It feels different near the Shire....

[littlemanpoet]

The Shire, the Old Forest, Old Man Willow and the House of Tom Bombadil have a certain Fae feel to them that is found hardly anywhere else in Middle Earth - at least in LotR.
The Fae nature of the Elves, whether Gildor in the Shire, or the Elves in Rivendell, or Lorien, does not have the same feel.
I don't know what to call that special thing, but I do recognize it in most of The Hobbit - it maintains all the way until Smaug is killed, after which it is lost, overshadowed by the political wrangling between the Dwarves and everybody else.
This feel is also shot through Smith of Wooton Major.
It seems to me that the Queen of Faerie in Smith is more like Goldberry than Galadriel, for example.

Does anybody else sense this? What is it? Why is it different from the Elves?

[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[ September 23, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[Tirned Tinnu]

You've hit on a good point, Littlemanpoet.
Yes! The first half of FOTR is very different in style from the rest of it.
I have discussed this with people before, and we have come to the conclusion that Tolkien started out writing something much more light-hearted. When he got to Bree, things changed. He very nearly made it an all-hobbit tale, with the invention of "Trotter", but laid the book aside for a good while, trying to understand what kind of a corner he's written hinself into. He was frustrated until he changed Trotter into Strider, and continued therafter on a different vein.

[mark12_30]

I wonder whether has anything to do with the fact that in between the writing of The Hobbit and the LOTR, Tolkien had spent some more, significant, time on the Silmarillion. Perhaps that added the different flavor? He began reaching back into his written history, giving the story it's weighty background, rather than into mystery. The second time he stepped into Elrond's territory he knew that much more about the history he was stepping into. Even Amon Sul had that sort of history to it. But Bombadil nor the old forest show up in those histories; => mystery then.

[littlemanpoet]

I'm familiar with the facts you bring to light, Tirned Tinnu. In CT's History it's suddenly at Weathertop that Tolkien discovered and unleashed the depth of power we now know to be what LotR is all about.

But there's something different, even yet. The flavor changed, as well as the tone. I don't know what better words to use. I have no problem with the lightness of tone having changed, but I guess I feel that Tolkien lost something, call it the whimsy, the Fae feel, of Goldberry and Old Man Willow and Tom Bombadil; I guess a summation is that it stopped being a Faerie-tale and started being an epic. I don't suppose he could have managed to keep both aspects. It's probably why I like Smith of Wooton Major even more than LotR. Heresy, I know, but that story seems to have been dipped straight from the vat of Faerie with very little additive.

Mark, I almost wish JRRT had left the Sil alone. True, we might not have gotten LotR from him then, but he might actually have WRITTEN more wonderful stuff throughout his life. Ah, well, might have beens, might have beens.

[Liriodendron]

Oh man! I better rush out and buy Smith of Wooten immediately ! The fairy tale quality of the shire part of LoTR and The Hobbit is my favorite. This is good news! (that Smith of Wooten continues on in the lighter fantasy style)! Thanks for the hot tip! smilies/smile.gif smilies/smile.gif

[ September 24, 2002: Message edited by: Liriodendron ]

[littlemanpoet]

Yes, it's lighter, but it is elegiac rather than hobbity. Does that make sense?

[Evenstar1]

...it stopped being a Faerie-tale and started being an epic.

But littlemanpoet, if the tone hadn't changed, he (JRRT) wouldn't have been able to effectively create the unbelievably-magnificent eucatastrophic ending. (Something, I believe to have read somewhere, that he was specifically shooting-for with LOTR.) Doesn't that, in and of itself, make it the Ultimate Faerie Tale?

[ September 24, 2002: Message edited by: Evenstar1 ]

[Liriodendron]

Hi Littlemanpoet! Thanks for the reply. Well, I looked up elegiac in my dictionary (to try to make some sense), but the definition wasn't clear enough for my denseness! smilies/smile.gif Elegiac was defined as mournful, or, "a distich having the first line in a dactylic hexameter and the second a pentameter". Sooooo, the first I get, if it's the second, HELP! smilies/eek.gif Thanks!

[littlemanpoet]

Evenstar1: Well, yes. I would not trade away the Lord of the Rings for anything. On the other hand, I wish there was more in the published world that had the same feel as the Shire and Smith. It seems that writers who follow in Tolkien's tradition always go for the big clash and epic proportions. I would love to see more along the lines of The Hobbit and Smith.

Liriodendron: Sorry. "elegiac" is an adjective. The noun is "elegy". An elegy is a song in honor of someone who has died or is dying. In the case of Smith, Tolkien could be said to have written an elegy that both celebrated Faerie AND mourned his own loss of it. It's really a wonderful little story. It's where my "from: the edges of Faerie" in my signature comes from.

[mark12_30]

lmp, what do you think of George MacDonald?

And yes, I could wish that Tolkien had been cloned just after The Hobbit, with the Clone free to pursue Faery. smilies/rolleyes.gif

Wasn't it Aslan who said: "What might have been, child? No. No one is ever told that."

lmp, you'll just have to write your own. smilies/eek.gif

[Bill Ferny]

This is just a suggestion. I always thought that Tolkien's change in mood from the Hobbit to LotR (where I actually noticed the change) had to do with two factors. 1) The Hobbit was first intended as a children's story. 2) Tolkien gradually works in the world of man. I think, that under it all, Tolkien had an absolute loathing for his own kind, especially in light of post-industrial England and the encroachment of technology and big business on his rather pastoral childhood home. **I really think the change in mood was intentional.**

I like the Shire, because that's the way life is supposed to be. I hate Isengard because that is how our world has turned out.

Aside: I really liked the movie's depiction of Isengard as a degeneration of pristine beauty to scared sadism. This was where I think the movie hit the Tolkien nail squarely on the head.

Edit: I changed my mind about the state in **s. I'm a firm believer in not trying to read into Tolkien what he, himself, didn't intend. He has said that he was not allegorizing. However, I still think it was an unconscious sort of thing.

[ September 25, 2002: Message edited by: Bill Ferny ]

[Nar]

Good question, good answers. I would agree with all of these posts.

I don't have much to add, except that I think the first version of the story of Luthien and Beren, 'The Tale of Tinuviel' from HoME 2-- the one where the Noldor are still Gnomes and Sauron is Tevildo the evil Prince of Cats-- has that loose charm that you're talking about-- and the courtship between the leads, while less grand and tragic, is more charming and heartfelt in some ways. At least, it takes a bit more time than 'love at first hearing'.

I connect that charm to a warm and loving aspect of JRRT's storytelling linked closely to his children when they were still children. So while I would agree with the comments of Billy Ferny and others on the children's story aspect, it seems to me that this tone is rooted more deeply than the intended 'children's book' genre (which genre seems to have worried JRRT in its tradition of 'preciousness'), rooted in JRRT's feelings about his family. The Christmas Letters about Father Christmas and his friend the North Polar Bear have that charm also, that intimate voice also, and they were written to his children and published much later. That's love and bliss and family-joy you're sensing, LMP. Even Smith has an ending concerned with a passage to the new generation.

The only other aspect I can think of is that the mythic background of the Hobbit and Shire to Bree sequences feels very English (possibly so English only a returned colonies-exile could feel it, possibly not) whereas the Noldor in their fading and tragic glamour feel more northern, no further south than middle Scotland at the warmest. The Hobbit and Bombadil's section are Tales Told from a Hedgerow. The Silmarillion's got icebergs and Northern Lights in it.

[Bill Ferny]

Yeah, I would agree with that Nar. Children's book was poor wording. I should have said "a story for his children".

What would be helpful is a timeline of Tolkien's life, and what was happening around him, both on a wider social scale, and on a more personnal level. Anyway, I found this brief biography a bit helpful in placing his work into a time frame of the author's life.
http://www.tolkiensociety.org/tolkien/index.html

[littlemanpoet]

Thank you all for some very thoughtful responses.

Mark: I love George MacDonald's fantasy. I have read Phantastes through twice, and especially love the tale within a tale of the young man who knows the art of fencing (with saber), who buys a mirror in which is trapped a young lady, and how he saves her.... (find the book for how it happens - I won't tell). I've read Lilith, a strange, strange book, and many short stories, including The Golden Key, which is quite amazing, but even more so is The Castle. And The Princesa and Curdie is great, too. JRRT and CSL both loved MacDonald. There are moments when GM really has the Faerie feel, but having written in the late 19th century, his books have a Romantic or Victorian flavor to them. Very fascinating writer.

As a matter of fact, I AM writing my own. It has more of the Faerie feel now than it ever has, I'm glad to say. I guess I finally reallly know what I want to read, so that's what I write. Now here's the irony: I'm fully aware that MY story, too, is going to lose that Faerie feel as it moves into a more epic tone, but I hope that my eucatastrophe succeeds in bringing the Fae back. Okay, spoiler there, but not too much, I hope.

Bill Ferny: I think you're close on Tolkien's loathing, but having just finished reading The Scouring of the Shire again, I think his especial loathing was, as you say, the industrial encroachment, but also (think of Ted Sandyman) the orcifying or ruffianizing of hobbits. That translates, in my mind, into a dehumanization that happens to us who are at the mercy of the machine age, which is caused by our lack of connection with the world of nature.

