Ich hab gerade einen Artikel gefunden von einer meiner Silm-Autorinnen, den ich euch nicht vorenthalten wollte. Einziges bislang vorhandenes Problem, der Artikel ist auf Englisch. Jedoch werde ich ihn demnächst übersetzen, da er wirklich gut geschrieben ist.
Jedoch für die Interessierten stell ich ihn derweilen ein. Übersetzung folgt bei Fuße.
The Theory of Sexual Relativity in Tolkien
"The invention of languages is the foundation. The 'stories' were made rather to provide a world for the languages than the reverse. To me a name comes first and the story follows... [LotR] is to me...largely an essay in 'linguistic aesthetic', as I sometimes say to people who ask me 'what is it all about?' " (Letters: 219-220)
"Nobody believes me when I say that my long book is an attempt to create a world in which a form of language agreeable to my personal aesthetic might seem real. But it is true." (Letters: 264)
Those are Tolkien's own words on the foundation of the world he created.
He created a world where he could play with the languages he spent so much time giving birth to. It was what gave birth to the monomyth he made when he made Lord of the Rings. He was a linguist first, a storyteller second, and it's something MANY people forget or choose to overlook entirely. And, in doing so, they do him and his world a great injustice. For the truths of his world, you can't look at the stories. You must look at the languages and examples he's given. With that in mind, I've run into this issue several times, both in fandom and out of fandom.
That is, the question of the sexualization of the Eldar and the Valar.
We can use cues from the languages that these races spoke to get some idea of Tolkien's intent for them. Since this was the driving force behind his world, I believe such things should carry more weight than other essays he wrote hoping to expand the culture of this new world he'd created.
Let's start with a conjecture. In creating his new language, Tolkien created words for concepts he felt were important and/or necessary. Because Quenya is a created language, it is by necessity incomplete. There is a great gulf of words we'll never know. I submit that one reason that part of this gulf exists is that there are concepts that we don't need to know because they simply don't exist in his world, or were not considered important by him when creating it. Tolkien has stated repeatedly (to anyone who would listen, and to some who wouldn't) that his world does not subscribe to the Catholic beliefs to which he himself ascribed. Middle-earth is polytheistic and, more over, many of the well-known characters have walked alongside the creators of their world. There's no need for a concept like faith when you don't have to have it in your gods when you can go down the street and have tea with them (or, in Manwë's case, up a mountain). So we can confirm this by the fact that Tolkien never created a word for 'faith' in Elvish. He never created a word for 'worship' or 'religion' or 'belief'. They weren't necessary concepts because they either didn't exist or were simply unimportant to note.
The converse to this is that, by the same token, if Tolkien did create words for a certain concept, it's because it was something he felt should exist. Elves are consummate storytellers. We see this constantly through canon. If you look at the language, there exists a word that means 'to tell a story'. A single word that encompasses this shade of meaning. That exists separately because it's so important.
So, with that in mind, let's agree that if a word exists in Quenya or Sindarin, the concept exists in Middle-earth. Because if it didn't exist, why would you need the word in the first place?
There is, for example, a word in Quenya that means 'lust' -- both as the noun 'lust' (mailë) and as the adjective 'lustful' (mailëa). By our conjecture, if the Elves needed a word for lust, then they felt lust. This necessitates them being sexual beings. If they were not sexual beings, they would not have lust and would therefore have no need of the word. Further digging gives us the word 'hroafelmë'. This literally translates 'body-impulse', but is defined by Tolkien to mean "an impulse provided by the body, such as physical fear, hunger, thirst, sexual desire" (emphasis mine). Again, we have evidence that sexual desire and sexual needs existed among the Elves, and that such desires were on the level of basic needs such as hunger and thirst. Putting it at that level means that sexual desire was not viewed as only for procreation nor was it taboo. In my view, this right here is enough to refute the statement that the Elves only had sex to procreate.
But it doesn't end there.
