Elves and Dwarves
- Thread starter efreysson
- Start date
- Status
They are not quite mary sues. A few examples.
It is the oath of feanor (which in the end comes back to greed), and the slaying of their own kin for no reason other than to take their ships that causes the doom of many of the elves in middle earth.
Three times they attack their own kin. And mostly in lust for the silmarils.
Curufin and Celegorme kidnap luthien and later try to kill her.
Thingol gets himself killed by his own greed for the silmaril.
Maeglin gives information to morgoth resulting in the fall of gondolin.
Yes they do come across as mary sues compared to the other races, as frankly Dwarves and Men just screw up more.
It is the oath of feanor (which in the end comes back to greed), and the slaying of their own kin for no reason other than to take their ships that causes the doom of many of the elves in middle earth.
Three times they attack their own kin. And mostly in lust for the silmarils.
Curufin and Celegorme kidnap luthien and later try to kill her.
Thingol gets himself killed by his own greed for the silmaril.
Maeglin gives information to morgoth resulting in the fall of gondolin.
Yes they do come across as mary sues compared to the other races, as frankly Dwarves and Men just screw up more.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 14
Personally, the only problems I have with elves and dwarves is something not limited to them and has nothing to do with their tropes but more of the execution: I really, really hate it when the tropes of fantastical creatures or whatever is simply invoked to just make them all act the same and have the exact same culture. I mean really I know every species has its set biases and quirks and that culture shapes people a lot, but when fantastical creature #1-#74521 acts in the exact same way as the guy next to him it really bugs me. It's the same reason I have a hard time buying the "X species is always alignment Y" thing.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2010
- Messages
- 7,063
- Reaction score
- 1,643
Very possibly so. I was a wee little mite when I read that one, and I haven't even mustered the geekishness to go see the new movie yet.
They're not even remotely Mary Sues. Yes, they are more beautiful and gifted than humans, but as is often seen in Tolkien, the further up the ladder you are, the further you fall. The less said about psychopathic Feanorians, the better.
It's okay to use elves or dwarfs. Just make them new. Really tall gigantic dwarfs, something like that.
(My spell-checker doesn't like "dwarves".)
caw
(My spell-checker doesn't like "dwarves".)
caw
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,130
- Reaction score
- 10,901
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Tolkien got the ideas for his elves and dwarves from European mythology (Norse etc.). The idea of elves being an elder, magical, immortal race that is less numerous but more refined than humans, and the concept of dwarves being stone-dwelling, smiting and gold loving certainly predates the Hobbit and LoTR, though he undoubtedly breathed a certain life into them and is responsible for popularizing those versions of elves and dwarves. Hobbits were a bit more "customized," though traditions of little people of varying kinds go back a long way as well.
Spell checker never likes the word dwarves (and many other legitimate words as well) but that actually is the correct plural for dwarf when you are referring to the mythological being. Dwarfs is the correct plural when you're referring to brown dwarfs or something astronomical.
To be fair to Tolkien, he did have different elf and dwarf cultures. I think in many mythical worlds, though, these beings are less numerous and longer lived than humans, so there would likely be fewer "nations" of them and their cultures might evolve more slowly as well. But I agree, it seems odd when all the elves are somehow a united front in many fantasy stories. Seems like there would still be politics and factions, even within a fairly insular group of people.
Last edited:
Yes, this is a trope particular to fantasy and sci-fi that annoys me. Yet I suppose I can see why writers so often fall into it.
When creating a non-human species with their own culture, one CAN just make them basically funny-looking humans with the exact same mindsets and issues as the other characters; but that isn't particularly memorable.
Creating a people truly separate from humanity makes the setting more distinct. Yet balancing THAT with giving them individual variety takes quite a lot of skill.
There are no non-human species in my current series so I'm not speaking from experience, but I have given this some thought. And I honestly don't really know how I would do this. I guess I'll cross that bridge if I ever get to it. But I would definitely not go the "all X think and act alike" route.
Personally, I can't imagine Elves and Dwarves any other way. Of course I assume you're referring to the "high" elves; from what I understand, there are also wood elves, dark elves, and others that I'm not to keen on... I think there's a kind that live in the water? Personally, I think both the elves and dwarves in the book series Eragon are perfect, but I think it'd be interesting to see someone write a story where they are not stereotypical.
Elves were certainly around long before Tolkien, as were collectors of local or worldwide folklore and fairy tales.
Tolkien does divide them, from what I can see in my limited reading, into two types, the High Elves from the West (beyond the waters), and the Wood Elves, less wise and less ethereal. Both would seem to fall under the Tolkien recommendation of "good people," but the High Elves seem a bit less like people than Wood Elves, and their sphere a bit more primal.
