"Smaug?
Oh, he was a pretty cool dragon—he set fire to a lot of stuff.” “Gollum? Creepy
guy—he really got what he deserved in the end, I guess.” “Gothmog? He…also set
things on fire?” These monsters are all, of course, very different, but they do
have one thing in common, and one thing in common with almost all Tolkien
characters—they are male. Indeed, the only monsters Tolkien has that are female[1] are Ungoliant and her daughter,
Shelob. This is perhaps not something too odd at first glance—dragons and
trolls and various other things are, after all, generally thought of as male. It
does seem to bear further scrutiny, however, that the only female monsters are
giant spiders who wish only to devour whatever they come across, literal
swallowers of light. I’m not trying to make a grand point about misogyny in
fantasy or something similarly far-reaching—I am just trying to perhaps see
what making these monsters female might mean.
If
we accept a very slightly allegorical reading of the various monsters, with
dragons being manifestations of greed, then it seems pretty obvious that the
various spiders are analogous to gluttony (and perhaps lust, considering that
Shelob mates with and eats her own offspring deep in her den.) The entire
purpose of Ungoliant, after all, is that she is never full, and presumably
never can be full. She exists only to consume whatever she can, from the light
of the trees[2]
to herself[3] when there is ultimately
nothing else to consume. Shelob is Ungoliant’s daughter and has much the same
problem, but as with most things in the Third Age, the extremity of her hunger
is lessened. She no longer has the power of her mother to “spin [the light she
has eaten] forth again in dark nets of strangling gloom”[4], but instead makes her den
in a dark place and stays there. Instead of being able to suck dry the light of
the trees, Shelob is hurt by the remnants of it contained in the Phial of
Galadriel. Ungoliant perhaps could have been classed as a predator, to use what
we talked about in class—she was, after all, able to overcome Morgoth until he
called the Balrogs to him[5]—but her descendants have
lost that capability and exist more as a ‘quest obstacle’. Shelob is still
perpetually hungry, but her hunger and her visage are less than what have come
before. She is almost a black hole of gluttony, eating only whatever comes
close to her.
To
further allegorize the monsters, if dragons are considered to be analogous to
the Serpent in the garden, tempting someone to taste of the fruit and be cast
down, what does this make the spiders? Ungoliant was, technically, the one to
consume the ‘forbidden fruit’ that lay in the gardens of the Valar—but there is
certainly a difference between this and the eating of a single fruit. I don’t
think anyone could seriously claim that Ungoliant is Eve. Outside of this,
however, I cannot see any place for the female monsters in a biblical analogy. Is
Ungoliant the pain and suffering of the world outside of the garden, someone
who only comes into play once the serpent has done his job[6]? If one was absolutely,
positively desperate, I suppose a parallel could roughly be drawn between the
femininity of Ungoliant, the destroyer of the Light and Eve’s temptation, with
something cleverly inserted about Ungoliant’s final devouring of herself coupled
with God’s decree that childbirth be painful[7] as a kind of self-induced
punishment. Much as Tolkien has said in some of his letters, however, too much allegory can
defeat the purpose of a work, and lead to a silly place besides. Let’s not go
there.
To
step away from looking only at his own works, Tolkien’s lack of female monsters
is simply following a time-honored tradition—this is, at least, the impression
one might get from reading “The Monsters and The Critics”. There are, to put it
very plainly, three sections or episodes in the story of Beowulf. Grendel
attacks Heorot, Beowulf arrives, Beowulf fights and defeats Grendel. Grendel’s
mother takes outrage at the fact that her son has been killed, and Beowulf
kills her in turn. Finally, Beowulf returns to the land of the Geats and after
ruling well for a long time, is finally killed by the dragon. I will freely
admit that one of these sections is much shorter than the others, and that
there is an extremely marked tonal shift between Grendel’s mother and the
dragon, such that dividing the poem into halves is a perfectly reasonable thing
to do when analyzing the poem, provided the division is based upon this tonal
shift. Tolkien, however, doesn’t really claim that his split is based upon this
tonal difference—rather, he seems to mostly ignore the existence of Grendel’s
mother. Her fight with Beowulf is not mentioned. She is, essentially, relegated
to the sidelines.