Another common objection points to the statement in the LACE (Laws and Customs of the Eldar) that the act of penetrative sex equates marriage. However, this is not completely accurate. The LACE actually states that following the ceremony of marriage, the act of bodily union completes the bond. It doesn't create -- that was created by the ceremony, or in times of flight or war, by the will and the invocation of Eru's name by the two parties involved. This is not an uncommon concept among us. In older times, if two people were married and did not have sex over a certain amount of time, the marriage is considered dissolved because it was never consummated. The marriage is considered to have never existed. In Tolkien's world, sex does not equate marriage; it only cements one when the will exists for it to be. Looking at the language, we can prove out this concept. There are separate words for 'spouse' and 'lover'. If the act of physical love automatically made two people spouses, there would be no need for the other word. There would be no such thing as two people being lovers. If they had sex, they'd be wed, according the that misinterpretation of the LACE. So, by our conjecture, sex happens between the Eldar outside marriage, because the language gives us that option.
Third point. Tolkien created words for sex and the words to describe the genitals. 'Huch' for vagina, 'móna' for womb (another nod to the difference between a woman and a mother -- once again pointing out that sex is not solely for procreation) and 'vië' for the penis and testicals. There is 'hacca' for the buttocks, and there is even a word for becoming nude -- 'helda'. The term for sex is 'puhta', and there is even a poetic/archaic term for it, 'púcë'. 'Wegê' means manhood or vigor, and there is even 'rod' for virgin. Tolkien gave a lot of thought to sex, contrary to what some people seem to believe. There's simply no compelling evidence that Tolkien did not intend for the Elves to be sexual creatures.
As for the Valar, there are barely two dozen words in Valarin, so we can't really look at it to pull any context about them from their original language. What we can discover is that the Valar, from the moment they saw the Elves, were completely fascinated by them. We know that, very quickly, the Valar adopted the form and language of the Elves. It is not that great a leap to assume that they also adopted the culture of the Elves. There is circumstantial canonical evidence for this.
In the Ainulindalë, Pengolodh says: "It must...have been from the first presented to us not only in the words of Quenya, but also according to our modes of thought."
This gives evidence that the Valar were well-studied in Elven culture enough to translate foreign concepts, like the Creation, into terms the Elves could understand.
It can be further noted that in several earlier drafts, Tolkien intended for the Valar to have children. Since we know canonically the Maiar can have children (witness Luthien, a product of Maia/Elf); we also know that the Maiar and the Valar are both members of the race of the Ainur and therefore are different only in scope of power and purpose. There is no reason to believe that the Valar were incapable of begetting children. Further, since presumably, Luthien was conceived in the 'usual manner' by Thingol and Melian, Maiar (and consequently the Valar) are capable of sex with Elves. Melian had sex and got pregnant. If she could do it, then all the Maiar could do it. And since the Maiar were the least of the Ainur, what they could do, the rest of them could. Luthien's existence proves it can happen. That it has happened.
And that it could happen again.
(So, please to stop hating on Gabriel, kthxbye)
Now that I've shown, and I think rather well, that the Elves and the Valar have sex, and have sex for pleasure and not necessarily for procreation, let's go one step further and discuss something that is continually debated and argued forums, and that's the concept of homosexuality among the Elves and Valar. ^^ (You had to know I'd touch on that one.)
A lot of people who are anti-slash (or at least anti-Elfslash) will continually fall back to the position of "Tolkien never said it happened".
Tolkien also never said there were cats in Middle-earth. There is no word for 'cat' in Quenya or Sindarin, despite there being a word for 'lion'. Does this mean that in Middle-earth lions are canines? No! The absence of a mention does not equate the absence of the concept.
Looking at the canon, there are far more males than females. Even accounting for females who must have existed even without being name (eg, Legolas' mother), we still see a ratio of roughly two males for every one female (and I do have that worked out in a rather lengthy essay if anyone wants to see it -- took four days to do). Since we've posited that the Elves were sexual -- had sexual desires -- a ratio like this would force one of three scenarios: adultery/polyamoury (iow, multiple partner relationships), a loooooooot of poor lonely males with cold beds and only a hand to love, or homosexual relationships. In nature, on this planet (the planet Tolkien himself lived on), there is no end to the examples of animal species that form homosexual relationships -- especially when there is such a gender disparity exists.
