Portrayal in Adaptations
The point is made in here that Arwen turns back for Rivendell after seeing a vision of her future child, but that this is unlikely to have been a major surprise to her. I always took this as a reference to the idea that elves had fewer children than humans, so it was not automatic that Arwen should bear a child at all in her lifetime. I know that LOTR and Silmarillion mention the relative fertility somewhere, can't remember where right now!
- See the following quote:
- "Also the Eldar say that in the begetting, and still more in the bearing of children, greater share and strength of their being, in mind and in body, goes forth than in the making of mortal children. For these reasons it came to pass that the Eldar brought forth few children; and also that their time of generation was in their youth or earlier life, unless strange and hard fates befell them. But at whatever age they married, their children were born within a short space of years after their wedding. . ."
- ― Morgoth's Ring
My problem with Arwen's role in the movie was not that she replaced Glorfindel, which was a perfectly reasonable thing to do, but that she stole screentime from other characters who were more important to the story. Instead of Frodo making a brave-but-futile stand against the Black Riders at the Ford of Bruinen, he just becomes baggage for Arwen. Her dream-sequence appearance in The Two Towers is completely contrived, and the time could have been better spent developing the Ents or including the final confrontation with Saruman. Her scenes in The Return of the King were not as bad, but her best role would have been delivering Anduril instead of the contrived "Arwen will die if the ring isn't destroyed" plot thread. --Ted C 15:10, 6 November 2006 (EST)
- Be glad she didn't go to Helm's Deep as was originally planned! But I agree with you on most of your points. It would have been, in my opinion, good if there were scenes of her weaving the banner of Elendil, and then the triumphant unfurling of it. The significance of this event was either overlooked or rejected by PJ. Then again, perhaps it would be considered too "anti-feminist" for this modern generation. . . --Narfil Palùrfalas 17:53, 6 November 2006 (EST)
Indeed, she could have defied Elrond by having the sword reforged herself and taking it to Aragorn, which would have tied her into the story much more neatly. Of course, that would create the problem of her and Eowyn having a chance to meet, but I'm not sure that would work so badly, as it would handily explain Eowyn's reckless desire to go get killed in battle. --Ted C 11:17, 7 November 2006 (EST)
- This would be at the further expense of Elrond's character. I disagree with the whole sword-comes-late idea anyway, though it is not as big a change as some others. As I said, I think if PJ had stuck to the book (and the Appendixes) he would have had plenty of material. --Narfil Palùrfalas 12:45, 7 November 2006 (EST)
- Do people really accuse such books as LotR as sexist for lack of female characters? I've heard of the ridiculous charges of racism (because of the violation of political correctness), but does this charge of sexism really happen? --Narfil Palùrfalas 07:56, 16 November 2006 (EST)
- I certainly don't hear charges of sexism aimed at Tolkien. He was actually quite liberal for someone of his generation. I haven't heard such charges aimed at PJ, either, but of course he pushed Arwen and Galadriel into the story in every film, which would probably deflect that sort of criticism. --Ted C 10:23, 16 November 2006 (EST)