Slashdot Mirror


Student Publishes Extensive Statistics On the Population of Middle-Earth

First time accepted submitter dsjodin writes "There are only 19% females in Tolkien's works and the life expectancy of a Hobbit is 96.24 years. In January 2012 chemical engineering student Emil Johansson published a website with the hope for it to become a complete Middle-Earth genealogy. Now, ten months later, he has published some interesting numbers derived from the database of 923 characters. The site features a set of unique graphs helping us understand the world Tolkien described. Perhaps the most interesting ones are showing the decrease of the longevity of Men and the change in population of Middle-Earth throughout history. The latter was also recently published in the September edition of Wired Magazine."

49 of 218 comments (clear)

  1. Everybody knows. by sunking2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dwarf women often get confused with the men.

    1. Re:Everybody knows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's the beards.

  2. Nerds! by LucidBeast · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll come to insult you more - after I go through these numbers and make sure they are correct.

  3. Allow me to be the first to say... by gman003 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    *ehem*

    NERD!

    (In all seriousness, though, that's actually kind of cool, pretty interesting)

    1. Re:Allow me to be the first to say... by Random2 · · Score: 2

      And already slashdotted to boot. The max number of user connections is allotted for the graphs. Apparently we've a lot of nerds here too. :)

      --
      "Our goal each year should be to increase the number of goals we set for ourselves!"
    2. Re:Allow me to be the first to say... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      And already slashdotted to boot.

      Great! I declare this "Don't RTFA Monday".

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Allow me to be the first to say... by Homr+Zodyssey · · Score: 2


      jerk: someone who makes up spurious definitions to common terms and then applies those definitions in order to make other people seem less credible.
      </irony>

      According to Merriam-Webster:
      Geek (noun):
      1: a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken or snake
      2: a person often of an intellectual bent who is disliked
      3: an enthusiast or expert especially in a technological field or activity <computer geek>

  4. 19% female is pretty good. by slackware+3.6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    That is better than most circles of geeks around here.

    1. Re:19% female is pretty good. by morcego · · Score: 5, Funny

      That is better than most circles of geeks around here.

      Actually, there are plenty of women around. They just don't want to talk to you :)

      --
      morcego
    2. Re:19% female is pretty good. by Guppy · · Score: 2

      Actually, there are plenty of women around.

      They just often get confused for men...

      (...it's the beards).

  5. The letter is in the mail... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This poor guy will probably soon receive a Cease and Desist letter from Tolken's estate...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  6. Hobbit life expectancy skewed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And Bilbo probably skewed Hobbit life expectancy with the life-extension properties of the Ring. There's also the problem that Bilbo and
    Frodo will probably live to enormous age (or possibly not die--it's not clear which from the text) once they are welcomed to the
    Undying Lands. If the become immortal, then the average life expectancy for Hobbits becomes infinite. I suggest moving to medians.

    1. Re:Hobbit life expectancy skewed by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      also Sam after the death of his wife Rosie left for the grey heavens and sailed to the west as he was also a ring bearer, thus possibly having immortality as well further skewing hobbit age statistics.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    2. Re:Hobbit life expectancy skewed by mrbester · · Score: 2

      "BullRoarer" Took lived to 135 without the aid of a magical ring...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    3. Re:Hobbit life expectancy skewed by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

      Why can't we do a search of "Hobbit Life Expectancy" Not-Bilbo Not-Sam?

      Good ol' Boolean ops!

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    4. Re:Hobbit life expectancy skewed by OldBus · · Score: 4, Informative

      I guess the way this comment was phrased is why it is at -1, but it is essentially true. There appears to be no evidence that going to Valinor gave immortality (see especially the whole farce of the attempted invasion by the Numoreans). Tuor is mentioned that he *might* have become immortal, but in the context that this is uncertain, and definitely very unusual.

    5. Re:Hobbit life expectancy skewed by Gilmoure · · Score: 2

      Actually, leaving Middle Earth takes them out of range of the research.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
  7. Slashdoted.. by Severus+Snape · · Score: 2

    Obviously.

    See with a wee bit of communication before storys go on the front page, I'm sure administrators of sites like this would be happy to get some help from amazon or whoever to keep up with the increase in load.