Returning again to the language, we can see that, when considering the word for 'lover', there is a male specific form, a female specific form, and a non-gender specific form (melethron, melethril, and seron). In a purely heterosexual society, this seems like overkill. Think of a sentence where you would need the plural for 'male lover' that didn't refer to a homosexual couple. It's very hard to think of a need for such a thing. In such a society, where same-sex coupling is so alien a concept, there is no real need to qualify the gender of a person's lover. It's a given, whatever gender you are, you're lover is not. And yet, in the Elvish vocabulary, these words exist. Tolkien took the time to create separate words. Going by our original conjecture, this was important to him. So important, in fact, that it extends beyond just the word 'lover'. He also created three separate words for spouse: one that is husband, one that is wife, one that is a non-gender specific form (hervenn, hervess, and bereth). Again, in a purely heterosexual society, what need would you have of a non-gender specific form of 'spouse'?
An interesting note is that Quenya doesn't have a generic word for 'spouse'. What it does have is a word that means 'husband and wife'. Since Sindarin evolved from Quenya, you can get the impression that as time passed, same-sexed pairings might have become more acceptable, and so a gender-neutral word kind of grew out of that.
The Valar, on the other hand, don't have that kind of disparity. In fact, most of them are paired off. Although I choose to adhere to a different statement found in WoJ where Tolkien said Vairë and Námo only lived together, were not wed, they would not be the only ones to do so. Irmo and Esté are wed, but she lives separate of him. Yavanna and Aulë are married, but again, they live separately. The only spouses we know live together are Manwë and Varda and Tulkas and Nessa. From what we're shown, it seems more like pairs were made not on love or sex, but on what power complimented what power. If the Maiar fell in love, had spouses, had children and lives, it isn't a stretch to believe the Valar could have desired the same thing. Maybe Manwë and Varda wanted that type of thing, as did Tulkas and Nessa, because those were the two Valar couples Tolkien chose to give children to in his alternate versions. Why them and not the others? Because I think those two couples were in love while the others found companionship and like-endeavours to occupy their waking hours.
---
Now.
A statement.
Námo, my puppet in Milliways, is not gay. The fact that he has a committed male partner does not mean that's all he desires. That he only feels sexual desire for males. The fact is, his form is arbitrary. Gender is a very fluid concept for him. He has, as a male, had sex with both men and women, and has taken a female form and had sex with a man as a woman. In fact, Námo is sexually attracted to Mary Anne. He'd have no problem sleeping with her as a male or a female -- it doesn't matter to him. He finds her sexually appealing (however, this doesn't mean he would sleep with her -- he isn't in love with her). He doesn't do the casual sex thing. He tried it and it just... doesn't work for him.
I also have never considered Gorlim gay. Yes, he's had male lovers, but honestly? If you paid any attention to his threads or could see the IM conversations he has with Námo, you would discover that the Man is very much heterosexual. He finds women sexually arousing, desirable, and enjoyable.
I can hear you asking it now: Why are they a couple if one doesn't care about gender and the other is very much attracted to females?
And I do have an answer for you.
Because they are in love.
Nothing more. To them, gender didn't matter. Not really. They fell in love and it doesn't matter what's between their legs. It's not like they have sex often (which causes no end of complications for them), but what they do share is so much more important than sex. Their relationship isn't defined by their gender. They define it by the fact that they love one another with immense, consuming devotion.
That's all that matters.
---
When presented with some of these arguments, I am invariably told, in a rather snippy, snarky manner, that "it's just my 'canon interpretation'; other people don't have to subscribe to it." My answer to that is to point out that not everyone believes that the earth is round or that man landed on the moon, either, but it doesn't make either of those any less true. Especially when no one who states this to me can give me any other evidence of any sort beyond that single statement, thus making it nothing more than the written equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and going, "la la la not listening!" Simple statements of disbelief when confronted with unpleasant portions of one's canon with no dissenting evidence do not constitute "another interpretation". If you have some compelling reason for thinking the way you do, and can back it up with examples from the canon, then by all means, do so; I'm more than willing to listen. But, I suspect more and more that there really is no reason beyond these people being unable or unwilling to incorporate unconventional ideas into their narrow worldview. And if that's the case, then just say it. Don't claim it's "canon interpretation" when it's really that you just can't handle homosexuality.
