the nazgul long enough for Eowyn to deliver the killing stroke.

That Eowyn killed* the Witch King in the book is not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether Tolkien was making a PC statement. It is my contention that he wasn't. Merry didn't just assist; he saved Eowyn's life. Despite her grandiose declaration, the Nazgul would have made short work of her without Merry.

Incidentally, Tolkien didn't imagine Eowyn to be a great warrior. He once wrote in a letter that Eowyn was "not really a soldier or 'amazon'".

*Actually "reduced to impotence" according to Tolkien.

 

[Piratecat]

Thanks for retreating from "pugnacious and argumentative" back to "polite discussion," gang. It's appreciated.

 

[Zander]

"He raised his mace to kill", not "he raised his mace with the certainty of a kill".

The two are synonymous. The latter is a more modern way of saying the same thing as the former. It's not Tolkien's style, that's all.

Remember that Tolkien was the product of a British Victorian/Edwardian education. Even though LotR was written much later, he still wrote in a manner that reflected his background. There's a plethora of Tolkien's writing that seems old-fashioned nowadays.

 

[Vocenoctum]

[/b]
I'll give you a hint: Wounding the Witch-King in the leg doesn't kill him. Further, the Witch-King can reform himself if he is not properly killed, and come back. Merry, being male, could not destroy the Witch-King, merely wound him.

Merry got him in the Wraithly Hamstring, bringing him to his knee's. Merry also was reduced to worthlessness by the stroke, but there's no indication that the Witch King was about to jump up and do something.
Did Merry get felled by the Witch King explosion? or was he still conscious...
It's all impossible to tell really. It does seem very unlikely that Eowyn could have beat the Witch King alone. She didn't really seem to have any skill at arms, just dodging the killing blows and not even very effective at that.

Also, isn't the line that the Witchking will not fall to Man? He fell to Merry, Eowyn just finished him off. In the other thread, it comes up that Man in most of the Saga means "human" not "male".

The Hobbit (being no Man) felled the witchking with a sword specificially forged to fight the forces of the Witchking. I think the credit is more for him than Eowyn, but Eowyn's part is important also.

 

[kengar]

Merry got him in the Wraithly Hamstring, bringing him to his knee's. Merry also was reduced to worthlessness by the stroke, but there's no indication that the Witch King was about to jump up and do something.
Did Merry get felled by the Witch King explosion? or was he still conscious...
It's all impossible to tell really. It does seem very unlikely that Eowyn could have beat the Witch King alone. She didn't really seem to have any skill at arms, just dodging the killing blows and not even very effective at that.

Also, isn't the line that the Witchking will not fall to Man? He fell to Merry, Eowyn just finished him off. In the other thread, it comes up that Man in most of the Saga means "human" not "male".

The Hobbit (being no Man) felled the witchking with a sword specificially forged to fight the forces of the Witchking. I think the credit is more for him than Eowyn, but Eowyn's part is important also.

"Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!"

Then Merry heard of all sounds in that hour the strangest. It seemed that Dernhelm laughed and the clear voice was like the ring of steel. "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Eomund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him."

The winged creature screamed at her, but the Ringwraith made no answer and was silent, as if in sudden doubt. Very amazement for a moment conquered Merry's fear. He opened his eyes and the blackness was lifted from them.

The Witch King wasn't sure whether Eowyn could hurt him or not. Further, her act of defiance in the face of the fear and terror the Nazgul brought gave Merry hope to act when before he merely cowered on the ground. Eowyn proved to be a skilled warrior v. the attacking hell hawk when "A swift stroke she dealt, skilled and deadly. The outstretched neck she clove asunder, and the hewn head fell like a stone."

The way the fight plays out in the book, Merry was undoubtably helpful and may even have saved Eowyn's life by wounding the Witch King, but it was her and not the hobbit whose strength and defiance gave them both the courage to fight at all.

As far as credit to Merry goes, Aragorn proclaims in Chapter 10, when Merry wishes to travel to the Black Gate (I know he was there in the film, but he stayed behind in the book): "You are not fit for such a journey," said Aragorn. "But do not be ashamed. If you do no more in this war, you have already earned great honour. Peregrin shall go and represent the Shirefolk; and do not grudge him his chance of peril, for though he has done well as his fortune allowed him, he has yet to match your deed."

IMNSHO, Eowyn is THE lead female of the LOTR. She is the most realized woman in the story as well as the one with the most depth. She undergoes the most development and change in the story. For the male characters, the hobbits are the leading males, followed -in terms of character development- by Theoden & Faramir. The rest of the characters in the books are largely static: Aragorn, Gandalf, Legolas, Gimli, etc. all of them are really rather static and boring.


EDIT: and -for the purposes of race ("mankind" v. male)- according to Tokien's letters, hobbits are considered human.