    1. Re:Slashdoted.. by mdsharpe · · Score: 2

      Shaaaare the loooaaddd

  8. Serious points raised? by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This does in some ways raise serious points: A lot of classical fantasy had a dearth of women as characters. In Tolkien's case even when they are characters they are often far more passive than active. One sees how this conflicts with more modern sensibilities- look at how much screen time was given to Arwen and Eowyn compared to how much time they had in the books. (It is true that The Silmarillion also introduces some females but the overall numbers are low). Worse, when later fantasy did try to have empowered female characters, they were often more male fantasies, the classical "chicks in chainmail" and the like. One sees the extension of this to other variants as well in modern games, where in many videogames and MMOs otherwise equivalent armor is depicted as covering much less on the women and often emphasizing the female figure. And one sees a similar pattern in science fiction. Indeed, much of it doesn't even get close to passing the Bechdel test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechdel_test. Note that in the case of Lord of the Rings, it fails the Bechdel test so badly that no two major female characters even have a conversation. (Interestingly, another major foundation of the work- The Chronicles of Narnia has much more in the way of strong females.)

    It shouldn't be that surprising in this sort of context that scifi and fantasy have for a long-time been seen as male-dominated genres. That's obviously not exclusively the case (I first started reading fantasy to some extent because woman who babysat me was a voracious consumer of fantasy novels), but it is a definite problem. There have been some clear changes in the genre in the last few years, especially in the Young Adult area. Thus, one has examples like Garth Nix's Abhorsen series where the main characters are to a large extent strong women, and actually strong not just skimpy-armor-strong. So the genre does seem to be changing, but there will likely always be some influence from what founded the genre.

    1. Re:Serious points raised? by iggymanz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      why are you bemoaning an imagined problem because fantasy and the real world don't conform to your expectations? There are some women warriors in the world, sure. but not many. most have the good sense to avoid that occupation like the plague. most women don't think it's cool to destroy, be violent, maim and kill. or to start a war to plunder or expand power. men are different in that regard, on average. get over it, we really need less of that kind of "empowered" women and men on this planet.

    2. Re:Serious points raised? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

      A lot of classical fantasy had a dearth of women as characters.

      Whereas the typical male fantasy has lots of women and only one guy.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Serious points raised? by Baloroth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      At the risk of sounding like a misogynist... is the lack of women really a bad thing in and of itself? It's certainly quite "realistic" (as much as a fantasy setting can be): in medieval cultures, women weren't adventurers or warriors, and LOTR is focused almost exclusively on adventure and fighting. And for good reason: it's a simple biological fact (source, warning that the picture at the top is full frontal male/female nudity, so probably NSFW) that men have a greater upper body strength than women, on average, and when wielding 50+ pound swords and 100+ pound draw weights on bows, upper body strength is kinda important (which is not to say women could not be fighters and archers, but the average woman would be worse at it than the average man: obviously, some women are far stronger than most men).

      There is also the fact that LOTR isn't concerned with gender inequality: it's simply not one of the themes of the book, so if you expect it to deal with it, you will obviously be disappointed. I'd say that isn't even the point of the genre, as a whole. It's like expecting sci-fi to explore what it's like to be a single person living in New York city: it's kind of missing the point. Gender equality is an issue in our day-to-day world. Writing fantasy to explore the issue, while possible, is a bit underwhelming. The point of fantasy is it can explore grand themes of the struggle between good and evil and power/corruption in a way no book set in everday life ever could. OTOH, a book set in everday life can explore the issues of gender inequality in a way that fantasy can't, because fantasy is by definition disconnected from the real world, so exploring real-world issues using fantasy will create some issues in the translation.

      Mind you, I'm not saying you should write a book to specifically exclude women or paint them in a bad light, that would be misogynistic. But simply ignoring the issue isn't a problem, IMO, if you don't mean to be dealing with it.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    4. Re:Serious points raised? by dkleinsc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are good reasons why Lord of the Rings failing the Bechdel test is hardly surprising:
      1. Tolkien wrote it in the 1940's. Sexism was hardly unusual then.
      2. Tolkien was actively imitating and drawing from older tales and epics, which regularly had very few important female characters. For instance, the only woman with any kind of significant role in Beowulf (a significant inspiration for Tolkein) is Grendel's mother, and she isn't even given a name.
      3. One of the constant and enduring themes throughout the books is the deep bonds that form between men thrown together into really bad situations. Probably part of the point was to give folks an idea of what it was like to be at the front in WWI, where the only women in the area were nurses.