And further, this doesn't mean that because of the way I view Námo, that other Tolkien characters can't be apped because it would create a clash of this mystical "interpretation". Just because Námo is in a homosexual relationship does not mean, for example, that no other Vala can be apped any other way. It does not mean that other characters necessarily have to accept Námo's choice of lifestyle or partner. It does not mean that all the Valar are homosexual. Even if the image of Oromë coming into Milliways in a pair of assless chaps and an oiled chest, brandishing a bottle of K-Y and singing "It's Raining Men" would be a sight to behold, it doesn't mean it has to happen simply because Námo is getting with the hot butt sex. Well... lukewarm, anyway. Tepid, if you must.
But that's what I'm left thinking because it's the only sticking point with the canon that anyone has bothered to bring up to me. My Vala has sex, therefore no one can bring in any other characters, or if they do, they necessarily must come from some wacky alternate universe where the Elves reproduce asexually or something. WTF, guys? If there's more to it than just that, then stop harping on the sex thing. Really, if you have some sort of valid canonical issue with my portrayal of Námo that you can support with something more than your own cultural mores and beliefs, then I implore you to bring it up to me. Don't hide behind the words "canon interpretation" -- tell me how you interpret it, and what statements in the canon led you to that interpretation.
(Now, if you've developed your characters well beyond canon, and in some instances in defiance of it, don't look down your nose at me. It's rude and hypocritical. ^^)
---
I would point out some of the issues I've had with canon interpretation where other pups are concerned, but I think it would be rude to do so in this kind of forum. If you think I might have issue with your puppet (and there are several on my flist that make me twitch like nothing else when their puppets enter the bar), ping me. Leave a comment. Ask. I'll be honest. But I won't shove my opinion where it hasn't been invited.
Jedoch für die Interessierten stell ich ihn derweilen ein. Übersetzung folgt bei Fuße.
The Theory of Sexual Relativity in Tolkien
"The invention of languages is the foundation. The 'stories' were made rather to provide a world for the languages than the reverse. To me a name comes first and the story follows... [LotR] is to me...largely an essay in 'linguistic aesthetic', as I sometimes say to people who ask me 'what is it all about?' " (Letters: 219-220)
"Nobody believes me when I say that my long book is an attempt to create a world in which a form of language agreeable to my personal aesthetic might seem real. But it is true." (Letters: 264)
Those are Tolkien's own words on the foundation of the world he created.
He created a world where he could play with the languages he spent so much time giving birth to. It was what gave birth to the monomyth he made when he made Lord of the Rings. He was a linguist first, a storyteller second, and it's something MANY people forget or choose to overlook entirely. And, in doing so, they do him and his world a great injustice. For the truths of his world, you can't look at the stories. You must look at the languages and examples he's given. With that in mind, I've run into this issue several times, both in fandom and out of fandom.
That is, the question of the sexualization of the Eldar and the Valar.
We can use cues from the languages that these races spoke to get some idea of Tolkien's intent for them. Since this was the driving force behind his world, I believe such things should carry more weight than other essays he wrote hoping to expand the culture of this new world he'd created.
Let's start with a conjecture. In creating his new language, Tolkien created words for concepts he felt were important and/or necessary. Because Quenya is a created language, it is by necessity incomplete. There is a great gulf of words we'll never know. I submit that one reason that part of this gulf exists is that there are concepts that we don't need to know because they simply don't exist in his world, or were not considered important by him when creating it. Tolkien has stated repeatedly (to anyone who would listen, and to some who wouldn't) that his world does not subscribe to the Catholic beliefs to which he himself ascribed. Middle-earth is polytheistic and, more over, many of the well-known characters have walked alongside the creators of their world. There's no need for a concept like faith when you don't have to have it in your gods when you can go down the street and have tea with them (or, in Manwë's case, up a mountain). So we can confirm this by the fact that Tolkien never created a word for 'faith' in Elvish. He never created a word for 'worship' or 'religion' or 'belief'. They weren't necessary concepts because they either didn't exist or were simply unimportant to note.
