The Hobbit Movie

[El-ahrairah]

But that's exactly the kind of thing that would smack of tokenism, which pisses off the purists while not really addressing the inequality - OK, ladies, you've got one dwarf out of 13, so stop complaining. Two or three female dwarfs (note, I'm not necessarily advocating this) would be a different matter, especially if they weren't bothering to be "in disguise" (ie. dwarfs don't have specific gendered clothing). There's also the Wood Elves who could easily have plenty of females, or the people of Laketown, all of which have a fairly scanty description in the book so there's scope for the directors to expand and improve.

Yes, Laketown would have plenty of women, and also the wood-elves in their halls. 50%, I suppose...

But lady dwarves a-questing is just ridiculous. In the real world females did not save in very rare cases fight in battle, and Tolkien knew this. Even the far more "progressive" ASOIAF has only one female warrior - the Maid of Tarth (plus the wildling spearwives), just as LOTR has Éowyn.

[mormont]

Even the far more "progressive" ASOIAF has only one female warrior - the Maid of Tarth (plus the wildling spearwives)

Sure, if you forget about Asha Greyjoy, Maege Mormont, Dacey Mormont, Obara Sand...

[El-ahrairah]

Sure, if you forget about Asha Greyjoy, Maege Mormont, Dacey Mormont, Obara Sand...

You're right - foolish me.

[MinDonner]

Yes, Laketown would have plenty of women, and also the wood-elves in their halls. 50%, I suppose...

But lady dwarves a-questing is just ridiculous. In the real world females did not save in very rare cases fight in battle, and Tolkien knew this. Even the far more "progressive" ASOIAF has only one female warrior - the Maid of Tarth (plus the wildling spearwives), just as LOTR has Éowyn.

Is this the same real world that has elves and dragons in? Just asking...

(plus, battles? They were off to nick stuff, not get caught in a war, that was just an accident.)

[Slurktan]

But that's exactly the kind of thing that would smack of tokenism, which pisses off the purists while not really addressing the inequality - OK, ladies, you've got one dwarf out of 13, so stop complaining. Two or three female dwarfs (note, I'm not necessarily advocating this) would be a different matter, especially if they weren't bothering to be "in disguise" (ie. dwarfs don't have specific gendered clothing). There's also the Wood Elves who could easily have plenty of females, or the people of Laketown, all of which have a fairly scanty description in the book so there's scope for the directors to expand and improve.

Exactly with the tokenism in the dwarves. I agree with your other comments as well, no reason say Bard can't be changed into a woman for instance, although I'm sure they'd be a bit hesitant to change the wood elf king in the hobbit into a woman as he's kind of a minor villain, particularly if that's the only major woman character in the films besides Galadriel. I honestly think they should have done it with Bilbo in the movie trilogy if they had thought ahead to making the Hobbit. There is absolutely nothing in the book that Bilbo does that couldn't be also done by a woman.

[El-ahrairah]

Is this the same real world that has elves and dragons in? Just asking...

Technically speaking, yes. Around 4,000 B.C.

(plus, battles? They were off to nick stuff, not get caught in a war, that was just an accident.)

This quote from Appendix A tells a lot.

It was said by Gimli that there are few dwarf-women, probably no more than a third of the whole people. They seldom walk abroad except at great need. They are in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to the dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of other peoples cannot tell them apart.

[MinDonner]

Technically speaking, yes. Around 4,000 B.C.

This quote from Appendix A tells a lot.

It was said by Gimli that there are few dwarf-women, probably no more than a third of the whole people. They seldom walk abroad except at great need. They are in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to the dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of other peoples cannot tell them apart.

Now look - I'm not disagreeing that Tolkien created his dwarf women in a particular way so as to preclude them from taking part in this adventure. What I AM protesting is this idea that this setup was somehow natural or inevitable, or historically accurate. It's a made-up race FFS! Dwarf gender roles are not some objective fact that our disinterested chronicler is drily reporting to us, it is a specific decision that Tolkien made. Yes, he made it because a) he was a product of his time and he was writing for his sons who didn't want any stories about icky girls; both of those are valid arguments to use, unlike "but dwarf women were really unadventurous!" which makes about as much sense as "but Richard really is a good guy cos Zedd said so!".

[Galactus]

Tp be honest, half the dwarves could be women for all that we know, how would we (or Bilbo) tell the difference?

[Mentat]

Now look - I'm not disagreeing that Tolkien created his dwarf women in a particular way so as to preclude them from taking part in this adventure. What I AM protesting is this idea that this setup was somehow natural or inevitable, or historically accurate. It's a made-up race FFS! Dwarf gender roles are not some objective fact that our disinterested chronicler is drily reporting to us, it is a specific decision that Tolkien made.

Actually, I think a pretty strong case could be made that if dwarf women had existed they would have been, as a rule, non-adventurous creatures.