I'm not well read in fantasy, but have read hundreds of fairytales over the years. I wanted to broaden my ideas of the origins of elves and such, after having so much fun reading a book on gnomes. So I picked up a kindle book called British Goblins: Welsh Folk-lore, Fairy Mythology, Legends and Traditions for free on Amazon via my kindle. It also comes in paperback, but on one version is on a different page. As a matter of fact, forget it. The Amazon search doesn't reliably bring up my kindle version, which is a third version of approx. 346 (printed) pages and instead points to books of 128 pages and a different kindle version. Here's the one I got: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004UJCH80/?tag=absowrit-20
Here's the blurb from one of the versions not my own: "Wirt Sikes's 1881 tome defines and records Welsh fairy legends as they existed -- still vital, alive, not just a mordant mythology but living folklore in that year. Like many texts of the time, it treats the subject mechanically, detailing fairy legends with such care and precision as to leach away a measure of the magic. But all the same, there's plenty of magic here: this is the myth that modern fantasy grows from; and the truth is that it's not to be found elsewhere still alive."
It's a long tome that I've found good fun. I wouldn't call it mechanical so much as sometimes shifting focus from the magic of stories to their origin in folk customs and beliefs. That integration of story with history is either interesting or not, as one prefers, but the book is not written without personality.
I've very much enjoyed its revelation (to me, anyway), that the various races we're used to -- elves, gnomes, fairies, dwarves, etc. -- are not historically as Disneyfied or Mary-Sued as today's popular culture portrays them. Some fairies used to be dangerous if not outright murderous, and the word and concept of goblin and elf were often thought of as interchangeable. Of course every locality has its own ideas, and it was the job of the folktale collector and student of fairy tales and mythology to find order amidst the chaos of individual fecundity.
I found the book a huge breath of fresh air that has freed my imagination up and let me consider accepting all sorts of renditions of fantasy characters as worth reading and worth creating. It took a load off my mind and inspired.
Tales Before Tolkien is another book that rounds up what it says it does and could be an inspiration.
George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin was read by Tolkien and at first amply admired but then scoffed at by him, as was its sequel (I forget the name). Both are available as free kindle downloads.
The Land of the Snergs is, if I recall correctly, acknowledged by Tolkien as probably the biggest influence on The Hobbit. (Skipping the Icelandic Sagas, I suppose?)
Finally, I found The Annotated Hobbit a great read. It has sidebars with annotations rather than putting notes at the end of the chapters or end of the book. They are an education in themselves on Tolkien, fairy tales, and his progenitors and influences. Honestly, I couldn't get through The Hobbit before I put this book aside and read an electronic version, because the notes were both compelling and too distracting.
Anyway, there is lots of material out there, much of it free, that puts Tolkien, his creations, and the most well-known fantasy races in context. The more you read of it, the less likely you are to feel bound by Tolkien's renditions.
Tolkien does divide them, from what I can see in my limited reading, into two types, the High Elves from the West (beyond the waters), and the Wood Elves, less wise and less ethereal. Both would seem to fall under the Tolkien recommendation of "good people," but the High Elves seem a bit less like people than Wood Elves, and their sphere a bit more primal.
I'm not well read in fantasy, but have read hundreds of fairytales over the years. I wanted to broaden my ideas of the origins of elves and such, after having so much fun reading a book on gnomes. So I picked up a kindle book called British Goblins: Welsh Folk-lore, Fairy Mythology, Legends and Traditions for free on Amazon via my kindle. It also comes in paperback, but on one version is on a different page. As a matter of fact, forget it. The Amazon search doesn't reliably bring up my kindle version, which is a third version of approx. 346 (printed) pages and instead points to books of 128 pages and a different kindle version. Here's the one I got: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004UJCH80/?tag=absowrit-20
Here's the blurb from one of the versions not my own: "Wirt Sikes's 1881 tome defines and records Welsh fairy legends as they existed -- still vital, alive, not just a mordant mythology but living folklore in that year. Like many texts of the time, it treats the subject mechanically, detailing fairy legends with such care and precision as to leach away a measure of the magic. But all the same, there's plenty of magic here: this is the myth that modern fantasy grows from; and the truth is that it's not to be found elsewhere still alive."
It's a long tome that I've found good fun. I wouldn't call it mechanical so much as sometimes shifting focus from the magic of stories to their origin in folk customs and beliefs. That integration of story with history is either interesting or not, as one prefers, but the book is not written without personality.
I've very much enjoyed its revelation (to me, anyway), that the various races we're used to -- elves, gnomes, fairies, dwarves, etc. -- are not historically as Disneyfied or Mary-Sued as today's popular culture portrays them. Some fairies used to be dangerous if not outright murderous, and the word and concept of goblin and elf were often thought of as interchangeable. Of course every locality has its own ideas, and it was the job of the folktale collector and student of fairy tales and mythology to find order amidst the chaos of individual fecundity.
I found the book a huge breath of fresh air that has freed my imagination up and let me consider accepting all sorts of renditions of fantasy characters as worth reading and worth creating. It took a load off my mind and inspired.
Tales Before Tolkien is another book that rounds up what it says it does and could be an inspiration.
George MacDonald's The Princess and the Goblin was read by Tolkien and at first amply admired but then scoffed at by him, as was its sequel (I forget the name). Both are available as free kindle downloads.