The converse to this is that, by the same token, if Tolkien did create words for a certain concept, it's because it was something he felt should exist. Elves are consummate storytellers. We see this constantly through canon. If you look at the language, there exists a word that means 'to tell a story'. A single word that encompasses this shade of meaning. That exists separately because it's so important.
So, with that in mind, let's agree that if a word exists in Quenya or Sindarin, the concept exists in Middle-earth. Because if it didn't exist, why would you need the word in the first place?
There is, for example, a word in Quenya that means 'lust' -- both as the noun 'lust' (mailë) and as the adjective 'lustful' (mailëa). By our conjecture, if the Elves needed a word for lust, then they felt lust. This necessitates them being sexual beings. If they were not sexual beings, they would not have lust and would therefore have no need of the word. Further digging gives us the word 'hroafelmë'. This literally translates 'body-impulse', but is defined by Tolkien to mean "an impulse provided by the body, such as physical fear, hunger, thirst, sexual desire" (emphasis mine). Again, we have evidence that sexual desire and sexual needs existed among the Elves, and that such desires were on the level of basic needs such as hunger and thirst. Putting it at that level means that sexual desire was not viewed as only for procreation nor was it taboo. In my view, this right here is enough to refute the statement that the Elves only had sex to procreate.
But it doesn't end there.
Another common objection points to the statement in the LACE (Laws and Customs of the Eldar) that the act of penetrative sex equates marriage. However, this is not completely accurate. The LACE actually states that following the ceremony of marriage, the act of bodily union completes the bond. It doesn't create -- that was created by the ceremony, or in times of flight or war, by the will and the invocation of Eru's name by the two parties involved. This is not an uncommon concept among us. In older times, if two people were married and did not have sex over a certain amount of time, the marriage is considered dissolved because it was never consummated. The marriage is considered to have never existed. In Tolkien's world, sex does not equate marriage; it only cements one when the will exists for it to be. Looking at the language, we can prove out this concept. There are separate words for 'spouse' and 'lover'. If the act of physical love automatically made two people spouses, there would be no need for the other word. There would be no such thing as two people being lovers. If they had sex, they'd be wed, according the that misinterpretation of the LACE. So, by our conjecture, sex happens between the Eldar outside marriage, because the language gives us that option.
Third point. Tolkien created words for sex and the words to describe the genitals. 'Huch' for vagina, 'móna' for womb (another nod to the difference between a woman and a mother -- once again pointing out that sex is not solely for procreation) and 'vië' for the penis and testicals. There is 'hacca' for the buttocks, and there is even a word for becoming nude -- 'helda'. The term for sex is 'puhta', and there is even a poetic/archaic term for it, 'púcë'. 'Wegê' means manhood or vigor, and there is even 'rod' for virgin. Tolkien gave a lot of thought to sex, contrary to what some people seem to believe. There's simply no compelling evidence that Tolkien did not intend for the Elves to be sexual creatures.
As for the Valar, there are barely two dozen words in Valarin, so we can't really look at it to pull any context about them from their original language. What we can discover is that the Valar, from the moment they saw the Elves, were completely fascinated by them. We know that, very quickly, the Valar adopted the form and language of the Elves. It is not that great a leap to assume that they also adopted the culture of the Elves. There is circumstantial canonical evidence for this.
In the Ainulindalë, Pengolodh says: "It must...have been from the first presented to us not only in the words of Quenya, but also according to our modes of thought."
This gives evidence that the Valar were well-studied in Elven culture enough to translate foreign concepts, like the Creation, into terms the Elves could understand.