      There was at least one fantasy novel I read a long time ago that had actually completely reversed the roles of men and women: The women were the tough fighters and leaders and in charge of everything, the men were expected to sit around looking pretty until the women wanted to sleep with them.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:Serious points raised? by mrbester · · Score: 3, Informative

      Pretty much all of the works by Anne McCaffrey, Ursula Le Guin and Marion Zimmer Bradley immediately spring to mind.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    6. Re:Serious points raised? by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it's more nearly the truth that Tolkien (like many men of his class and generation) was quite alienated from women. I don't think you'd exactly call him a misoynist - although many of his attitudes look very misoynistic to modern eyes - but he had no sympathetic ability to understand what it was to be a woman, not to write from a woman's view point. His understanding of women is pretty much as sexless and passive creatures. The outstanding exceptions to passivity are Eowyn and perhaps Luthien, but Eowyn at least is clearly unable to express the sexuality of her feeling for Aragorn[1], and is apparently virgin until her marriage to Faramir. I don't remember the Luthien narrative in detail, but my memory of it is that he pursues her, not the other way around; so again there's little evidence of any erotic feeling on her part. The only couple in the whole damned epic (I include the Silmarillion and the Hobbit) to appear to have anything approaching what we'd describe as a normal healthy sex-life are Sam and Rosie Gamgee, and that happens in a few pages at the very end of the text.

      I have very conflicted feelings about Tolkien, and this is one of the issues. In the end he's telling a very reactionary story, a story of primogeniture, divine right, and male supremacy. A story, undoubtedly, influenced both by his Catholicism and his experience of the Great War. But seriously, do you see Arwen as good in the sack? Do images of Galadriel have you writhing in the night? No, didn't think so. Me neither. And, actually, I think the story would be stronger if they did.

      Perhaps the reason that the population of Middle Earth is so small and doesn't grow in anything like a natural way is that Middle Earth women just don't like sex very much? Or perhaps Middle Earth men just aren't very good at it?

      [1] I'm not suggesting that Eowyn 'ought' to have made an unsubtle pass at Aragorn; there are plenty of societies in which young women are very inhibited from doing that, although it's a little surprising in the robust horse-nomad society of the Rohirrim: but there are plenty of subtle ways in which Eowyn could have made a pass at him, and she just doesn't. She mopes about waiting for him to make a pass, and then when he doesn't goes all fey and suicidal.

      --
      I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
    7. Re:Serious points raised? by JoshuaZ · · Score: 2

      I don't think that's all that's going on here. In a lot of classical fantasy including Lord of the Rings, many of the people who are involved aren't don't want to be. Both Sam and Frodo clearly are forced into their circumstances for example. And that's a pretty common thing in fantasy. The set of fantasy where people go out of their way to maim, kill and destroy like Conan is fairly limited.

    8. Re:Serious points raised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      First, if a sword weighs 50 lbs, the blacksmith did something very, very wrong. Maybe it's a lump of gravel glued into the shape of a sword.

      Second, I think you missed the point of the OP. Gender inequality doesn't have to be central theme of the book, just for women to be in it. That's a problem with historically unequal face time for female characters - it's come to mean that when they do show up, people think it's for a special reason or to 'make a point' or something. When, given that women and girls are half the population, and every man and boy will run into at least one at one point in their life (probably many more), you'd expect to see us all over the place for no particular reason because we're just that ubiquitous.

      And yeah, specifically excluding us or painting us in a bad light is misogynistic. So is ignoring us because you think we only make good characters when you want to discuss women's issues. Women aren't "an issue," we're people. Just like men. If an author ends up writing a book about the lives of several characters and fails to present any women at all because they 'don't want to explore the issue of gender inequality,' there is still a problem. It's an indication that the author cannot see how women fit into the lives of 'people' (read: men). That's misogyny, too.

    9. Re:Serious points raised? by mrbester · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Tale of Beren and Lúthien was written by Tolkien as an epic love story deliberately casting himself and his wife as the characters.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    10. Re:Serious points raised? by thelexx · · Score: 4, Informative

      "wielding 50+ pound swords"

      Swords do not weigh that much. The Wallace Sword is five feet six inches long and weighs six pounds. It's at the upper end of claymore size/weight and of swords generally.