Speaking of which, Nar, I'm sure you do not mean "nothing but" family love, joy and bliss, as important as those are; because I also believe that there is a strong emphasis on connection to the natural world - think of Goldberry and Tom Bombadil - also think of Alf Prentice and the Queen of Faerie. The connection to nature is strong; this is an essential aspect of Faerie. Thus, trout, blue herons, oaks, deep springfed pools and cliffs and cliff swallows, and ferns and thickets and all the rest. Old Man Willow. The Old Forest. Hedgerows. Wild heaths.

Thanks, Nar, for the insight into the early writings of Tolkien in the Tale of Tinuviel, etc.

The Silmarillion is myth. The Lord of the Rings is an epic romance, so said J.R.R. Tolkien. The Hobbit and Smith of Wooton Major are fairy tales.

[hobbitlass]

I like the points brought up so far. I think the difference lies in what is happening in the world around the characters and how much they know.
In "The Hobbit" and "Smith of Wootten Major", the world as a whole is fine and everything is running smoothly except what the major characters are experiencing. Therefore the elves and other people they encounter(to me) are more light hearted and gay.
For the beginning of FOTR, the hobbits didn't know the full extent of this "ring business" and the adventures they come across till Bree have nothing (major) to do with the "ring business" and therefore still maintain that light heartedness. Afterwards, everyone for good or ill is spent on the outcome of the end of the world (as they know it) so they are pre-occupied and lose that light-heartedness.
I hope I said my point without confusing the heck out of anyone.

[mark12_30]

Hobbitlass, I thought you made your point very well. And actually, that's a good quick outline of a different difference. :-)

We've been focusing on epic versus personal journey-- and I tend to confuse "epic" with "quest". They are not the same, are they? One can go on a personal quest-- and perhaps that fits in best with "faery"-- but one can not go on a personal Epic very well. Epics have sweep and grandeur and engulf nations as they progress.

Thanks for making that point. I need to look at my own stories again and think that over some more. But I think you've solved my own question. My stories remain very personal, and hence they stick to the "quest" category. They do not involve the destinies of nations; they're not epics. Thanks again.

[Nar]

Quite right, LMP, I did not mean 'nothing more than' family bliss --although children may also reconnect one to nature. I would agree that an intimacy with nature is a basis for that 'Fae' feeling, and I think of that as an English aspect of the stories which I summed up with the word 'Hedgerow'.
Which on-topic post allows me to add: Are your stories posted anywhere, Helen/Mark...? Because I'd like to read them! Are any of them going up here? Is it time for me to look in Fan Fiction once again?

[mark12_30]

Nar,

Gee! Thanks for asking. They are slowly oozing onto the Downs, one chapter at a time, under pen name "Daffodil Furrow". But much more is written than is posted at the downs.

However, here (http://members.cox.net/hrwright61/fanfic.html) the complete copy of "The Fairy Wife" is posted (see note below) and the developing "Bolco In Massachusetts" and "Bolco in the Shire" are also there. (I'm back to wrestling in Massachusetts; I hope I don't lose! Right now I'm pinned. smilies/wink.gif )

Please forward reactions, criticism, suggestions...

The Fairy Wife was my take on the rumor mentioned in The Hobbit. Child of the 7th Age mentioned that some Fallohide must have married an elf. I ran with that at the time. Now I wonder what Tolkien really meant by "Fairy". I had always assumed that meant "elf". Would he have substituted the word "gnome"? As it stands it is more elvish than faery. (Sorry, lmp.)

Will I start hunting for Faery again? Maybe, like George MacDondald. But I really want to finish Bolco first.

[ September 26, 2002: Message edited by: mark12_30 ]

[littlemanpoet]

Thanks, Helen aka Mark, for a very useful distinction (I speak of that between 'personal' and 'epic'). I had not thought of it that way before. It definitely informs my appreciation of Tolkien, as well as my understanding of my own story.

Your work is your own, of course, Helen, but I have a feeling that the Fairy element in Fallohide/Tookish blood is probably more like Goldberry and less like Galadriel. IMHO. smilies/wink.gif

[ September 29, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[mark12_30]

lmp, You write that one.

:-)

--Helen

[Child of the 7th Age]

Here I am, on the very tale end of this discussion. All of the things you have said are very true and insightful, but I'd like to add one more possibility that's been overlooked.

The faery that exists in the Shire and Bombadil's house has a very special origin. For, unlike much else in Middle-earth, it is a faery that derives from the soul of England herself. And it is the England that Tolkien wanted to resurrect, that which preserved the ancient ways and threw off the influences that came from France and the remnents of the Roman Empire, and even the Celts. The same could be said of Wooten Major. This gives these pieces a flavor very different from the later parts of the story.

It's very interesting to me that this entire discussion could take place, and no one latch onto this point, particularly regarding the Shire. For it reinforces my personal opinion that one of the things we're in danger of losing in "recent" discussions of Tolkien is the sense of how he rooted it in the soil of England.

T.A. Shippey was probably the critic who was best at searching out these hidden roots, and explaining how Tolkien was consumed with the desire to recapture a past that had been lost.

I'd better stop myself here, as I hope to do a separate thread on this question-- the English roots of the Legendarium, since I feel it merits far more attention than it's recently been given, both on the Downs and elsewhere.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[littlemanpoet]

Hmmmm... even not Celtic, eh? My instincts lead me to agree with you. But it's not Nordic, either, it seems to my intuition (if I may make so bold). It seems to be particularly Saxon, and not even Anglo, if my historic understanding serves me correctly, and I guess a Saxon that has pulled up its roots from Germany and planted itself deep in England. Is that what you're trying to get at?

[Bêthberry]

I don't want to deny the main tenor of your point, Child, that The Shire is informed by a vision of England past. However, it seems to me that Goldberry is very much informed by Tolkien's vision of Demeter and Persephone, without the violence of abduction and assault. Goldberry represents Tolkien's rewriting of the classic myth just as the Akallabeth is his desire to incorporate Atlanta and the Flood.

lmp and others,

What Tom and Goldberry and the Old Forest represent to me is a primordial sense of the world where the desire to use knowledge of the world and of others to control and manipulate them are absent. This is not a sentimental or softened vision--harm and decay still occur--but it is, to me, substantially different from The Shire.

Bethberry

[ October 01, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[Nar]

I'll be very interested to hear Child clarify this idea here or in a new topic, LMP, but meanwhile I'll share my own thoughts. I don't really know what you mean by 'Saxon', separate from 'Anglo' --I'd be interested to hear the sources from which you draw that idea. 'Uprooted from Germany and planted here' --interesting idea.

I tend to see something else in the idea of 'Englishness' --and I really don't know how much I'm projecting as a foreigner to such things! Probably a great deal! The model I would cite is the relations of the various conquerors of China, like the Mongols and so forth, to the Chinese-- wave of conquerors imposes new set of bosses, exhalts new tribe of people, but the culture and spirit and soul of the original residents seeps up around each new set of invaders, permeating the invaders and changing them in a way that is impossible to detect or separate out because it is seamlessly and smoothly spread throughout the newcomers. They have drunk it in and it is in them now. All we know of English history back to the dimmest of dim times is successive conquering tribes, including Normans, Danes, Angles and Saxons, Celts, so forth. Looking to any one tribe because they're very early and we know very little feels dangerous to me.

Of course, everything about this excercise is dangerous and highly subjective. Anyone engaging the question can't help but fall into projection-- there's so little to go on, it's not unlike using a spark of light in a crystal or prayer beads or breathing as a focus for contemplation-- whatever we do, we're in the end going to find out most about our innmost hopes, fears and intuitions about the world.

That said, my own take is that the rising, seeping quality of the land and living spirit that Tolkien was addressing or tapping into with Bombadil and Goldberry is not tribal in any way we could detect, is not based in any culture of conquest or sacrifice to something-or-other, is based on quite another way of forming an identity. If you name a people/tribe/ancestry, you've lost the sense I'm getting at, and are talking about a different thing. If the relation to nature is one of exhortation through ritual, again, this is a different thing. I'm speaking purely though a personal intuition that is vibrated by reading the Tom Bombadil and Goldberry sections, and also by certain places in the woods behind my house, and by certain aspects of people I've met. I'm not talking about superstition, but about funtioning systems on the nature-human cusp. This is why I used the word hedgerow-- but what do I know about that? Borderlands might be a better word.

Letting go of a sentimental idea of Englishness all too easy for an American like me to fall into, I could discuss the borders I maintain between the clearing around my house and the buses, heaped logs, compost and critters beyond, or the sense of awe I feel deeper into the forest, when I sense a pattern of activity in a clearing or across of brook without being able to articulate to myself what it is.