It can be further noted that in several earlier drafts, Tolkien intended for the Valar to have children. Since we know canonically the Maiar can have children (witness Luthien, a product of Maia/Elf); we also know that the Maiar and the Valar are both members of the race of the Ainur and therefore are different only in scope of power and purpose. There is no reason to believe that the Valar were incapable of begetting children. Further, since presumably, Luthien was conceived in the 'usual manner' by Thingol and Melian, Maiar (and consequently the Valar) are capable of sex with Elves. Melian had sex and got pregnant. If she could do it, then all the Maiar could do it. And since the Maiar were the least of the Ainur, what they could do, the rest of them could. Luthien's existence proves it can happen. That it has happened.
And that it could happen again.
(So, please to stop hating on Gabriel, kthxbye)
Now that I've shown, and I think rather well, that the Elves and the Valar have sex, and have sex for pleasure and not necessarily for procreation, let's go one step further and discuss something that is continually debated and argued forums, and that's the concept of homosexuality among the Elves and Valar. ^^ (You had to know I'd touch on that one.)
A lot of people who are anti-slash (or at least anti-Elfslash) will continually fall back to the position of "Tolkien never said it happened".
Tolkien also never said there were cats in Middle-earth. There is no word for 'cat' in Quenya or Sindarin, despite there being a word for 'lion'. Does this mean that in Middle-earth lions are canines? No! The absence of a mention does not equate the absence of the concept.
Looking at the canon, there are far more males than females. Even accounting for females who must have existed even without being name (eg, Legolas' mother), we still see a ratio of roughly two males for every one female (and I do have that worked out in a rather lengthy essay if anyone wants to see it -- took four days to do). Since we've posited that the Elves were sexual -- had sexual desires -- a ratio like this would force one of three scenarios: adultery/polyamoury (iow, multiple partner relationships), a loooooooot of poor lonely males with cold beds and only a hand to love, or homosexual relationships. In nature, on this planet (the planet Tolkien himself lived on), there is no end to the examples of animal species that form homosexual relationships -- especially when there is such a gender disparity exists.
Returning again to the language, we can see that, when considering the word for 'lover', there is a male specific form, a female specific form, and a non-gender specific form (melethron, melethril, and seron). In a purely heterosexual society, this seems like overkill. Think of a sentence where you would need the plural for 'male lover' that didn't refer to a homosexual couple. It's very hard to think of a need for such a thing. In such a society, where same-sex coupling is so alien a concept, there is no real need to qualify the gender of a person's lover. It's a given, whatever gender you are, you're lover is not. And yet, in the Elvish vocabulary, these words exist. Tolkien took the time to create separate words. Going by our original conjecture, this was important to him. So important, in fact, that it extends beyond just the word 'lover'. He also created three separate words for spouse: one that is husband, one that is wife, one that is a non-gender specific form (hervenn, hervess, and bereth). Again, in a purely heterosexual society, what need would you have of a non-gender specific form of 'spouse'?
An interesting note is that Quenya doesn't have a generic word for 'spouse'. What it does have is a word that means 'husband and wife'. Since Sindarin evolved from Quenya, you can get the impression that as time passed, same-sexed pairings might have become more acceptable, and so a gender-neutral word kind of grew out of that.
The Valar, on the other hand, don't have that kind of disparity. In fact, most of them are paired off. Although I choose to adhere to a different statement found in WoJ where Tolkien said Vairë and Námo only lived together, were not wed, they would not be the only ones to do so. Irmo and Esté are wed, but she lives separate of him. Yavanna and Aulë are married, but again, they live separately. The only spouses we know live together are Manwë and Varda and Tulkas and Nessa. From what we're shown, it seems more like pairs were made not on love or sex, but on what power complimented what power. If the Maiar fell in love, had spouses, had children and lives, it isn't a stretch to believe the Valar could have desired the same thing. Maybe Manwë and Varda wanted that type of thing, as did Tulkas and Nessa, because those were the two Valar couples Tolkien chose to give children to in his alternate versions. Why them and not the others? Because I think those two couples were in love while the others found companionship and like-endeavours to occupy their waking hours.