The Land of the Snergs is, if I recall correctly, acknowledged by Tolkien as probably the biggest influence on The Hobbit. (Skipping the Icelandic Sagas, I suppose?)
Finally, I found The Annotated Hobbit a great read. It has sidebars with annotations rather than putting notes at the end of the chapters or end of the book. They are an education in themselves on Tolkien, fairy tales, and his progenitors and influences. Honestly, I couldn't get through The Hobbit before I put this book aside and read an electronic version, because the notes were both compelling and too distracting.
Anyway, there is lots of material out there, much of it free, that puts Tolkien, his creations, and the most well-known fantasy races in context. The more you read of it, the less likely you are to feel bound by Tolkien's renditions.
Last edited:
We've been telling stories about humans since the beginning of time and still haven't said all there is to say about them. I sincerely doubt we have already done so for elves and dwarves, or any other "staple" fantasy race.
*she says as she's writing a story about two elves*
*she says as she's writing a story about two elves*
Doug Anderson is one of my very favorite Tolkien scholars, right up there next to Tom Shippey, Michael Drout, and Verlyn Flieger.
I like elves and dwarves as unique characters in a story, but the idea of a mountain or valley filled with them makes me yawn!
I'll likely check some of those writers out, thank you.
I also read and enjoyed Your Guide to The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings, by Charles River Editors. It's not particularly deep, according to a reviewer or two on Amazon, but on the other hand, that is probably what made it a valuable read to someone like me not already fully submerged in all things Tolkien. If I recall correctly, they also did one on The Hobbit alone which isn't as well-reviewed. As it's about the same price as the version that includes LOTR, it seems a better idea for Tolkien tyros to opt for the version that combines The Hobbit and LOTR. Anyway, it was fine for a beginner.
I'm 64% through Corey Olsen's "Exploring J.R.R. Tolkien's 'The Hobbit.'" I like it quite a bit. He ties in neat little observations about small points in Tolkien's writing that bring it together, making connections I didn't always make. At times he seems to expand on the obvious, but considering I miss things myself sometimes, perhaps I shouldn't be too confident in that criticism. It could be that others are picking up some of the things I've missed without having to think about it while I'm picking up things others miss, each of us finding what we've already spotted unnecessary to discuss any further and what hasn't occurred to us a revelation, but really it's simply easy to be blinkered. I suppose Mr. Olsen is correct to try to cover all his bases, my occasional impatience notwithstanding.
I also picked up the sample of Jane Yolen's "Deconstructing Tolkien," but don't care for its quick diversion of the reader into short stories that somehow might have something to do with Tolkien. That doesn't strike me as analysis so much as a roundabout excuse for an anthology with a bit of history and analysis as a tidy wraparound.
LOL this was my response. I don't find them perfect in the least. Quite aloof and shitty at times. Oh no, darkness is coming. Let's play our harps. We're pacifists. We're too old to sacrifice ourselves. Who cares about Morgoth? Pfft. Deal with it yourselves.
Tolkien's work is, a lot of the time, "convenient" and such in regard to supernatural aid, but it certainly doesn't JUST come from the elves. Gandalf saves the 14 frequently (later Bilbo takes on this role). The eagles, etc.
Back to elves . . .
Think about it. They live a long-arse time (nearly immortal). If I had a thousand years to learn my harp, I'd probably be pretty darn good at it.
Head straight for Tom Shippey; he's a medievalist, and has held the same positions at the same unis that Tolkien had.
I'm going back and forth over which book to tell you to read first, and I can't pick:
Tom Shippey. J. R. R. Tolkien: Author of the Century.
Tom Shippey. The Road to Middle Earth.
These are smart interesting books by someone who knows and loves Tolkien, and knows the literature that Tolkien loved and taught.
Okay, I bought Shippey's JRRT: Author of the Century. I wanted the other one more, but it was going for many times the close-out price ($4.00) I got from one of Amazon's sellers for Author of the Century, and I've already overdone my book budget considerably lately. I look forward to seeing it in 4 to 14 days.
It's worth taking a look. Though now that the Hobbit movie has come out, there might be a three-year waiting list.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2009
- Messages
- 957
- Reaction score
- 62
- Location
- Rome, Italy
- Website
- tedacross.blogspot.com
Back to elves . . .
Think about it. They live a long-arse time (nearly immortal). If I had a thousand years to learn my harp, I'd probably be pretty darn good at it.
This, and the fact that if you were immortal, you would be inclined to stay out of most conflicts that might actually end that immortality...
I think you're spot on. When you have an army of 1000-year old elves, imagine the loss. I also get the sense that procreation isn't happening a whole lot among the elves.
I didn't get a sense of a lot of women being around in The Hobbit to procreate with, anyway - elf or otherwise. There were either singly identifiable men, or groups. In that book, only the Lake Town's humans had children or women, that I recall. But not a one was identified by name or job function.
There's only one named female in The Hobbit, and that's Belladonna Took, Bilbo's deceased mother. The only speaking females are the Mirkwood spiders (though they're never specified as female, I think we can assume they are).
- Status