I can feel the dangerousness in some places, and part of that comes from seeing the fox scat with fur in it and knowing this is a good site for a den and there's probably one near, but part of it is distributed through half-guessed ideas about the lay of the land and the pattern of growth --whether a living thing here in this clearing could see something coming or would that something be hidden --wild brambles growing tight over a clear-cutting scar --what the sheared stumps mean --how those trees fell and what that suggests --it all adds up to more than the sum of its parts. When my thoughts as someone walking in the woods drift over into possibilities: chipmunk? fox that might stalk her? surveyor that passed through and left those oh so dangerous plastic ties on the treetrunks? developer? the trees that fell, and the bushes that grow so tightly and eagerly over them? the trees that stand? the sound of water nearby? the curve of the hill settling downward? I reach the point where it seems as if it's not entirely me thinking anymore, and that's the best way I can explain it.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bethberry --

I totally agree that the Demeter/Persephone legend certainly has strong echoes in Goldberry and her charming husband. And that Tolkien took that ancient myth and translated it in his own terms. But I would also say that one of the terms he took into consideration in that translation was the soul of the English countryside.

Whatever else Tom may or may not have become, his origins were clearly as "the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside" as stated in a letter of 16 December 1937.

Now, let me run off and post that strange thread which I fear may not resonate with anyone else, but I truly feel compelled to get it off the top of my head.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[ September 30, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[littlemanpoet]

Bethberry: Quite right on the primordial.

Nar: The Angles inhabited East Anglia, whereas the Saxons ingabied Sussex, Wessex, and such areas more in the surround of Oxford and Berkshire. So the Angles as such have little, as a separate culture group, to do with the Westmidland countryside Tolkien evoked. Having said that, I quite agree that it goes deeper than Saxon or Celt, back to primordial humanity/nature. You are saying things that ring true for me, I just didn't know how to get there.

So the "soul of the English countryside" is, we're saying, Child English only in name since they have resided there for the last 1500 years.

[Bêthberry]

My apologies, lmp, if this post goes too far astray of your original idea.

Child, I would like to look at the larger passage of that letter from 16 December 1937 (Letter 19, to Stanley Unwin).

But I am sure you will sympathize when I say that the construction of elaborate and consistent mythology (and two languages) rather occupies the mind, and the Silmarils are in my heart. So that goodness knows what will happen. Mr Baggins began as a comic tale among conventional and inconsistent Grimm's fairy-tale dwarves, and got drawn into the edge of it--so that even Sauron the terrible peeped over the edge. And what more can hobbits do? They can be comic, but their comedy is suburban unless it is set against things more elemental. But the real fun about orcs and dragons (to my mind) was before their time. Perhaps a new (if similar) line? Do you think Tom Bombadil, the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside, could be made into the hero of a story? Or is he, as I suspect, fully enshrined in the enclosed verses? Still I could enlarge the portrait.

Bolding is mine. I think the juxtaposition of these two statements is interesting for two reasons. First, they imply a difference between Bombadil and the hobbits. And second, they suggest something about how Tolkien constructed his narrative. Tom's presence changes the meaning of the hobbits. Thus, his function is not solely to represent the vanishing English countryside. This, to me, is fascinating, for it suggests how aesthetics (narrative structure) creates meaning. And vice versa.

However, I might be the only Downer who is interested in how themes are embodied and not just in the themes themselves.

Respectfully,
Bethberry

[littlemanpoet]

NO APOLOGY REQUIRED! Wow, Bethberry, that's an eye opener. I read the Letters more than a decade ago and never purchased my own copy, so thanks for the post.

Yes, I am very deeply interested in narrative structure, for reasons of avocation (as writer) as well as for the aesthetics as a reader.

Whereas Hobbits are close to the land, they are not OF the land. They inhabit it, but as borrowers, though it would never occur to them that the Shire is not there's (except for Frodo and a few others). Tom B. is, of course, one of the things more elemental (but so is the Ring). And THERE is yet ANOTHER fascinating juxtaposition. What do you suppose Tolkien meant by showing that Tom Bombadil, the spirit of the vanishing Oxford and Berkshire countryside, was immune to the effects of the Ring? I realize that I have hereby sent this thread further off topic than you feared to do, Bethberry. At least potentially.

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bethberry --

However, I might be the only Downer who is interested in how themes are embodied and not just in the themes themselves.

Surely not the only one? LOL. Yes, this is a fascinating subject. And I know you speak with more authority in this vein than I.

My own approach is somewhat different. I sometimes think this is because I view things as an historian. I am extremely interested in the process by which Tolkien created these works: how he went from one layer of meaning to the next. This is why I found Littlemanpoet's earlier thread on the "religious" revisions so intriguing.

Take a look back at the England thread. I've done a lengty post which deals with my belief that at the 'core' of both the Silm and LotR stands Tolkien's desire to take the few scraps he had of Old English and transform them into the lore and poetry which were so sadly missing. How frustrating it must have been for him!! To see a character or poem mentioned in passing by Chaucer and yet have no access to the original. As I explained there, the English 'origins' were not just limited to the Shire. In fact, the purest statement of this "core of the onion", comes in the earliest writings of the Legendarium like BoLT 1 & 2.

If you want the detailed "proof" of this Anglo-Saxon core, take a look at the other thread as it's too long to duplicate here. Believe me! I went a little crazy.

It was only later that Tolkien continued on with multiple layers of meaning; he went beyond his original core to reach out towards other mythic traditions as well as to dig down inwardly to his own religious faith, and also to deal with questions such as narrative structure which you have identified. This layer-upon-layer approach to both meaning and structure is so typical of JRRT. You can almost see the points chronologically when one concern leads to another, although there is still considerable overlap. It was, for example, the religious/philosophical layer which he most explicitly addressed in the last 15 years of his life with the essays on Andreth, Adanel, and osanwe-kenta.

Given this view of a multi-layered onion (for lack of a better term!), your own thoughts on aesthetics do not, I think, contradict what I have said. They form yet another layer of meaning, although one which is imposed by a different means. I believe, howver, that my humble little core of Anglo-Saxon history and lore stands buried at the center. This was the original base and all else builds on it.

There's nothing like stretching your posts and ideas between two different threads to confuse people totally! But go take a look at the thread on "losing the basics" and let me know what you think.

Littlemanpoet-- This is regarding the statement below and the "soul of England".

You are saying things that ring true for me, I just didn't know how to get there.


Please have a look at the other thread and see if it helps at all. I have dealt with the issue as much in terms of process as meaning.

The interesting thing to me is that the Shire, whom so many point to as the focal point of Tolkien's English identity, was actually a latecomer. The true soul of the epic lies not in Victorian and Edwardian England, but in the Old English tradition which forms the "core of the onion" for the Legendarium.

sharon, the 7th age hobbit

[ October 01, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[Bêthberry]

LOL, isn't this a postmodern web of intertextual meanings, running back and forth between threads!

Child, I fully intend to reply to you on your thread. Just give me time. I have the feeling that this will lead us into a discussion of the nature of texts, particularly Tolkien's texts. I also want to address your metaphor of 'onion.'

lmp, it is good to see someone else interested in narrative structures! Let me bring back your question:

What do you suppose Tolkien meant by showing that Tom Bombadil, the spirit of the vanishing Oxford and Berkshire countryside, was immune to the effects of the Ring

I'm not sure we can directly make this link between the English past and immunity to the Ring. Or maybe I would be more comfortable thinking that Tolkien would not make it, LOL.

That statement about Tom being the spirit of the countryside was made in a letter; it is therefore a commentary upon LOTR and tied in with the letter Tolkien is responding to. It is Tolkien's way of helping Stanley Unwin understand Tom; it is supplemental to the novel, since nowhere in LOTR is that association openly claimed.

It is a bit like the 19C novel, Jane Eyre. The overwhelming response of many readers is to say that the setting of the novel is Brontë's Yorkshire. Yet nowhere in the novel is that expressly stated. This is very different from Brontë's other novel, Shirley which is very definitely placed not just in Yorkshire, but in the West Riding, and during the Luddite uprising. Understanding the two novels involves recognizing this difference in setting. One is generalizable; the other is not, or at least not to the same kind and degree.

Thus, while we can try to see Tom as part of that vanishing countryside, to make any further claims about it would be dubious, I think. Certainly, I don't believe that Tolkien himself would have thought that the past held any moral superiority over the present. Arda was marred in the First Age, in the Second Age, in the Third, and will be until the Final Battle. Tom's immunity is a personal, moral strength. I don't think Tolkien, who so very much respected the moral choice of each individual, would make that kind of generalization to an entire culture or age.

I'm sure that others would want to say that Tolkien harkens back to an idyllic past which did not pursue manipulation, power politics, and destruction. I would't agree that Tolkien romanticizes the past quite that much. What would you say?

Bethberry

[Nar]

Bethberry, I would say that JRRT saw past ages as slightly different than modern ages, in that evil aspects were clearer to see-- more embodied and less distributed, if you know what I mean? And that in past ages, nearly-unmarred islands existed, one type in Elf-havens and the other in Bombadil and Treebeard (call them spirit/light and earth/water) whereas now, there are no more less-marred islands. Corruption is smoothly distributed throughout all-- now we suffer psychological darkness rather than epic darkness. I don't mean that there was no inner conflict then, but inner conflict connected to a dark lord then, now it's all distributed through us.