The case goes thus: As a hard-core gamer who covers the whole scope of traditional RPGs, MMORPGs, etc. I have not failed to notice how female gamers always gravitate towards elves and humans over other races like dwarves, hobbits, half-orcs, etc. This clearly expresses a preference of female characters of races which are associated with qualities which are, in turn, traditionally considered desirable in a female (elves are beautiful, graceful, slender, etc.; dwarves on the other hand are strong, tough, stern...). One can also see this in female characters played by male players, who, in adjusting to male fantasies, tend to favor these races as well. While this view is obviously human-centric, since humans are the dominant race in even the most high-fantasy settings one would expect the dominant view to be that of the dominant race. Add to this the fact that race also influences professional choices. Elves tend to gravitate more towards professions that require dexterity and intelligence over the brute force favored by dwarves and half-orcs. They're racially better adjusted for them. While I obviously can't provide any measure of evidence, I think it's intuitive that the females of the species would tend to favor the adventuring professions more in a race that favored grace and intellect than in a race that favored brute force and resilience.

So, we have an obvious human bias towards female adventurers of certain races, which would in turn lead to a job market where adventurer positions would be offered more to the females of certain races over the females of others, combined with a racial preference for adventuring professions which seem more suited to traditional male/female characteristics creating a racial divide in non-humans which would make us expect more females in one and less in the other. I think it's not irrational to assume that, in a fantasy world, fewer females of some races would choose the adventuring profession than females of other races. This would, in turn, influence expectations and traditions which would dis-encourage female dwarves from an adventuring career in a similar way that human females are not encouraged to pursue a science-based career in the real world.

I'd even contend that, female dwarves would probably prefer appearing as males to their non-human adventuring colleagues in a similar way that early female authors ellected to adopt male pseudonyms, so as not to be singled out. In a likely homophobic pseudo-medieaval society, even male dwarves might prefer to let female companions blend in with them, fearing a dwarf couple might appear gross to other races where the different sexes are more physically diferent.

[Happy Ent]

Not-completely-crazy suggestion: One could replace Bilbo by his mum, Belladonna Took. She’s got the right attitude, and there are already enough timeline shenanigans and composite characters to make it swallowable.

The only problem is the retrofitting of the single scene where Bilbo, not Belladonna, finds the ring. Otherwise she could have taken it from Gollum, she could have had Bilbo’s adventures, and the One Ring could pass from her to Bilbo. And since she’s a Baggins of the Shire (by marriage), so Gollum and the Ringwraiths could use the same lines.

[Dunhallym]

Actually, I think a pretty strong case could be made that if dwarf women had existed they would have been, as a rule, non-adventurous creatures.

The case goes thus: As a hard-core gamer who covers the whole scope of traditional RPGs, MMORPGs, etc. I have not failed to notice how female gamers always gravitate towards elves and humans over other races like dwarves, hobbits, half-orcs, etc.

Tsss tsss tss mentat, you've clearly not played with my group. I have a female friend who always plays dwarves if given the chance, another one played a halfling and a dwarf, and I'm pretty sure another played a half-orc at least once. As for me, my main D&D character is a halfling and 2 of my favourite Warhammer characters were a halfling and a dwarf. I guess it's because I'm short in RL...

[Mentat]

Tsss tsss tss mentat, you've clearly not played with my group. I have a female friend who always plays dwarves if given the chance, another one played a halfling and a dwarf, and I'm pretty sure another played a half-orc at least once. As for me, my main D&D character is a halfling and 2 of my favourite Warhammer characters were a halfling and a dwarf. I guess it's because I'm short in RL...

No, I've clearly not. You'd know if I had

Anyway, the evidence you offer is anecdotal. Admittedly I can't offer any hard evidence myself, either. I've been looking for a reliable WoW census which lists class/race/gender, but the only one I found lists class and race exclusively. A clear predilection for races like human, night-elf or blood elf over races like dwarf, gnome or orc is demonstrable, but since character gender information is absent I cannot descend further into the analysis.

Regardless, veteran gamers, such as yourself, tend to show a greater desire to experiment with the race/gender/class trichotomy and to escape from the more standardized character archetypes.

Powergaming elements, such as night-vision or spell resistance abilities might also influence these choices in the more experienced gamer (which would be atenuated or stressed by a greater emphasys in role-playing elements or a more hard-core dungeoneering campaign respectively).

[El-ahrairah]

Now look - I'm not disagreeing that Tolkien created his dwarf women in a particular way so as to preclude them from taking part in this adventure. What I AM protesting is this idea that this setup was somehow natural or inevitable, or historically accurate. It's a made-up race FFS! Dwarf gender roles are not some objective fact that our disinterested chronicler is drily reporting to us, it is a specific decision that Tolkien made. Yes, he made it because a) he was a product of his time and he was writing for his sons who didn't want any stories about icky girls; both of those are valid arguments to use, unlike "but dwarf women were really unadventurous!" which makes about as much sense as "but Richard really is a good guy cos Zedd said so!".

