: Bravo! PJ needs to realize that he is dealing with a tapestry of interconnecting symbols. When he changes one character and that character's accompanying symbolism, he interferes with the intelligibility (and richness) of the tapestry as a whole. LotR is such an incredibly complex work in terms of allegory and metaphor that, if one tampers with it too much, one damages the work. Changing Arwen is like changing the elder son in The Prodigal Son parable to a forgiving son. The major elements of the story is not changed, but, since the leder son represents self-righteousness, the overall message in the story is altered. Arwen is not as integral a character to LotR as the elder son is to the Prodigal Son, but the point stands.
: -Olorin

We have nothing to base that critism on yet. And there is no reason to think that if the prodigal son had been the younger and not the older that it would have diminshed the emphasis of the story.

Until the movie is released, we just don't know if PJ has failed in his translation of the LOTR's central themes. And certainly, even Tolkien himself stated that he thought the work wasn't complete. His biggest regret was that it should have been longer. Thus, saying that the text can't be improved upon because it would upset the whole space-time continuim is a bit of reach (I said the space-time continuim, not Olorin).

Perhaps I am just getting tired of defending something that shouldn't need defending until AFTER it is released and can stand or fall on its own.

-RobRoy