This is somewhat similar to the roles of Ungoliant and Shelob- though the impact of their actions is certainly great, neither of them are really extant in their respective stories for more than a chapter. What else does Grendel's mother have in common with these great spiders? Before her son is killed, Grendel’s mother seems to have been
lurking in “a mere… at night there, something uncanny happens: the water burns.”[8]—similar to Shelob’s
lurking in her den. Before the fight, it would seem that she might be a foe on
par with Grendel, and she is certainly described as having all the strength of
Grendel. It would seem that their upcoming fight would be treated with all the
weight of Beowulf’s fight with Grendel. And yet—it really isn’t. Beowulf dives
to the bottom of the lake where she makes her home, and she seizes him—but she
cannot get through his armour[9]. Beowulf’s sword breaks
upon her hide, leaving him weaponless—but he quickly finds a sword that can
kill her among her treasure-hoard[10]. She dies, ultimately,
fairly quickly.
She is an supposed to be an ancient and crafty foe, one who has
terrorized her surroundings for untold years—and she dies within fifty lines.
The fight with Grendel may not be much longer, but it is at least prefaced, so
that the reader understands the weight of years of suffering that lay upon that
fight[11]. This might be a personal
reading, but something much the same seems, for me at least, to happen with
Shelob. She has preyed on the orcs that were given to her by Sauron for a very,
very long time, and she is ultimately defeated (temporarily, at least) by a
desperate Hobbit. To be sure, she does accomplish quite a lot, nearly killing
Frodo and being a genuinely frightening monster—but her appearance also seems
rather anticlimactic. This is, I suppose, the job of a hero, to take a monster
that has been frightening locals for generations and to kill it—but the fact
that it is much more marked with Grendel’s mother than with Grendel, and that
Shelob’s existence is not even really hinted at aside from the section of the
book where she appears, seems to indicate a kind of commonality.
Ultimately, I suppose the point of this post is not so much a single argument as a series of observations. As a final
observation, the pairs of Ungoliant and Shelob with Grendel’s mother and
Grendel seem to share many similarities. The first of each of these pairs, of
course, share an origin that is almost completely unknown. Ungoliant has
crawled out from the void, and to look too deeply into her origins seems a task
that can lead only to sleepless nights. Grendel’s mother may be a descendant of
Cain, but the generations that have passed between him and her are also
probably best left unmentioned. The child of each of these monsters, then, is
more known to us, and perhaps slightly less alarming in being known. Certainly,
at least, Grendel has a spark of humanity that his mother seems to lack—she is
a distinctly more unknown creature. Ultimately, however, that knowledge about
them also seems to serve as a way to make them a more compelling foe. Ungoliant
is a terrifying figure, to be sure, but her deeds are confined to such a
distant age that they have a distinct quality of unreality, as opposed to
Shelob’s almost tangible menace. Grendel’s fight with Beowulf is more
compelling than his mother’s perhaps because he is almost indistinguishable
from Beowulf in the heat of the fight, so close is he to human. What does any
of this have to do with my original musing, on the distinct lack of female
monsters within Tolkien’s legendarium? Well,
I think perhaps the only conclusion I can draw is that there is a sense
of female monsters having crawled out of what is essentially the void or
woodwork around a story, without a real backstory—something that serves to make
them more monstrous, perhaps, but also less compelling as villains. Whether this is a result of a conscious attempt to other these spiders from other monsters, who are traditionally thought of as male, or something more unconscious, I don't think can be determined in one blog post.
--OK
[1]
At least, to my knowledge and that we’ve talked about.
[2]
The Silmarillion, pp. 76
[3]
The Silmarillion, pp. 81
[4]
The Silmarillion, pp. 73
[5]
The Silmarillion, pp. 81
[6]
The Serpent, in this case, being…Morgoth? Who made the much more serpent-like
dragons?
[7]
Genesis 3:16
[8]
Beowulf, trans. Seamus Heaney, pp. 95
[9]
Beowulf, trans. Seamus Heaney, pp. 105
[10]
Beowulf, trans. Seamus Heaney, pp. 107
[11]
The visceral description of Grendel’s arm being torn off also contributes.
1 comment:
I agree, it is puzzling why female monsters do not play a larger role in Tolkien. What if they had? It is interesting that the spiders and Grendel's mother seem to share a certain indefinite quality--dark and hard to see, not to mention fight. Heroes seem to have an easier time fighting more masculine monsters that come out to fight. It is hard not to see something fairly archetypal going on here! RLFB
Post a Comment