orchidrabbit

the internet's worst clown

call me remy or rime.
illustrator. plushie maker. ttrpg content maker. video game/interactive media thing creator. im a renaissance man. the act of creation is reverence.

thanks for everything, cohost.

Commissions: Check If Open (Click for more info)

@AStudyInSpectrum - mystery media essays

@clownpost - clowns


links to other places
orchidrabbit.neocities.org/
email
orchidrabbitrr@gmail.com
discord
orchidrabbit

orchidrabbit
@orchidrabbit

starting lotr: two towers today and the entwife shit is even more nuts than i was led to believe. the entwives worked hard and cultivated the land, eventually teaching farming to men, while the enthusbands just decided to be nomadic and walk around, hoping to encounter them again. literally the "how do you lose a woman" "you forget to cherish her" thing.

they didnt just "lose" them, they walked out on their wives and were confused when they decided to just go do other stuff.


orchidrabbit
@orchidrabbit

im near the end of the book now where the hobbits get to shelob's lair and i think its really neat how the narration implies that she's an ancient and ever hungry personification of darkness before it makes her physically manifest as a huge disgusting spider-like monster.

i dont think its neat as im skim reading some scholarly analysis of shelob and these people that get paid too much have written a lot of stuff that says shelob is some kind of archetypal female sexual threat or some kind of metaphor for evil maternal femininity castrating the masculine. like not be too reductive here but shes literally named "she + lob (archaic word for spider)" and sam stabs her with a sword.

we already had what we'd eventually call cosmic horror as a concept at this point, and i think shelob's descriptions lean much easier into that as an interpretation, which makes it wild that people immediately jump to "this monster is a representation of why women are evil". like im not gonna give tolkien too much credit here but to say that he did this with any intentionality is just mad fucking stupid.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @orchidrabbit's post:

yeah the entwives bit is one of many wild sections of lotr that make the books much weirder and cooler than the movies imo (not that i don’t enjoy those too)

another one for me (i forget which book it’s in so potentially very minor spoilers if you haven’t read the whole trilogy yet) is that it’s basically implied (at least this how i read it) in some narration that the nazgul flying steeds are basically dinosaurs/pterodactyls?? wild shit

also re shelob: wth academics

the ents are made much more comedic in the movies when in the books even if theyre silly theyre still much more noble and dont require the tricking/incitement of pippin to take action against isengard which i do think is cool. but i agree, both are still cool.

i havent finished the trilogy yet (i now have to wait ~20 weeks to borrow return of the king lol) but i was wondering about the nazgul steeds since unless i wasnt paying attention too hard, in two towers they are mostly just seen in the distance surveying and thought to be/compared to hawks and other birds but understood to be much larger and strange which tracks with them being dinosaurs! that's pretty neat!

and yeah the shelob people. i found some anti-criticism of those interpretations that were basically "sometimes it really is just as simple as a man vs monster thing"

yeah agreed about the ents in film v book

you’ll have to see if you get the same sense of the nazgul steeds as pterodactyls as i did since it isn’t said explicitly and this is me going entirely off my memory from the last time i read the books haha