Interested in narrative structure? Of course! The principle one I see is the broad, green, human-scale valley of the hobbit's story, with a broad, friendly river in it, running on and on up into the mountains --epic-- purple mountains majesty-- Aragorn/Elves and the little green valley getts higher and thinner, the river becomes thin, fierce rapids it becomes more difficult for the small, humane heroes to breathe, but the perspective on Kings, Heroes, Enemies, purple mountains majesty is more amazing-- then, just at the pinnacle, the little green valley begins to wind downward, river widening and gentling and deepening, widening and widening until all reach the sea, which is another thing entirely --where the river that was alongside the whole time makes its nature and true depth known.

(geographic details may be a bit fuzzy there at the pinnacle-- don't work the analogy too hard!)

One sign I see that the story's in the peaks is that remote, poetic langage, and that the story's seen --as Theoden's charge is seen-- as if a vision burned through the pages of the book one is reading-- whereas a sign of the green valley/hobbit theme is that the narration's standing on the ground and there's a strong sense that one is in the landscape. I don't know where I'm standing on the fields of Pelannor-- mainly I'm seeing and hearing a battlesong and I seem to be floating, seeing and hearing from elsewhere. I know exactly where I'm standing reading Frodo and Sam in Mordor, how it physically feels-- or how it feels in the marsh between midges and neekerbreekers. The braiding of two different narrations and perspectives and genres is one of the most exciting parts of the book for me.

Child, I like your onion analogy very much. I'm trying to edit a post for your other thread, but I had to put it up last night as my poor head was aching! It's something to do with standing on the grass in the fields of Rohan-- the one point where I'm physically present in the narration and also seeing a remote vision. It seems those roots you mention are the parts of the story where it seems like a vision has burned through some unknown manuscript I'm holding in my hands. Anyway, my reaction to you saying 'is it specifically English?' is 'Yes!'

[littlemanpoet]

Child, Nar, & Bethberry, you all amaze me with your erudition and vision. I, too, doubt that Tolkien meant that the spirit of the vanishing Oxford countryside was somehow invulnerable to the effects of the Ring. It's just not in keeping with everything else Tolkien wrote. I guess I just saw those notions of TB as that spirit and his playing with the Ring as a fascinating juxtaposition.

Nar, I can appreciate your feeling of standing on the plain of Rohan while looking at things as from the eyes of an Eagle, if I may so conjecture. I just finished reading the section where Eomer meets Aragorn for the first time.

You think you're drowning in deep waters, Bethberry. blub blub blub

[Child of the 7th Age]

Child, I like your onion analogy very much. I'm trying to edit a post for your other thread, but I had to put it up last night as my poor head was aching! It's something to do with standing on the grass in the fields of Rohan-- the one point where I'm physically present in the narration and also seeing a remote vision. It seems those roots you mention are the parts of the story where it seems like a vision has burned through some unknown manuscript I'm holding in my hands. Anyway, my reaction to you saying 'is it specifically English?' is 'Yes!'

Nar -- What an amazing way to put this! And it's fun to have someone agree with me.

You think you're drowning in deep waters, Bethberry. blub blub blub

Agh, me too. Why does this always happen to my threads? I don't mean to do it intentionally, but they always have lots of headaches hidden inside! But it is kind of fun.

Sharon

[Bêthberry]

Drowning? Us? Where's that Lonely Star when we need her? smilies/wink.gif

lmp, don't mind me. As a citizen of a former colony of England, I take umbrage at the idea that the blessed isle (the Shire) shall redeem us all. smilies/wink.gif

Nar, *curtsies a pleasant greeting on a first meeting*

I would say that JRRT saw past ages as slightly different than modern ages, in that evil aspects were clearer to see-- more embodied and less distributed, if you know what I mean? And that in past ages, nearly-unmarred islands existed, one type in Elf-havens and the other in Bombadil and Treebeard (call them spirit/light and earth/water) whereas now, there are no more less-marred islands. Corruption is smoothly distributed throughout all-- now we suffer psychological darkness rather than epic darkness.

I had never really thought of "the long defeat" in quite this way, of the gradual elimination of unmarred sites as corruption spreads. This is a valuable point. And even the sites of renewal/ retreat are lost, with the abandonment of Rivendell and Lothlorien. *nods respectfully* What I am not so sure about, though, is the way you extrapolate the extension of evil to modern psychology. Are you generalizing about the modern condition or are you thinking of something specific in Tolkien which foretells this?

Bethberry

[ October 03, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[Nar]

Greeting, Bethberry! *belated and rather unpracticed curtsy* You are most kind. Although I think I've never crossed posts with you before (barring our simultaneous posts above), I have often nodded in agreement while reading your posts.

I was not meaning to call modern psychology evil, but rather trying to distinguish between an internal evil of personal tempations (which I called psychological evil) and an external evil centered in a larger-than life mythological figure (which I called epic evil). I think there's something about this in the Letters. ... the Third Age began, a Twilight Age, a Medium Aevum, the first of the broken and changed world; the last of the lingering dominion of visible fully incarnate Elves, and the last also in which Evil assumes a single dominant incarnate shape.

... the Shadow will arise again ... but never again ... will an evil daemon be incarnate as a physical enemy; he will direct Men and all the complications of half-evils, and defective goods, and the twilights of doubt as to sides ... those will be and are our more difficult fate.

But if you imagine people in such a mythical state, in which Evil is largely incarnate, and in which physical resistance to it is a major act of loyalty to God ... (Letters 131 & 156)

Child, your threads are always a joy to read and respond to. smilies/cool.gif *Happily resumes drowning*

LMP-- Yes! What is it about the fields of Rohan? It's so epic and grand and tapped from Tolkien's deep knowledge of the old traditions, but when reading it, I'm so much there!

[littlemanpoet]

Nar: And yes! The Ride of the Rohirrim onto the Pelennor Fields is - grasping for words here without stealing Tolkien's - strong and bold, full of bright color and mythic power; I know exactly what you mean (this time, after a second reading on "that other thread" smilies/biggrin.gif ) how it's like seeing a vision rather than being in the middle of it.

I tell ya, these threads are beginning to make me give thought to starting an RPG that actually captures that vanishing spirit of the English (call it primordial if you like) countryside. If that's even possible for us dullwitted-and-unlettered-in-Oxfordshireness-Americans) Come to think of it, Bethberry invited us to just such a treat, I'm thinking, and I, fool of a Tookish fellow that I am, failed to take her up on it. My loss.

[mark12_30]

Part of me is trying to grasp the Englishness of the Shire and Tom Bombadil. Since that's what the proffessor said, then there it is.

But having never been to England, nor Scotland (more Faery, it seems to me, but nevermind)-- I've got to say this. I grew up in a sleepy bedroom-suburban town in New England, where Woods cover everything, and farms are rare.

Outdoors wrenched at me, even just a fresh breeze, or the smell of melting snow in March. There was Something out there waiting to be found; there were tunes waiting to be played and songs waiting to be sung, and dances waiting to be danced, if only I knew what they were. And I used to stand outside in the spring air desperately wishing I could find them.

Once I had read the Hobbit, every bare and grassy knoll drew a gasp of wonder from me, and a stare of longing that persisted until the hill faded from view-- **because it reminded me of the Shire, of Middle-Earth.**

And so, pictures of England and Scotland look like the Shire to me, and as much as they do, I love them. No offense intended to anybody; but I do not love England for its own sake. I love it when (and if) it reminds me of hobbits, or Eriador, or Weathertop, or The Tower Hills.

So although I understand what you are driving at scholastically when you speak of England and Bombadil and the Shire, on a heart level, all this baffles me.

Somebody said that Tolkien didn't invent Middle-Earth, he discovered it and gave us a way to get there. I've always agreed with that. Even now that I'm reading HoME, I percieve it in levels of discovery.

I wonder what Tolkien would think of this perspective. Am I the only one who feels this way?

--Helen

[Bêthberry]

'Morning All,

lmp, yes, thanks for recognizing and acknowledging the Picnic this way. *curtsies* That was indeed the hope, but fear not, there could well be future excursions planned.... Adventures are never quite finished, are they? *grins*

Nar, many thanks for elucidating your point. Perhaps on another thread we can discuss the nature of evil (trying to keep on topic here!).

Helen, it strikes me that this response of knowing the essence of Middle Earth without knowing the specific, literal references, is a particularly strong effect of Tolkien's style of storytelling.

I think it relates to his concept of "applicability". More and more I wonder if 'parable' isn't a good way to think of this applicability. Here is what I mean by parable; the explanation comes from Robert Murray's essay, "J.R.R. Tolkien and the Art of the Parable."
...a medium which could first attract and then fascinate and tease the mind, even for a long time, till the hearers might form their own response, ....a skilful use of the arts of speech so as not to impose or compel, but to invite a response in which the hearer is personally active.... the power of stories to act as parables depends not on whether they are fictitious or factually true, but on whether they possess that potential universality which makes others find them applicable, through an imaginative perception of analogy, to other situations.

This way of thinking about his storytelling art avoids the "domination of the author" (Foreward to LOTR) which Tolkien disliked so much in allegory. It grounds the story in delight, a prime purpose of art, while granting that "freedom of the reader" (again, Foreward, LOTR) which he so much respected.