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    11. Re:Serious points raised? by vlm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A lot of classical fantasy had a dearth of women as characters

      With childhood death rates around 80% any culture that doesn't do the barefoot pregnant and in the kitchen thing is literally going to disappear in at most a couple generations. As the Bechdel wiki page contains "A work may fail the test for reasons unrelated to gender bias, such as because its setting works against the inclusion of women"

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    12. Re:Serious points raised? by bzipitidoo · · Score: 2

      The story focuses a lot on physical drama-- trekking through dangerous wilderness, ruins, and enemy territory, plus of course war zones and battles. Men are physically stronger and better suited for that kind of thing. The things women are better at aren't given much time. Children are even less visible, so no need for any mothering. Talk is hardly needed, as, true to classic fantasy, the lines are already drawn and everything is black and white. Naturally the evil side is so dramatically strong and threatening that the good folks can't afford much disagreement and discussion, nor can they spare time for the complexities of domestics and the pursuit of happiness. When they do, the realm totters. It's all very simple. It's war.

      Women and children aren't the only things conspicuous by their absence. There is also nearly zero science. But fantasy has to keep science, logic, and good thinking at a distance, or the fantasy world quickly breaks down. We can't have better forms of government appearing, that would spoil the monarchist idyll. (Funny how fantasies always ignore the Roman Republic and Greek democracies.) No one is inventing better weapons, instead progress is inverted. Such is necessary for monsters to be powerful and scary. That Watcher in the Water would have no chance whatever against a corps of engineers, anymore than solo acts like King Kong or Godzilla had a real chance against an entire city. The Balrog can't prevail with personal combat either. Sauron didn't rely on personal strength even with the Ring, instead he recruited and organized armies, and held territory. For communication we have horse relays, beacons, horns, and mysterious, rare, dangerous magical objects, and sorcery available only to the highest ranks of the enemies. Admittedly, control of a volcano makes for one heck of a beacon and tool for demoralizing and frightening one's foes. The older it is, the better it is, presumably because the forces of evil have been gradually grinding the free peoples down over the ages. Very Goth. Such discovery as there is, is all in the area of traveling and seeing the world. And to make that work, all the peoples have to be extreme homebodies. How else could the elves of Lorien be so out of touch with the Ents?

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    13. Re:Serious points raised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If an author ends up writing a book about the lives of several characters and fails to present any women at all because they 'don't want to explore the issue of gender inequality,' there is still a problem.

      That seems like that would really depend on the situation. If what is being written about is a scenario that historically didn't involve many women, then one could potentially face a decision about how hard one must try to include women. For example, if writing about soldiers in WW2, there are times it is going to be pretty male-centric. Of course there were women around, and women could be included in the story from anywhere from interacting with the local population to the couple front-line roles women had to something much more minor like writing to or reminiscing of someone they know back home. But those all require certain types of characters going into specific situations and specific focus/themes that may or may not fit with the story in mind.

      I'm not trying to say there are not some issues with how women are treated in many stories, but I do think in many stories it is not a clear cut whether something was done for the story versus done because the author was misogynistic. And depending on who you talk to, some people complain even if they are women but are in the background too much, or complain that there are not enough women in certain roles within such stories. Trying to address those complaints are where you end up with the connection between "addressing gender imbalance issues" = "including more women," when trying to put women in a breaking-the-mold type position without risking it looking out of place or forced.

    14. Re:Serious points raised? by kumanopuusan · · Score: 2

      You're mostly correct, but Japanese cavalry swords were up to 18 pounds and were used in actual combat. Larger ceremonial versions weigh more than 150 pounds and exceed 3 meters in length—although these are obviously not usable as weapons.

      --
      Use of the words "good", "bad" or "evil" is almost invariably the result of oversimplification.
    15. Re:Serious points raised? by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you really think the characters would be improved if they were more plausible as sex objects? I really never thought so, personally.

      Most, if not all of the women in the story are of a noble class, either elves or of men. Noblewomen may certainly have desires and be desirable, but they also got points for demonstrating a certain subtlety in how they went about courting. Not to mention that neither they, nor often the men, were entirely free to marry on their own. If Eowyn was some sort of lower class woman, as opposed to a member of the royal family of Rohan, she might well have been more direct.

      However, since she is who she is, despite her nomadic roots, she's still got certain requirements. If she's going to get Aragorn, it's going to be as a husband, because in reality, if she just bedded him, everyone would know the next day. If she's a virgin until she's married, that's because that was a common requirement for a woman of her class.