---
Now.
A statement.
Námo, my puppet in Milliways, is not gay. The fact that he has a committed male partner does not mean that's all he desires. That he only feels sexual desire for males. The fact is, his form is arbitrary. Gender is a very fluid concept for him. He has, as a male, had sex with both men and women, and has taken a female form and had sex with a man as a woman. In fact, Námo is sexually attracted to Mary Anne. He'd have no problem sleeping with her as a male or a female -- it doesn't matter to him. He finds her sexually appealing (however, this doesn't mean he would sleep with her -- he isn't in love with her). He doesn't do the casual sex thing. He tried it and it just... doesn't work for him.
I also have never considered Gorlim gay. Yes, he's had male lovers, but honestly? If you paid any attention to his threads or could see the IM conversations he has with Námo, you would discover that the Man is very much heterosexual. He finds women sexually arousing, desirable, and enjoyable.
I can hear you asking it now: Why are they a couple if one doesn't care about gender and the other is very much attracted to females?
And I do have an answer for you.
Because they are in love.
Nothing more. To them, gender didn't matter. Not really. They fell in love and it doesn't matter what's between their legs. It's not like they have sex often (which causes no end of complications for them), but what they do share is so much more important than sex. Their relationship isn't defined by their gender. They define it by the fact that they love one another with immense, consuming devotion.
That's all that matters.
---
When presented with some of these arguments, I am invariably told, in a rather snippy, snarky manner, that "it's just my 'canon interpretation'; other people don't have to subscribe to it." My answer to that is to point out that not everyone believes that the earth is round or that man landed on the moon, either, but it doesn't make either of those any less true. Especially when no one who states this to me can give me any other evidence of any sort beyond that single statement, thus making it nothing more than the written equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and going, "la la la not listening!" Simple statements of disbelief when confronted with unpleasant portions of one's canon with no dissenting evidence do not constitute "another interpretation". If you have some compelling reason for thinking the way you do, and can back it up with examples from the canon, then by all means, do so; I'm more than willing to listen. But, I suspect more and more that there really is no reason beyond these people being unable or unwilling to incorporate unconventional ideas into their narrow worldview. And if that's the case, then just say it. Don't claim it's "canon interpretation" when it's really that you just can't handle homosexuality.
And further, this doesn't mean that because of the way I view Námo, that other Tolkien characters can't be apped because it would create a clash of this mystical "interpretation". Just because Námo is in a homosexual relationship does not mean, for example, that no other Vala can be apped any other way. It does not mean that other characters necessarily have to accept Námo's choice of lifestyle or partner. It does not mean that all the Valar are homosexual. Even if the image of Oromë coming into Milliways in a pair of assless chaps and an oiled chest, brandishing a bottle of K-Y and singing "It's Raining Men" would be a sight to behold, it doesn't mean it has to happen simply because Námo is getting with the hot butt sex. Well... lukewarm, anyway. Tepid, if you must.
But that's what I'm left thinking because it's the only sticking point with the canon that anyone has bothered to bring up to me. My Vala has sex, therefore no one can bring in any other characters, or if they do, they necessarily must come from some wacky alternate universe where the Elves reproduce asexually or something. WTF, guys? If there's more to it than just that, then stop harping on the sex thing. Really, if you have some sort of valid canonical issue with my portrayal of Námo that you can support with something more than your own cultural mores and beliefs, then I implore you to bring it up to me. Don't hide behind the words "canon interpretation" -- tell me how you interpret it, and what statements in the canon led you to that interpretation.
(Now, if you've developed your characters well beyond canon, and in some instances in defiance of it, don't look down your nose at me. It's rude and hypocritical. ^^)
---
I would point out some of the issues I've had with canon interpretation where other pups are concerned, but I think it would be rude to do so in this kind of forum. If you think I might have issue with your puppet (and there are several on my flist that make me twitch like nothing else when their puppets enter the bar), ping me. Leave a comment. Ask. I'll be honest. But I won't shove my opinion where it hasn't been invited.