Session 1.7

If we make Ungoliant's hunger her main trait, and take that as far as you can, she is a representative of cardinal sin gluttony. Nessa and her deer could be objects of her desire, not for pairing but for swallowing. Their elusiveness could trigger her hunger. And to catch them she could invent the sticky spider web. If Nessa is caught, of course, she becomes a damsel in distress...and Tulkas would have the strength necessary to free her... But then, after that, we could have the running. :)
And then Ungoliant could develop four more legs and so on....
 
Last edited:
I really do like the idea of Tulkas and Nessa taking off running, and having what had been a tense situation turn into sheer fun, with both of them laughing. :)

I think the idea was to save the reveal of Ungoliant's spider form to the time when Melkor allies with her to take out the Two Trees. But she can of course be associated with spiders now.
 
MithLuin said:
I really do like the idea of Tulkas and Nessa taking off running, and having what had been a tense situation turn into sheer fun, with both of them laughing. :)

I think the idea was to save the reveal of Ungoliant's spider form to the time when Melkor allies with her to take out the Two Trees. But she can of course be associated with spiders now.
Click to expand...
Well... she could make sticky rope traps without being a spider...
 
I'm so far behind at this point...

I do remember when the idea of Ungoliant having an 'interest' in Nessa was brought up, but I do not remember that interest being described as sexual in nature. Perhaps this was brought up in a later broadcast, but I think we might be tilting at a windmill a bit here. There are a number of reasons that Nessa could fascinate Ungoliant, but the most compelling reason I can think of is the spiritual power given off while Nyssa is off running and dancing in the Wild by herself. This can be illustrated visually by Light, which we already know that Ungoliant has an obsession with. Ungoliant can envy the light and plot to obtain it, drain it from Nessa, without desiring her sexually.
 
Nicholas Palazzo said:
I'm so far behind at this point...

I do remember when the idea of Ungoliant having an 'interest' in Nessa was brought up, but I do not remember that interest being described as sexual in nature.
Click to expand...
That was how the hosts discussed Ungoliant's "attraction to Nessa" in the recording for Session 1.8 last week. They seemed to go back-and-forth about the extent the sexual dimension of her interest would be played up, but towards the end of the session they were throwing around the term "sexual predator."

I agree it's possible to show Ungoliant's interest in a non-sexual manner - though it's admittedly more difficult in contemporary Western culture, we tend to see sexual innuendo under practically every rock - but it sounds like the hosts are steering in the direction of lending a sexual component to the scenario, although there's a lot more to Ungoliant's attraction than sexual desire. Still, when you bring in that angle, you're importing with it a small mountain of baggage which I'm not convinced the hosts are prepared to unpack in a thoughtful and respectful manner.
 
Yeah, seriously - no one wants to portray the only character with same-sex desire as an evil monster! And I didn't hear any suggestions for turning any of the other Maiar or Valar into same-sex couples. (Nor would I particularly like that idea.) So, the idea of Ungoliant wanting to pair up with Nessa is extremely problematic. Having her want to eat Nessa alive and suck the life out of her...is a little more straightforward for monstrous behavior.

And it is true that *any* interest will be seen as having a sexual undertone because...we don't know how to portray platonic friendships on film very well. Not that anything Ungoliant does should be platonic - she should be all about lust and hunger. But...make that beastly, not sexual.

And that brings up some of the 'brotherly' relationships between the Valar that we haven't even touched on yet. Manwë and Melkor, okay, we've talked about their rivalry during the Lamps. Irmo and Námo are also brothers, though. And Nienna is someone's sister....I forget who, though. And Vana is Yavanna's younger sister, right? Anyway, we haven't done anything with those relationships at all.
 
Modern viewers/readers also read sexual undertones into Sam and Frodo's relationship, complete with a love triangle (rectangle?) with Sméagol/Gollum. I don't think it's worth the effort to avoid a plot point because some folks will take it that way. People will ship who they want to ship no matter what we do, so I wouldn't make it something to worry about. And, like Prof. Olsen said: (paraphrased) To modern Hollywood, there is no drama more compelling than human sexual tension. Doesn't mean that we have to walk on eggshells trying to not let people think that way. It won't work regardless.
 
