. . . Tolkien was perfectly capable of writing a mushy romance with a large
role for a female lead, i.e. the tale of Beren and Luthien. So come to
think of it, he seems to have made a deliberate choice to keep sexual romance,
and alluring leading ladies, out of LotR, except for all the quick unions at
the end of the tale. It is still not a tale written for children, and yet
it is also strangely asexual.
I think Tolkien leaves out sex, even in the form of subtle romance, for the
same reason the New Testament does: so the tale can focus on higher
matters. If so, I find it ironic that the critics use this asexual tone
as evidence that the tale is only fit for
children.
________________________________________
"‘I think he was a silly little man,' said Councillor Tompkins. ‘Worthless, in fact; no use to Society at all.'
"‘Oh, I don't know,' said Atkins, who was nobody of importance, just a schoolmaster. ‘I am not so sure: it depends on what you mean by use .'
"‘No practical or economic use,' said Tompkins. . . .
. . .
"‘It is proving very useful indeed,' said the Second Voice. ‘As a holiday, and a refreshment. It is splendid for convalescence; and not only for that, for many it is the best introduction to the Mountains. It works wonders in some cases. I am sending more and more there. They seldom have to come back.'"