You see, if you keep me at this long enough, I will expound a complete thesis on Bombadil as the luminescence of Tolkien's art. smilies/wink.gif

Bethberry

[Child of the 7th Age]

Bethberry --

Where do you find this essay? Thanks. sharon

[Bêthberry]

Pearce, Joseph, ed. Tolkien: A Celebration, Collected writing on a literary legacy. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1999.

ISBN 0-89870-866-4

EDIT: I should say that Murray fits my own theory of Tolkien's art very well, for more and more I see Tolkien inhabiting a place of art which I had previously come to know through another writer. You might also want to look at Roland Barthes' contrast of 'readerly' with 'writerly' texts, although that is not the form my argument takes. See Barthes, S/Z (1970).

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[Liriodendron]

I feel like you, Mark. (Helen!) Though I appreciate the charming "Englishness" of the Shire and all, I don't need "England" to find the Shire. Never did! That's the magic spell The Hobbit and LoTRs cast upon me at first readings! Any temperate zone forest with a good mix of deciduous trees and evergreens, mossy stumps and stones, gnarley old tree roots, mysterious piles of brush with shadowed holes and depressions in the middleground, will do it for me. I think more of the "feel of the moment", and the ability to take joy in "magic" for magic's sake, as the appeal of the Shire, Old Forest, Bombadil and all. That's the fairy thing (in my mind). Obviously, I've never been to England! smilies/smile.gif

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Liriodendron ]

[Child of the 7th Age]

And so, pictures of England and Scotland look like the Shire to me, and as much as they do, I love them. No offense intended to anybody; but I do not love England for its own sake. I love it when (and if) it reminds me of hobbits, or Eriador, or Weathertop, or The Tower Hills.

Helen--

I think Tolkien himself would have agreed with you.

The Shire which Tolkien depicts is an admittedly idealized portrait. On at least one level, it's the author's view of what England ideally could have, or rather, should have been, not what it actually was.

In reality, Tolkien found many (perhaps most?) aspects of modern England unappealing and even distasteful. These didn't attract him in the slightest. He probably felt that this blight, scenic or otherwise, arose from values that had been ignored or even willfully abused. He found these things depressing, since they represented, at best, an England which had failed to live up to its potential and, at worst, an England which had been corrupted by evil. But he loved his country well enough to keep hunting in the nooks and crannies for those sparks of the "real" England.

Although the Shire represented the best parts of England, I would add that JRRT did not the deny the reality of evil even here. The Shire is idealized only in a relative sense. It is still part of Arda Marred. Small evils like gossip, possessiveness, sticking one's head in the sand, blindness to the desirability of spiritual or mental awakening--all these are evident in Hobbits, and these evils come from within, not from outside, the Shire.

But even with these shortcomings, the Shire still seems to many people as if it would be a pleasant place to live. That's one of the reasons that the ending at Grey Havens is so poignant. If the Shire had been a nasty place, we would have been cheering for Frodo to get on the boat and leave. But we aren't cheering. Our hearts are split; we can see that Frodo is going towards good, but he's also leaving good behind. This makes us sad, yet it's also realistic.

There's something that Lewis wrote which I think relates to this whole question of England and how the Shire represents the heart of England. Many years ago, I remember reading something in his sci fi trilogy about "Logres". For Lewis, every country had a true soul and a true name. Lewis called the true soul of England "Logres". And Tolkien's Shire embodies a little bit of Logres, I think.

There's an interesting difference between Tolkien and Lewis on this quest for the true soul of England. Lewis was always taking part in vigorous cross-country walks, way off the beaten track, searching for scenic hideouts. He'd take a backpack and go off with his friends on long hikes, sometimes staying overnight and stopping at country pubs.

JRRT didn't do much of this. But then, with four children, it's no wonder. His style was to find little hidden plces near his own home. Clyde Klby mentions that, in 1965, he was going with JRRT in a motor car on the main road between Oxford and London. I was on that same road several times in 1967-68, and I can tell you that, even then, it was very busy. Scenically, it really wasn't anything "special" by most people's standards (not like driving through the highlands of Scotland or the dales of Yorkshire!) Yet, on that short, bland trip, Tolkien "pointed out little hills to the north of us that, he said, were just right for Hobbit territory."

I, like many, am doomed to live in an urban area. With husband and children, my life experience is closer to that of Tolkien than Lewis. So I really do appreciate Tolkien's ability to find the hidden pieces of the real England (and by implication parts of Middle-earth) by driving down a main road and just fixing his gaze a little way off on the horizon. That is a rare gift of true seeing!

sharon

[ October 04, 2002: Message edited by: Child of the 7th Age ]

[littlemanpoet]

Thank you, Helen aka Mark 14-20 for helping me figure out what it was that was bugging me about the direction we've been going with the Englishness thing. For a more filled out explanation, see my most recent post in "Losing sight of the basics".

The Shire which Tolkien depicts is an admittedly idealized portrait. On at least one level, it's the author's view of what England ideally could have, or rather, should have been, not what it actually was.

Thank you, Sharon, for providing further evidence for my latest hypothesis. What we all love is only Englishness because we are English speakers. It is the way, par excellence, for us to receive that Something we all crave from the deepest tap root of mythic story.

You describe, Sharon, the evil (pettiness) woven through the Shire. My concern is primarily with those places near the Shire: the Old Forest and the House of Tom Bombadil. These are Faerie as can only be communicated to English speakers.

For Lewis, every country had a true soul and a true name. Lewis called the true soul of England "Logres". And Tolkien's Shire embodies a little bit of Logres, I think. I called it Perelandra as a "perhaps", in the other thread, but you are right: Logres is nearer the mark. The Shire, however, is not. The Shire is enjoyable, but let us be reminded of that great quote (Bethberry?) that said the Hobbits are merely suburban unless deepened by that touch of Faerie that is Bombadil and Goldberry - and the Elves, I grant you, but they just don't quite do it for this English speaker, not like Tom and Goldberry and Old Man Willow.

I recognize Tolkien's comment regarding hills off in the distance being like Hobbiton or the Shire. There are all kinds of places near where I live that have made it into my story. In Tolkien's case, just as in mine, these are not Faerie; they are one remove from it.

If I seem especially hard-hitting on this point, it is because I am excited with having rediscovered the truth behind it all that I had once known and forgotten. Thanks, Helen!

[littlemanpoet]

I think one aspect of what makes Tom and Goldberry - and Old Man Willow so beautiful - special - fascinating to me, is that they seem to hark back to Arda unmarred, to borrow a phrase.

Steering clear of allegory, Tom and Goldberry remind me of C.S. Lewis's Perelandra AFTER the story is over; only Tom and Goldberry are better because Tolkien doesn't have the screwed up notion still stuck in Lewis at this time that men are creationally superior to women.

I think this is why I see the House of Tom and Goldberry, and their haunts of the Old Forest and the Downs and the Withywindle as a kind of Eden (as applicatory, still steering clear of allegory). Tom and Goldberry, Tolkien has reflected, are the spirit of the vanishing Oxfordshire countryside. I think it is at least as true that T & G are epitome's of what an unfallen humanity would look like, in harmony with nature and each other, having a house full of music, safe and cozy, and familiar and comfortable and packed full of archetype. It has been discussed elsewhere on this board that Frodo's attraction to Goldberry is hobbit man to lovely woman. I'd like to suggest that whereas this element may be there, it is at least, and maybe more so, that Frodo instinctively recognizes Goldberry's "mother of all"-ness. Yes, Tolkien calls her "river-daughter" over and over again, which might be construed as evidence against my assertion, but that title could speak simply to where Tom found her, which is itself tantamount to legend the way JRRT writes it. So I guess I'm saying that Frodo's attraction to Goldberry is akin to her being an Eve of Middle Earth, and Tom a kind of Adam.

I am NOT trying to draw one to one relationshps and fall into the trap of allegorizing, but I do see the applicability.

I hope I'm not just talking to myself here.

[ October 06, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[Nar]

'Talking to yourself'? 'Course not! I think I don't see 'Faerie' in LotR --or here in our minds-- quite the same way you do, but I can't currently articulate any more about what I do see, except that it's both dangerous and endangered.

I think Milton's Paradise Lost is the source for that feeling of Ransom's for the Perelandra Eve, and for her character-- If you haven't read book 9 you should (books 1-2 are also good, but in more of a grand, dark 'halls of Morgoth' way). Perelandra seems to be Paradise Lost with the poet-narrator-reader figure included in the action-- something of a 'fan-fic' for Paradise Lost (please understand I mean that in a good way) -- a working out of the 'oh! If only I'd been there!' reaction, which can be very powerful.

My favorite part of Perelandra was Ransom's first awakening on that floating island (I found the idea of it fascinating) --the way the land moved, his piebald state-- I loved that-- and his thoughts on the berries --'the desire to repeat a pleasurable experience is the root of all evil'. His awe and love for 'Eva' was wonderfully done, like courtly love without the arch mannerisms and self-interest-- courtly love as it should be (I could never stand the idea as it is). She's a great character. She, Lucy and Psyche's 'ugly' sister (I've forgotten her name-- O-something-- been too long since I read 'Til We have Faces') are the only female characters Lewis created and never, in any corner of his imagination, betrayed. All the others some buried part of him hates despite himself and his best intentions.