Honestly, no one is going to femslash Ungoliant and Nessa unless we write that into the scenes. True, people ship who they like, but they don't ship just everyone. I mean, okay, yes, fine, someone will always ship rare pairs and everything exists on the internet. If you are Hermione Granger, you get paired with absolutely everyone. The Weasley twins? Lucius Malfoy? Why not! But no one suggests that is in the source material. So, yes, if the actresses who play Ungoliant and Nessa are extremely attractive, someone somewhere will ship it and write femmeslash. But that doesn't mean that it will be portrayed on screen as Ungoliant wanting to be in a relationship with Nessa, the way the other Valar have paired off. And there's a huge difference between what is there, and what people do with it.

I agree that people will take a platonic friendship and/or a confrontational relationship and turn it into sexual tension in fandom. So, if two characters have a close relationship or a working partnership or a recurring enmity....fandom will run with that. But here we were discussing actually writing the story that way to start with. Not letting viewers make up their own interpretation, but explicitly establishing Ungoliant's interest as 'sexual predator'.

As an example of what I mean, the film 'Avengers' has two verbal confrontations between the main villain (Loki) and the Avengers that fandom ran with. One is when Black Widow (Natasha Romanov/Scarlett Johansen) interrogates Loki while he is in a glass prison. The other is when Iron Man (Tony Stark/Robert Downey Jr) returns to his tower to find Loki waiting for him. In both cases, there is a back-and-forth and some power plays. Fandom, sure, enjoys reading sexual tension into those scenes. It's quite possible that the actors intended some of that. But the way the story is written does not actually imply anything beyond the enmity. So, that's fine. I have no reason to avoid scenes that could be read into....but we weren't talking about creating a scene like that.


This is nothing to avoid. What I am expressing qualms about is having Ungoliant say or do anything to imply she was looking at Nessa as a...potential mate? We know Ungoliant does end up pairing with some hapless monstrous spider to create the evil giant spiders of Middle Earth. And she likely eats him, because....Ungoliant.

But we're already investing in a Manwë-Varda-Melkor love triangle. We really don't want to write a Tulkas-Nessa-Ungoliant triangle, so that both Melkor and Ungoliant are seen as jilted lovers who were just left alone and nobody wanted them and that's why they turned evil. That's a pretty weak story.
 
Yes, I'm totally inboard with not portraying it as a sexual or romantic interaction. I'm just saying that we shouldn't let the fact that people will ship the two characters despite our best efforts not to portray them that way deter us.
 
MithLuin said:
As an example of what I mean, the film 'Avengers' has two verbal confrontations between the main villain (Loki) and the Avengers that fandom ran with. One is when Black Widow (Natasha Romanov/Scarlett Johansen) interrogates Loki while he is in a glass prison. The other is when Iron Man (Tony Stark/Robert Downey Jr) returns to his tower to find Loki waiting for him. In both cases, there is a back-and-forth and some power plays. Fandom, sure, enjoys reading sexual tension into those scenes. It's quite possible that the actors intended some of that. But the way the story is written does not actually imply anything beyond the enmity. So, that's fine. I have no reason to avoid scenes that could be read into....but we weren't talking about creating a scene like that.
Click to expand...
Oh, yes, I wasn't meaning to suggest we should try to eliminate any possibility of reading sexual tension into Ungoliant's interactions with Nessa. Those two Avengers scenes are good examples of what I have in mind as well - fandom can do what they like, but the film itself isn't overtly or covertly suggesting a sexual dynamic.

I think it's a bit more difficult between Nessa and Ungoliant, though, because Ungoliant is trying to tempt Nessa in this scene, and because Ungoliant's whole motivation is unrestrained appetite. In a way, I can see where the hosts are coming from in taking an across-the-board approach to Ungoliant's appetite, throwing sexual desire in along with everything else. It makes a certain amount of sense: I just think that in context, it's very likely to raise all sorts of unfortunate implications that I'd really rather the show not fall into.
 
Hi.
Just want to say, that I do not think the sexual appetite is a way to go. Mostly because it is a far step from what Tolkien did. At least according to my impression of his writings. How the "public" receives it, we can not really do anything about.

Generally I think we should try to convey Tolkien's views and attitudes, as far as possible. It is after all his work, and I feel he deserves that respect, even if I do not agree with all of Tolkien's views.
 
Halstein said:
Hi.
Just want to say, that I do not think the sexual appetite is a way to go. Mostly because it is a far step from what Tolkien did. At least according to my impression of his writings. How the "public" receives it, we can not really do anything about.

Generally I think we should try to convey Tolkien's views and attitudes, as far as possible. It is after all his work, and I feel he deserves that respect, even if I do not agree with all of Tolkien's views.
Click to expand...