      In a sense, she's a more accurate portrayal of a woman of that sort of world than the sexy Eowyn would be, because she knows as a noble and as a female, she has certain duties and responsibilities that are not easy to escape. Tolkien lived in a very class-conscious society, and in that society, men and women of certain classes operated in specific ways. Insofar as he was also describing a feudal sort of society himself, his experiences probably ring true for what woman would have appeared to be on the surface.

      If you do want to call Tolkien on something, you might well call him out on Rohan itself, since he calls them Horse Lords, but they never really bore much resemblance to anything like real horse nomads. Of course, it was said that they settled down a bit when they were given their land by Gondor, so that may well explain the changes. If so, though, that is also probably why Eowyn acts more like a court lady and less like some Mongol chieftain's niece.

      Anyway, I understand that some stories feature romances as motivational factors and push the story forward, but in this case, I don't see how they do anything for the story. How does a fuller description of what Aragorn thinks of Arwen in the sack add anything? In some stories, the hero is fighting for some woman, but in this story, it's pretty clear that you don't even need that sort of motivation. A very real evil is coming, and in reality, when that sort of total war is coming, your women are usually going to be doing their best to keep things going while you are away fighting and not at all acting like vixens. They may well jump you before you leave, because you may well not come back, but that would be a coupling born of dread.

      I suppose of Tolkien was all you had to go by, it would be deficient in describing females, but it's almost refreshing to *not* have the heroes or heroines hooking up all the time. In the real world, there's a reason you had camp followers and that's because the women you married were at home, being protected, and also protecting things in their own way by controlling the family estates. He's describing a time where women did not go to war, and telling a story that is entirely about the action and little in the way of talking about the home front or the feelings of the population.

    16. Re:Serious points raised? by PRMan · · Score: 2

      Exactly. It could come across as flat as the Muslim woman in BBC's Robin Hood. That level of PC made me stop watching the show all by itself. Battlestar Galactica, OTOH, had many strong female characters including Starbuck and the President. They weren't preaching women's issues, either. Very refreshing.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    17. Re:Serious points raised? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2

      On the other hand, a standard katana would weigh maybe 1100 g (around 2.5 lbs), which is very similar to the common medieval European swords, but with an additional bonus of being wielded with both hands.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    18. Re:Serious points raised? by redlemming · · Score: 2

      With respect to the Deed of Paksenarrion, I'm not sure what you mean by "the woman protagonist is not particularly a woman".

      This book was written by Elizabeth Moon, a female writer and former US marine, who presumably knows what it is to be a woman, and how a woman might behave if she ended up being a soldier. What aspects of her characterization do you object to?

  9. Re:let me guess by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Funny

    If I were a gambling man, my bet would be on the other way around.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  10. Hobbits and natural selection by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Flores man is thought to have become small due to island dwarfism. But what sort of environment would select for the traits ascribed to Tolkien's hobbits and especially the apparent population explosion starting around the 26th century T.A. (10th century S.R.) as seen here?

    1. Re:Hobbits and natural selection by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 2

      Personally, I'm voting for "literary necessity" followed by "some convenient agricultural innovation."

      More seriously: without having read nearly as much Tolkien as I'd like to be able to claim, and without even referencing your LotR Project link because it's Slashdotted right now, one of the theories behind island dwarfism is a series of population explosions: the creatures over-eat, consume all available resources, and only the smallest organisms are able to find enough food to survive afterwards. This doesn't really scale well to an agrarian culture like the hobbits, since the primary purpose of farming is to make food sources more steady.

      That leaves us with the possibility that their crops are very nutrient-poor as a general rule, and over time evolution (perhaps even sexual selection) led to smaller creatures. The conservative culture of hobbits would permit a much later influx of resources would increase the breeding rate but not allow sexual selection to suggest taller individuals.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    2. Re:Hobbits and natural selection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would think that with comments about hobbits being shy quiet folk, with an ability to not be seen if they don't want too, and living in 'holes in the ground' that there was a large preditors that ate all the tall ones...selecting for short, quiet (hairy footed) hobbits.

      It may well have been the ent wives...since they are unaccounted for..and probably mean.

      Are the ent wives counted in the stats?