As to Tom and Goldberry being representations of unfallen 'man and woman' --possibly, but they are also 'other' -- they are also male-land and female-land, as ents are male-forest and entwives are female-forest.

In an unfallen state, are man and male-land the same; are woman and female-land the same? Do you become the world, is that what 'having dominion over all things' really means outside of the influence of sin?

So do you define 'unfallen' as:
man's being one with nature
-- in the image of:
God's being one with all creation, both cherishing all things, and containing all things?

then yes. I think. Maybe. But I'm now wandering far afield from the way I naturally thing about such things!

[Child of the 7th Age]

Nar --

The woman's name is Orual. It is no coincidence that this book was dedicated to Joy Davidman. She obviously had a profound affect on how he perceived women. Lewis does something with Orual that Tolkien does not even attempt. He creates a central character who is ugly on the outside and who must struggle to right herself on the inside as well.

Littlemanpoet-- You certainly were not speaking into a void. I also read and enjoyed your post, although I had nothing to add at that particular moment.

sharon

[Bêthberry]

I'm not sure how relevant this is to your observation about Tom and Goldberry, lmp, but here is something from a character in a nineteenth century novel. Two young women are outside church, deciding to watch the sunset rather than attend evening service. They begin to discuss the first woman and Milton's Paradise Lost.

'Milton tried to see the first woman; but, Cary, he saw her not.'
'You are bold to say so, Shirley.'
'Not more bold than faithful. It was his cook that he saw; or it was Mrs Gill [the housekeeper], as I have seen her, making custards, in the heat of the summer, in the cool dairy, with rose-trees and nasturtiums about the latticed window ...

I always think of this conversation whenever I read of Goldberry. (And to be fair, I have truncated it.)

Bethberry

[Reginald Hill]

I think that the part of the book that takes place in the Shire might have felt different because Tolkien was writing it after World War II (I think that that is what he said in the foreword of the edition that I have). He might have written it as a light-hearted tale because of the sad environment around him in the aftermath of the war. The image of the Shire in all its perfection sure is a good anti-depressant (spelling?)

[littlemanpoet]

Nar: So do you define
'unfallen' as:
man's being one with nature
-- in the image of:
God's being one with all creation, both cherishing all things, and containing all things?

Yes. Thank you. That was a very succinct, and accurate, summary.

In an unfallen state, are man and male-land the same; are woman and female-land the same? Do you become the world, is that what 'having dominion over all things' really means outside of the influence of sin?
Again, yes. I think Tolkien's description of Tom's (and perhaps Goldberry's) dominion over all things in his domain is as close to the Edenic archetype, and the purpose of 'having dominion', as I've ever seen depicted. He can even shoo the Barrow-wight! (shh! don't let you-know-who know that I said that! smilies/eek.gif )

[littlemanpoet]

Bethberry: The discussion you relate in that 19th century book refers to an archetype, of the Homemaker or Serving Woman, or some such name (Nar probably can identify the precise archetype). Goldberry does indeed draw from this archetype, but it is not the only one from which she draws. For me, she draws from the Homemaker, the Faerie-maiden (Riverdaughter), AND the Honored Matron/Mother-of-all. Tolkien has indeed packed a lot into her.

Reginald Hall: Actually, I think Tolkien wrote the Shire section quite early, such as in the late 30's or early 40's. It was only later, when he was writing the scene of Weathertop, that the story took on the powerful and deep mythic and epic tone. For more on this you might want to check out Christopher Tolkien's publications, entitled something like "History of the War of the Ring," or something.

[davem]

I've just finished a remarkable book - The Uncharted Realms of Tolkien, by Alex Lewis & Elizabeth Currie, published by Medea in the UK(available via Amazon UK) which deals with a lot of this. There's a long essay on Bombadil.
You have to keep in mind, I think, that the Bombadil/Old Forest episode goes right back to the original drafts of LotR, when it was only a sequel to the Hobbit. The Whole Middle Earth aspect - ie the links bsck to the Silmarillion were to be no stronger than they were in the Hobbit. That seems to be why the Fellowship has a more 'fairytale feel to it. Even the name Bombadil has no 'Elvish' elements - unless as Lewis/Currie suggest- you take the -'dil' ending into consideration. But they connect Bombadil to various figures from Celtic myth & legend.
I think basically Tolkien wasn't starting LotR as a part of the Legendarium, & by the time he'd decided to incorporate it, he'd already created too much of the 'world' of Middle Earth in the 3rd age to discard all of it. So Bombadil & the Old Forest remained.
Lets face it, Bk 1 especially fits rather awkwardly with the rest of the book. Maybe that's relevent to Frodo's saying his return felt 'like falling asleep again'.

[Bêthberry]

lmp,

Tolkien has indeed packed a lot into her.

Yes, you are right, and I do admit that there is much in the Old Forest that is germane to LOTR, in attenuated ways which require active work on the part of the reader. However, I remain wistfully disappointed that, when the interesting discussion starts with Tom and the hobbits, Goldberry always retires for the night. Only the cigars are missing.

Bethberry

[littlemanpoet]

Bethberry: I remain wistfully disappointed that, when the interesting discussion starts with Tom and the hobbits, Goldberry always retires for the night. Only the cigars are missing.


That is a tad Edwardian, isn't it? smilies/wink.gif Thank goodness Goldberry didn't turn into Joy Davidman and start smoking cigars with the men! That would have busted all the archetypes all to smithereens. Ack! I just had a vision of Joy Davidman as Goldberry doing the cigar thing in the House of Tom Bombadil. Nightmarish. smilies/eek.gif

davem: they connect Bombadil to various figures from Celtic myth & legend.
Whoa! Child needs to read this. It contends with her assertion (well documented as well) that Bombadil is the epitome of Oxfordshire Englishness. In fact, davem, I wonder if you couldn't go into a little more detail as to which Celtic figures the authors connect with Bombadil?

On your other points, I would agree that Fellowship has the more fairy-tale feel, and I agree with the reasons you state. I don't, however, find that Bk 1 especially fits rather awkwardly with the rest of the book. Care to elucidate your point?

[davem]

Sorry, can't give any details of the celtic figures, welsh I think, which the authors put forward, as I'm writing this at work, rebel that I am, & don't have the book with me. You'll have to buy it - which you should as the authors are really nice people. I met them at the Tolkien Society's Oxonmoot this year, where I got the chance to visit Tolkien's grave. I knelt & placed my hand on the earth of the grave & it was a moment that I'll remember forever, but I digress.
There is, though, a strong resemblence, though not exact, to figures like Myrddin Wellt & Lailoken, the wild prophets inspired to verse & mad capering dances.
Ok, I was wrong in putting it as strongly as I did that Bk 1 is out of place with the rest of the work. I should just have said it
it has, as you said, a stranger feel, less hard & 'real'. Tolkien himself, I think, said the same in one of his letters.

[Bêthberry]

lmp,
Thank goodness Goldberry didn't turn into Joy Davidman and start smoking cigars with the men! That would have busted all the archetypes all to smithereens.

I don't know your reference to Joy Davidman--I watch virtually no television and am happily ignorant of much pop culture.

However, that you joke about the limitations of Goldberry's character suggests to me that you have never been denied admittance to any of the forums where true, substantive discussion occur. You would understand my deep regret and anguish over her characterization if you had.

Bethberry

[Nar]

Bethberry, I'm sorry to hear you've been denied from a forum of argument for being female-- I keep hoping the human race will be over and done with such things (obviously it hasn't happened everywhere yet). Joy Davidman (sp?) was not a pop culture figure, she was C.S. Lewis' wife, who singlehandedly switched him from his earlier simpleminded theories about the superiority of men to women (as Child has informed me in another thread, and I can see the effect in Lewis' later novels) to a better view not founded on hysteria, a couple of bad experiences (I believe his landlady Minna was somewhat of a hysteric when he was a young impressionable man and there's some suggestion they had a hysteric co-dependant sort of romance-- I forget which biography that was, I don't usually read them), and near-total ignorance (he lost his mother as a boy). Pre-Joy, Lewis was against having 'gurlz' around when men discussed serious scholarly stuff and, I think, somewhat insufferable about Tolkien's inexplicable insistence on going home to his wife and family; post-Joy, Lewis wanted her included in everything. That's why LMP thought of her in conjunction with the Inklings discussions with Lewis, Tolkien and others.

Re: cigar horror, LMP, you're probably being haunted by Miss Hardcastle (the villainess from That Hideous Strength by Lewis), not Joy. I HATED everything connected with her (Miss H.) but she does tend to lodge in the brain-- thanks, C.S.-- I wish you'd kept your fevered nightmares to yourself! Ah, I forgive you, I liked everything before and after that blasted book. Just wish I could vacuum the inimitable Miss H. out of my subconscious!