Tolkien does portray sexual appetite in a couple of cases, typically in reference to Luthien, but I don't believe that we ever read Ungoliant in that way.
 
Yes, the entire story of Luthien is a study of whether people react to her beauty with possessive lust or freeing love. Release from Bondage indeed......

Tolkien does use the word lust to describe Ungoliant's desire for light. So, her...interest is predatory and possessive and consuming. I agree it's not meant to be sexual. I mean...how does one even have sexual desire for light? That makes...very little sense. And, what little we do know of her sex life involves spiders, not the Two Trees and gems of light.
 
Another thing that has been bothering me a bit is Ungoliant's name. Isn't it strange that she already has a name that partially means spider? Or do we take it that all spiders simply are named after her, and that her name means something else, or nothing in particular? (That would be a problem, since names are important to Tolkien.) Do we need another name for her before she takes the spider form? Or do we let her be without name before that? In that case, how do the other Valar refer to her?

EDIT: She could for instance be called Wirilomë, which means "gloomweaver".
 
What the Silmarillion does not need is more names that change. I realize 'Ungoliant' includes the name for 'spider' (in both Quenya and Sindarin), but....viewers who know that already know she's going to turn into a giant spider, so I'm not worried about the spoilery effects. She can be called 'Gloomweaver' or 'Ungoliant the Gloomweaver' (especially in the frame narrative), but we don't need to invent an alternative name for her. She never changes, and is always what she was when she entered Middle Earth. One name is the way to go with her.

And, yes, the names of the Valar all mean what they do in Quenya (etc) *because* they are the names of the Valar and the Valar embody the meaning of those words.
 
I do like the idea that the word for spider comes from Ungoliant's name, rather than the other way around. Also, the idea that she was a spirit of darkness from the beginning. Doesn't mean that Eru created an evil being, darkness is just the space between the light. To make a Bible reference, "... God separated the Light from the Darkness ...," he didn't destroy it. Darkness is not in and of itself evil, but perhaps the initial motivation for Ungoliant's 'lust' for light results in envy, since she was 'left in the dark', no pun intended.

Superficially, darkness is boring. Nothing to do, nothing to see. No beauty, no artistry. And Ungoliant can be missing the point of how she's supposed to work _with_ the Light, and believe herself pushed aside. She may _say_ that she loves the darkness and "the dark is so beautiful" and all that, but really, she wants, craves, Light.
 
I should mention that there are several passages where Tolkien describes Morgoth as a sexual predator (to go back to that term). In the Lost Tales, Gothmog is his son, and the mother is an ogress....well, she's certainly not Morgoth's wife, so one could infer that she wasn't entirely willing/happy about the situation, but we don't know any details. Then, in the Lay of Leithian, when Luthien dances before Morgoth, he gives her a speech about, essentially, how he is going to break her like trampling on flowers. I mean, you can read into it what you will, but it seems pretty straightforward that he is threatening/promising to rape and murder her.

'And here of need thou shalt remain
now, Luthien, in joy or pain-
or pain, the fitting doom for all,
for rebel, thief, and upstart thrall.
Why should ye not in our fate share
of woe and travail? Or should I spare
to slender limb and body frail
breaking torment? Of what avail
here dost thou deem thy babbling song
and foolish laughter? Minstrels strong
are at my call. Yet I will give
a respite brief, a while to live,
a little while, though purchased dear,
to Luthien the fair and clear,
a pretty toy for idle hour.
In slothful gardens many a flower
like thee the amorous gods are used
honey-sweet to kiss, and cast then bruised
their fragrance loosing, under feet.
But here we seldom find such sweet
amid our labours long and hard,
from godlike idleness debarred.
And who would not taste the honey-sweet
lying to lips, or crush with feet
the soft cool tissue of pale flowers,
easing like gods the dragging hours?
A! Curse the gods! O hunger dire,
O blinding thirst's unending fire!
One moment shall ye cease, and slake
your sting with morsel I here take!'

Line 4014-4043, from HoME 3: The Lays of Beleriand​

He ends this speech by reaching for her; she evades and goes about singing everyone to sleep.

And then in the 'Myths Transformed' later writings (HoME X), Melkor proposes to Arien early on that she be his wife, and when she refuses him, he takes her anyway.


But Melkor, as hath been told, lusted after all light, desiring it jealously for his own. Moreover he soon perceived that in As (the Sun) there was a light that had been concealed from him, and which had a power of which he had not thought. Therefore, afire at once with desire and anger, he went to As and he spoke to Árië (Arien), saying: 'I have chosen thee, and thou shalt be my spouse, even as Varda is to Manwë, and together we shall wield all splendour and mastery. Then the kingship of Arda shall be mine in deed as in right, and thou shalt be the partner of my glory.'