Are you suggesting that Tolkien wrote his own personal prejudices into his translation from the Red Book of Westmarch? Shame on you.

Not-completely-crazy suggestion: One could replace Bilbo by his mum, Belladonna Took. She’s got the right attitude, and there are already enough timeline shenanigans and composite characters to make it swallowable.

The only thing worse than that would be using Bilbo's original name of Bingo.

[MinDonner]

The only thing worse than that would be using Bilbo's original name of Bingo.

(Bingo was Frodo's original name, not Bilbo's)

[Anatole Kuragin]

Technically speaking, yes. Around 4,000 B.C.

But Jesus created the world in 4000 BC, and the Third Age is like... however many thousands of years after creation.

[Joanna vander Poele]

Are you suggesting that Tolkien wrote his own personal prejudices into his translation from the Red Book of Westmarch? Shame on you.

Yes, that's right. You should be ashamed.

[The hairy bear]

I've read them both multiple times and never noticed that. Sure it's not in HoME somewhere instead? All kinds of strange ideas came to light in the HoME stuff.

I guess they are refeering to this quote from the Appendix B:

After the fall of the Dark Tower and the passing of Sauron the Shadow was lifted from the hearts of all who opposed him. but fear and despair fell upon his servants and allies. Three times Lórien had been assailed from Dol Guldur. but besides the valour of the elven people of that land. the power that dwelt there was too great for any to overcome, unless Sauron had come there himself. Though grievous harm was done to the fair woods on the borders, the assaults were driven back; and when the Shadow passed, Celeborn came forth and led the host of Lórien over Anduin in many boats. They took Dol Guldur, and Galadriel threw down its walls and laid bare its pits, and the forest was cleansed.

Doesn't mention the ring, but it can be assumed since it's the source of her power.

And personally, I'd hate if they forced the story to include female characters. I understood why they replaced Glorfindel with Arwen, in order to give her more screen time and establish her relationship with Aragorn. I was fine with it. But I just don't see the need to introduce female dwarves in the hobbit just for the sake of political correctness. And the problem with PC is that it can't never be fully satisfied. Once we've got wemen, we'll have to introduce black or oriental dwarves. And obviously not all the dwarves can worship Aüle. We'll make some of them be followers of Yavanna, Oromë, and even Morgoth. Am I forgetting anyone? Yeah! Tall people are clearly being discriminated!

[El-ahrairah]

But Jesus created the world in 4000 BC, and the Third Age is like... however many thousands of years after creation.

The Creation must have been before 10,000 B.C. at least, adding the about three millennia each for the Third and Second Ages, plus the unknown length of the First. Tolkien knew the wrongs of an Archbishop Ussher-style dating, as in this letter:

I do not now feel either ashamed or dubious on the Eden ‘myth’. It has not, of course, historicity of the same kind as the [New Testament], which are virtually contemporary documents,

while Genesis is separated by we do not know how many sad exiled generations from the Fall, but certainly there was an Eden on this very unhappy earth.

And obviously not all the dwarves can worship A�le.

Actually Dwarves worship (technically venerate, I suppose) Aulë, maybe Hobbits worship Ale. ( )

[Werthead]

I'm not sure if I buy this, but this article suggests that the three actors being considered for Bilbo are James McAvoy, David Tennant and Daniel fricking Radcliffe.

Sounds like bull to me. I wouldn't be surprised if McAvoy is being considered. He's got the right look, the right nationality, he looks like he could be 'Hobbitified' straightforwardly. He's also not too familiar to audiences.

Tennant I'm not seeing in the role. Seems a bit tall and slim for the more rotund Bilbo (although I suppose CGI and costumes could do the job). Plus if he quit Doctor Who because he wanted to do more theatre, spending twelve months in New Zealand would seem to be out of the question.

Radcliffe? Come off it. Way too familiar from Potter, too young to be Bilbo (remembering that Bilbo's supposed to look similar in age in Hobbit to how he looked in LotR thanks to the age-retarding impact of the Ring) and he'd be killing his career stone dead by jumping from one fantasy franchise to another.

A lot of other people are pushing Martin Freeman. In age and looks, closest by far, but his performance in Hitch-Hiker's as Arthur Dent, which should likewise have been a shoe-in, really underwhelmed me and I don't think he's got the acting chops for it.

[Fenryng]

Well, if we presume for a minute that these three are being considered, McAvoy would certainly be my first choice of the bunch.

I actually have Radcliffe second on my list of choices. If Elijah Wood can play Frodo at the age he did, Radcliffe, who is the same age now (or close enough to not argue over), could do Bilbo. Whether it would destroy his career or not is up to him, and I think he is still too young yet to have his career set in stone THAT much.

Tennant is a distant third.