As to Goldberry, she should have stayed. I'm sure she had much to say, and Frodo would have liked to hear it. I wonder who those dreams came from-- Bombadil, the house, the Shire, or Goldberry?

Bombadil and Celtic figures-- how about the Green Man?

[davem]

Nar, I'm not sure of the connection between Bombadil & the Green Man, can you enlighten me? As far as I'm aware the G.M. isn't specifically Celtic, but pre-Celtic if anything. If you accept the identification of the Green Man with Robin Hood, then there's possible a link with Bombadil via a figure like Herne/Cernunos, but this is to get very mixed up, I feel. And Herne & Robin are Saxon, not Celtic. Robin Hood certainly manifests aspects of both the G.M. & Herne, or at least has been linked to both, even though one is the Lord/Spirit of the flora, the other of the Fauna. But these figures seem to have a different relationship to the land/animals to the one Bombadil displays. They display Control - see the giant in the Mabinogion, or the giant in Gilgamesh. They seem too primal & 'chaotic' to be analogous to Bombadil.
Don't know if you agree?

[Bêthberry]

Hello Nar,

Not so much denied access, really, as come face to face with lingering assumptions and culural habits. Bear with a little tale of autobiography, if you will.

The day I defended my dissertation was the first day I developed morning sickness with my first pregnancy. This is the most formal, rigorous examination in academe and can make or break the entire career process. 'Morning' is a misnomer; it can occur any time.

My advisor knew and graciously told me to leave at any time should I need to, without explanation, and also gave me leave to nibble on dry crackers. Yet not all the examination committee knew this. One in particular, after I had left the room for the committee's deliberations, objected to my "eating" during the exam. My advisor, after the vote, explained why I was nibbling on the crackers.

The committee exited the examination room, walked passed me without saying a word--not even telling if I had passed--to shake my husband's hand, who had been allowed to attend the defense (as I had been allowed to attend his).

The behaviour of these examiners is all the more ironic given their support of me in the defense. I had been challenged by one who questioned how I could discuss a female author in the same breath as Augustine and Coleridge. My reply of "Why not?" was met with hostility and I was told that it was not my place to pose the questions. These same men who rushed to congratulate my husband--not even me--on our impending family had supported my querilous reply by deflecting his retort.

Every time I read Carpenter on Tolkien's love of his club discussions and every time I read of Goldberry's discrete withdrawal, I think of the loss of 'her' contribution to that scene with Tom and the hobbits and I wish that Tolkien had been able to see his way through to extending the archetypes just a little farther.

Bethberry

[TolkienGurl]

You people are too smart for your own good! smilies/wink.gif smilies/smile.gif Thanks for some great information. I'm not really that much of a Tolkien veteran, I mean I just started reading The Silmarillion! seesh... newbies... smilies/rolleyes.gif

Another of Tolkien's books that has the Faerie feel to it - Roverandom.

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: TolkienGurl ]

[Nar]

Bethberry: That is terrible! Very rude... they shook your husband's hand and not yours-- who was having this baby, anyway? Who just won her doctorate, anyway? Maybe there was some stupid tradition/ superstition-- handshaking too soon thought to bring bad luck on the prospects of scholarship-- oh, never mind, they were under-socialized and possibly feeling defensive and guilty for mistaking you, and they buckled under pressure. I say again, very rude! I would very much like to know who the 'female author' you were comparing to Augustine and Coleridge was and, if it can be summarized, what the points of comparison were.

Yes, those 'no gurlz' theories were based on a large dash of ignorance about girls and women, combined with the effects of undereducating a population -- well, they're not going to seem thoughtful if you under-educate them, are they? Thus the neatly sealed prejudices become self-fulfilling.

Davem-- I would not compare Bombadil to Herne, as you say, there's nothing of Lord of the Fauna in him. Lord of the Flora, yes, I think so. And he does say 'Tom he is the master,' while neatly turning that phrase around to mean 'nothing has caught him (Tom)...' not what we mean by 'master' at all! So who's wrong about what 'mastery' means? Bombadil or us? Suppose 'mastery' means yielding and elusiveness so that nothing catches us? To have dominion -- is it the same as domination? Or is it something Ghandi or Martin Luther King would understand?

Joy, jokes, elusiveness -- isn't that the definiton of a trickster? Robin Hood's an example, or Brer rabbit, -- myself, I like Bugs Bunny. Call Bombadil a trickster, master of flora. I see the Green Man the same way, but what's modern new-age projection onto the Green Man, and what's (I'll take your word for it, although I don't know that we know enough to distinguish such things) 'pre-Celtic' Green man, I don't know. I do see Bombadil as a Green Man figure. I don't see him as a Herne the Hunter figure. I can't imagine him hunting anything other than mushrooms, if that. Now Beorn, him I could see as a Herne the Hunter figure (vegetarian pony-lover though he be). Bombadil's not a force for chaos or evil, true, but he's pre-law, and I'm not talking about a college program! My intuition (although I think you know more on the subject) says that the evil, overtly disordered aspect of those giants comes from them being pre-law figures carried over into a time they no longer belong in. Bombadil, like Galadriel, comes from an earlier time held over in an island of almost unstained past time and space --Galadriel's domain is of the first age and the Noldor when they were vital and young and Bombadil's and Goldberry's is of the time before the arrival of the Noldor ... it holds in memory the time before even the entry of Morgoth and the Valar and the passing of Arda from stillness into story ... the time when the dark was fearless.

Another question ... in honor of Bethberry's worries about Goldberry. I would say that as clever and elusive and bright-spirited as Tom is, he would not have been able to maintain his little world if he hadn't found Goldberry. Think of how Joyce's wife (Nora, was that her name? blast, I'm forgetting everything. What's my name again?) was his 'Ireland' wherever he was, or --back to Tolkien! -- how Sam was Frodo's Shire wherever HE was. (And Sam's pans were HIS Shire!) Tom might not have been able to maintain his island of the 'old no-rule rule' without Goldberry -- then he'd have been a pre-law figure wandering in a time that requires, depends and insists on laws-- he'd have been lawless and disordered instead of the master that slips by laws, that nothing has caught under stars, sky ... like those giants, he'd have been a 'rogue male' as with elephants --oh, I mean oliphaunts.

'Tom has his house to mind, and Goldberry is waiting.' He is time and she is place and together they are a holdover from the fearless dark and the new earth.

Oh, TolkienGurl, we're glad you're with us. Thanks for the compliments, but don't neglect to post with us! And keep reading the Sil! Now I've got to remember which is Roverandom -- is that in the Tolkien reader? Or did I miss it? What's in it?

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: Nar ]

[TolkienGurl]

Roverandom is a book about a dog who is rude to a wizard, and he gets turned into a toy dog as a punishment. Then the story tells of his adventures (on the Moon and with the merpeople, I believe) and all the while he is trying to get back to his owner. It's been a while, so that may not be totally accurate but close enough. I know this book is definitely a 'Faerie Tale.'

[Nar]

Thanks, TolkienGurl! smilies/smile.gif I have definitely not read it. I'll keep an eye out.

[davem]

Nar & Bethberry, perhaps its wrong to think of Bombadil & Goldberry as individuals, in the sense of hobbits, Elves, humans, etc. Aren't they more 'manifestations' of the land, & the river. The land & river become conscious, in a way like the Ents are trees become conscious?. There's so much more of this in the book I mentioned in a previous posting, The Uncharted Realms of Tolkien, which also has a fantastic discussion on Tolkien & feminism. One of the best Tolkien books published in years as far as I'm concerned. What they do show is how far ahead of his time Tolkien was in his representation of women. You always have to keep in mind, Bethberry, that Tolkien was the product of the Victorian period, & was creating his Legendarium during the first half of the 20th century. Find ANY female characters in any book from that, pre-feminist period who are as well developed & strong as Eowyn, Galadriel, Luthien. They don't exist. You can only judge him in relation to the other writers around at the time & previously. Also, its important to remember that he was writing an 'epic romance' along the lines of Morte D'Arthur, or the Faerie Queene, which has its own rules & forms.

[Bêthberry]

I must begin with apologies to lmp, for taking this discussion so far away from the faerie elements around the Shire, but, if you bear with me, I hope to bring it 'round eventually.

Davem,

*curtsies a polite greeting on a first meeting*

I appreciate your wish to defend Tolkien against what could be perceived as feminist criticism (a defense I would be in sympathy with) but let me take a look at some specifics of your argument.

Find ANY female characters in any book from that, pre-feminist period who are as well developed & strong as Eowyn, Galadriel, Luthien. They don't exist. You can only judge him in relation to the other writers around at the time & previously. Also, its important to remember that he was writing an 'epic romance' along the lines of Morte D'Arthur, or the Faerie Queene, which has its own rules & forms.

Actually, that list is quite long: Clarissa Harlowe, Moll Flanders, Roxana, Anne Eliot, Emma, Lady Castlewood, Becky Sharpe, Shirley Keeldar, Lucy Snowe, Maggie Tulliver, Dorothea Brooke, Gwendolyn Harleth, Tess of the d'Urbervilles, ... limiting the list to just English novels of the 'realism' the 18th and 19th centuries and omitting Dickens and some interesting lesser novelists.