  11. Re:poor site has been slashdoted by vlm · · Score: 2

    we'er sorry

    Yeah, you're sorry. Now the poor admin and his friends need to walk and walk and walk, now not including Tom Bombadil, and walk and walk all the way to the data center, which now closely resembles a volcano due to the /. effect, to reboot the server, because no one can explain why the eagles can't just fly there and take care of it, because (insert a whole bunch of mumbo jumbo).

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  12. Re:A Love Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Roses are red, grass is greener.

    When I read Slashdot, I play with my weiner.

    Why do English speakers unanimously suck at spelling loanwords that contain "ie" or "ei"?

    Wiener, referring to a penis, comes from the obvious association with the type of sausage. That sausage is a "Wiener Wurst", which is German for "Vienna Sausage". Wien is the German language name for Vienna. It's also where you get "Wiener Schnitzel" from.

    "Wein" on the other hand is the German word for wine and is pronounced similarly.

    There's a basic rule in English of "i before e except after c"; so if you're going to get things wrong, I'll accept accidentally writing "ie" instead of "ei" on loanwords, but the other way around like this is just fucked up.

  13. Sorry the site is down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    As the creator of LotrProject I can only offer my deepest apologies for the site being down. My host has temporarily shut it down -_-
    Being featured on Slashdot is a dream come true.

    Best,
    Emil

  14. writing out of one's element by KingAlanI · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I first thought bad female characterization was a problem with amateur writers such as myself, but even very good professional writers sometimes have issues with it. This can come up even if the writer is not bigoted, or trying not to be.

    As a male, I worry about my ability to write female characters. I want to try, but I don’t want to screw up by doing it badly. I don’t want to make well-meaning mistakes. I want to include it without forcing it in. I can and should have good female characters without covering female-specific issues, but I want to try writing that too. I’m not actively trying to fail Bechdel, but I’m not actively trying to pass it either.

    Perhaps understanding the group better helps write about them well, whichever comes first.

    One woman advised me to make them well-written characters in general and not to overplay stereotypes.

    Other differences (sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, social class, et cetera) present similar challenges. Although it’s not as much of a social issue, writers from a nondominant group might have trouble writing characters from the dominant group.

    This could be a subset of “write what you know”. Also, people are often inspired by works similar to them.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  15. Re:Decreasing longevity of mankind by tnk1 · · Score: 2

    I'd imagine that he certainly got the idea from the Bible or similar stories. Of course, there are a lot of ancient stories that posit that humans used to live longer, like the Greeks.

    Of course, in Tolkien, it is important to separate the normal Men from the Númenóreans who were the men who stood with the Elves in the Wars of Morgoth and were rewarded by the Valar. Those Men obtained their long lives from the favor of the Valar, intermarriage with some elves, and their own presumed virtue. Their lives eventually shortened as they lost their virtue and their relationship with the Valar and the elves soured. Eventually, some Númenóreans ended up in Middle Earth and were the initial population of Gondor.

    However, it is not clear that the ancestors of the Númenóreans are any different than normal men. Their first King, Elros, was half-elven and was actually the brother of Elrond of Rivendell. Unlike Elrond, he chose to be human, and not elven, but he still managed to live a few hundred years. Most of the Men of Númenóreans that did have the longest lives seem to have been nobles or Kings who might well have had elven ancestry, so it is even possible that the Númenóreans or High Men of Gondor were not entirely human either.

    Adding to that, Tolkien makes us aware of the Men of the East, who generally work for Sauron in the War of the Ring, and who seem pretty numerous. It is quite possible that those people never had any decrease in their lifespan, as it probably never was longer than normal to begin with. So, Tolkien does suggest a Golden Age for at least some men, but I think it is clear that he did not imply that humans as a race were more perfect the farther back you went.

  16. Re:A Love Story by icebike · · Score: 2

    There's a basic rule in English of "i before e except after c"; so if you're going to get things wrong, I'll accept accidentally writing "ie" instead of "ei" on loanwords, but the other way around like this is just fucked up.

    Excellent pedantry sir, thank you for the education. Knowing you is just like going to college.

    But this "loadwords" idea is a bit of a stretch. English is eclectic, and it borrows nothing, and steals everything.
    You may have thought these words were on loan from the German, but, like that moldering library book, you took out when you were in highschool, they are not going to be returned.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  17. Perspective by krondell · · Score: 2

    This thread is ridiculous. I just watched WWII in HD, an actual, modern historical account of a war - guess how many of the "characters" were women. I didn't crunch the numbers, but 1 in 5 is not even in the ball park.