[She says no.]

Melkor did not heed her warning, but cried in his wrath: 'The gift which is withheld I will take!' and he ravished Árië, desiring both to abase her and to take into himself her powers. Then the spirit of Árië went up like a flame of anguish and wrath, and departed for ever from Arda; and the Sun was bereft of the Light of Varda, and was stained by the assault of Melkor.
​

I bring this up not to suggest that what the Silmarillion needs more of is brutal rape scenes, but rather to make the point that Tolkien himself did employ the broad term of lust to the evil inclinations of his antagonists, and did not exclude the sexual component at times. That doesn't mean we need to come up with scenes showing lust as a particularly sexual appetite, but I don't want our reason for avoiding that to be 'Tolkien would never go there!' because....yes, yes he did.
 
Last edited:
I'm thinking one thing that makes us think of sexual attraction is of course that both Ungoliant and Nessa have taken human forms at this stage. Or could we take this from a different angle, and use Ungoliant being a creature of shadows as a way to make her not so human-like?
I'm getting this idea that she could initially be seen watching Nessa run with her deer and loving it, wanting her beauty. I like the idea that this is a parallel to Luthien dancing later. What if Ungoliant takes the form of a black deer, joining the flock? And she initially fascinates Nessa, and she starts to do things with shadows (like veil dancing or something that was mentioned in session 1-08). But then she wants to incorporate Nessa and her powers, and she says Don't you think the shadows fall beautifully? Can you accomplish that? Wouldn't you want to be able to? You could if you join me. And Nessa says Why? No. The idea is basically alien to her. I think it is important to have the threat being not only physical but that it is a matter of Nessa being put to a test.
Also, I think, since the risk here is that Nessa will fall (not to the ground but spiritually/morally), that Tulkas cannot actually save her. She has to save herself on her own. Now of course Tulkas can help her, but again, it's not a physical thing, it's Nessa being tested.
 
Oh, I very much like the idea of non-humanoid forms! I was wondering if, maybe, before Oromë gets Nahar, he could be a bit more of a centaur himself? And, well, obviously Ungoliant has the giant spider as her true form. But yes, for Nessa to be running with a pack of animals (is she 'swift as a deer' or associated with deer in particular?) and then creepy-shadowy-animal joins the pack at some point and turns into Ungoliant (female humanoid Ungoliant) for the dialogue part...that could be quite interesting visually.

I will note that demonstrating temptation on film is very difficult. Because the viewer, who feels none of the same temptation, is left shouting 'don't do it!' at the character who is wavering. Not that it can't be done, but just that it is seldom done *well*. Boromir's desire for the Ring is handled about as well as you can handle that. Sean Bean has a lot to do with Boromir being a sympathetic character, of course, but even so, that final confrontation with Frodo is ... what it is.

In contrast, the mirror scene with Galadriel has a lot of bizarre underlying sexual tension that was...just weird. The audience shouldn't be laughing when Frodo says 'What will I see?' But again, how do you portray temptation and desire without it being taken that way? How can you make a female say to a male 'my heart has greatly desired this' without that underlying subtext? Perhaps, with Ungoliant and Nessa both being female, we can steer the viewer away from that association, but...I wouldn't bet on it. But still, the fact that the LotR trilogy managed to convey desire/temptation for the Ring at all bodes well for this sort of thing.

But back to 'temptation scenes that fall flat.' The third Narnia film suffers from this - the characters are all 'tested' and they are fighting a green mist that tempts you. But the viewer doesn't want a pool of water that turns things into gold, so the Deathwater scene in particular is just painful to watch.

Another example is the forbidden feast in Pan's Labyrinth. The protagonist is a child who has been living on war rations, so she is naturally quite hungry. She is told not to touch any of the food at the feast, and is warned away from it by the fairies. But...well, anyone who has ever read a fairy tale knows what happens. The problem is that the viewer is not particularly hungry, knows the danger, and therefore is like 'Come ON!' when she fails that test.

So, we have to figure out a way for the viewer to be invested in the temptation scene, and having Nessa be very 'innocent' (unaware of any danger) is one way to do that. But for that to work, the inherent danger has to be subtle, but not *too* subtle.....
 
I'm a bit uncertain about the deer...I mean, Nessa is associated with deer, but I'm not sure there were any deer yet at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top