It is, to my mind, quite a mistake to think that feminists of the twentieth century have an exclusive voice in speaking of and for female characters or that modern and post-modern literature alone has created strong female characters. I am not, speaking philosophically, a feminist and in fact I despise their (alleged) logic.

Then, in consideration of medieval literature, there is Cryseyde and the Wife of Bath; the Morte d'Arthur, with its elevation of adultery into an idealised literary form, is not, I would think, germaine to Tolkien's interests. And The Faerie Queene raises some interesting points, both because it is an allegory, which Tolkien averts, and because of the difficulties with the historical references to Elizabeth I, Mary of Scotland, the Spanish defeat etc. That one-on-one link between symbol and historical referent can be a problem.

In all fairness, however, my comments here were limited to Goldberry alone; I have made no reference to Galadriel, Arwen, or Eowyn. And those comments about Goldberry were really to point to a problem in constructing the character. They are probably related to other posters' frustrations with Tom's nonsensical verse: how to allude to the more symbolic elements of both Tom and Goldberry without falling into the trap of allegory. (Letter 153 identifies Tolkien's intention to give Tom a ridiculous name and particulars as a way of fending off allegory.)

I think Tolkien was brilliantly original in his handling of the Persephone myth in Goldberry and I wish the particular nature of his 'rewriting' were more generally respected and admired, for it can suggest much, IMHO, about his legendarium. It is the grounding of the character in the homey domestic routines which are circumscribed by Tolkien's own culture, time and place, that cause me regret.

I'm a greedy reader; I would have wanted more, because for other characters Tolkien does give us more. Perhaps I need to constrain my appetite. smilies/wink.gif

lmp, I hope these last comments provide a way of bringing the discussion back to the Shire: there is mythology in the Old Forest which characterizes it in a way uniquely different from the Shire or other geographical places in LOTR.

Regards to all,
Bethberry

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[littlemanpoet]

Bethberry: Please accept my apology for stomping lightheartedly over a raw place for you. Please believe that I intended no offense. And thanks for your kind apology. I have indeed had my share of barriers in life, though obviously not the female in a man's world type; so I do sympathize. Since the barriers I face have absolutely nothing to do with this thread, I'll leave it alone. PM me if your curious.

In a very real sense, what you may consider a digression is not at all one, because Goldberry's exit from the scene does indeed render her archetypical effectiveness weaker than it might otherwise have been. I can imagine that Tolkien may have used his own family life as a kind of template for this scene in the House of Tom Bombadil, and Edith probably made herself scarce out of both choice and frustration (not to mention olfactory reasons) when "the men" sat down to puff on their pipes and bandy words about.

Nar: Actually, I've read a good deal biographically about Lewis and Davidman. Hardcastle may have been way deep down in my subconscious, but Davidman in her own right was known to "play the man" among men, in a skirt, using what was then considered man's language and indulging in what was at that time considered man's vices. Lewis' friends found her quite obnoxious, above and beyond being "insufferable" for being an educated woman who stood up to educated men and their stupid ideas about women. So say the biographers.

Tolkiengurl: You have it right about Roverandum. But you did forget to mention the dragon on the moon....... The book was published only in the last couple years. Good libraries and bookstores should have it. Not my personal favorite; it was early and feels more like the Father Christmas writings than his more mature Niggle and Smith stories.

Nar: That's a wonderful insight into "mastery". It seems like a very deep well that very few have dropped their buckets down....

So Bombadil's a Harlequin with different kinds of funny clothes, eh?

'Tom has his house to mind, and Goldberry is waiting.' He is time and she is place and together they are a holdover from the fearless dark and the new earth.

Wow! Simply profound. Is he time, though? I can see her as place...

[davem]

Bethberry, 'Elen sila ...'
I take your point, up to a point. I was being too subjective in my statement. Actually, I don't know all the characters you cite, but most of the ones I do I find annoying or twee. They strike me as unconvincing, as do most of the stories . I'm not a great fan of the 18th- 19th century novel. Besides, those women strike me as too typical of their millieu (should that be 1 L or 2?). I don't find them interesting. I don't find any of those characters as convincing as Eowyn, or Galadriel, for example, so I stand by my point. In other words, you haven't convinced me for all the long list of names! smilies/tongue.gif
None of them strike me as being as vivid or real.
Any way, this is getting way off this particular thread!

[Bêthberry]

davem, but all you asked for was a list. smilies/wink.gif

The question gets into defining criteria for plausible or believable characters and also recognizing historical determinants in narrative--that is, if we are to raise the discussion above simple opinion. JMHO, but your observations about "annoying" and "twee", in the face of massive critical commentary to the contrary, present a weak defense. Not that they are wrong, but that they limit discussion to personal preference alone.

lmp, no problem. Of course I realize you could not have known. smilies/smile.gif The withdrawal is, I think, not limited solely to the nature of the Tolkien household, for the 19th had well-established codes of etiquette for the withdrawal of the ladies after dinner and before the cigars, so having Goldberry withdraw reinforces that social code. I think you are right that it limits the possibilities for her.

Nar, I like the idea of seeing Tom and Goldberry as time and place, but I would have to think, as lmp does, how exactly does Tom represent time. This is not a demand for you to elucidate so much as my statement that I must mull the idea over. smilies/smile.gif

Bethberry

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[Nar]

All excellent points! Not to digress too much, Davem, but many of the female characters on Bethberry's list are complicated and rich (and to me heart-rending, Dorothea or Maggie in Elliot's work -- I wrote a LOT on Clarissa in my undergrad days-- masochistic, spiritually ambitious, lousy taste in men, yes, twee, no -- man, that was a disturbing book I had to do a thesis to exorcise it) --however, what these women are not is able to choose the field on which they do battle-- they cannot choose their opponent or determine the prize they try for or the goal they pursue-- they fight as they can for what they find to be good, but they have (it appears to me) little or no control over the terms of that fight and very circumscribed control over what sorts of things they can choose to fight for. Some real women of the period had more control -- I've always thought any woman going by 'George' had much more scope for altering the rules and upending the assumptions than your 'Clarissa' or your 'Dorothea'. In that sense, an Eowyn or Galadriel is much more satisfying, having SOME influence over the terms, goals and game to be played.

'He is time and she is space' -- yikes! That line slid straight from the back of my mind through my fingers and appeared on screen in front of me -- what? I thought Bombadil was 'the spirit of the land' so where did 'time' pop up from? What, you're asking ME? I think it was the songs he sings -- song is a linear form, it made me think of time, and Goldberry's changing with the weather made me think of the land.

Let's review. In deliberate descriptions by Tolkien, Goldberry's discussed in terms of the river and riverbanks and the life it gives to the land, with a connection to the life giving rain. She appears among a pool of water lilies, she's in green with flowers when it's sunny and silver when it's cloudy, Frodo thinks of the river whenever they meet. Goldberry's appearance clearly matches what the river would look like under the weather, and the notion of a river from its spring in the mountains all the way down to the sea pops into Frodo's head while he's with her. And I have the strong feeling she's the land surrounding the river, made life-giving and fertile by it, as well as the river and the rain that falls on it.

However, in Goldberry I think Tolkien also tapped his idea of water as the element with the most lingering influence of the song of Arda -- at the beginning of the Sil he linked the echoes of the song to the sound of the ocean and by this it is linked to the special status of England as a green (because misty and rainy) and pleasant land and as an island surrounded by ocean and channels. In that sense Goldberry's the heart of England, the element that makes England English.

In the thread 'Did Galadriel have a Palantir' I suggested that the vibrations from the song, containing the entire story of history, remained in and were sustained by all water, and that Galadriel's mirror (water from her fountain in a broad basin) might work to produce past, present and future images of the history of Middle Earth by responding to these vibrations with surface ripples that a receptive mind might form into pictures from the song: images of past, present and future. Like the concentric bands in the trunk of a tree, which reflect the life of the tree from the heart to the edge.

Is it an accident that in the house of Goldberry, whose nature springs from the river and who is intimately connected to the rain, the hobbits have prophetic and awesome dreams? It is always Goldberry explaining and reassuring --warning, almost --'heed no nightly terrors' -- she is of water and water tunes and vibrates to the song of Arda, beginning to end of time, tuned and reverberating through all space. So she is of the element most receptive to the song of Arda -- that made the world and sung of all history. She's the medium for the song.

Who's the song? Well, we do have a singing yellow-booted sprite around, that would be Tom. I am saying that Tom is the incarnation of the song of Arda, the song that defines the history of this land and therefore is the original form of time in Arda, from before the moment of creation. A song is harmonics, vibrations, they need a medium and the medium that retains them, remembers them, is the waters of the earth. Thus, Tom can only live as a stable embodied presence because he has bound (but not bound) himself in happy marriage (but free in love) to his medium, Goldberry, the river and riverbank, which runs from mountain meadow through pleasant shire down to the gentle shore where time ends, and song and river are absorbed in the boundless ocean.

So is Tom still the spirit of the land? yes. The embodied song of Arda is the spirit of Arda. My intuition is that Tom is the song sprung from the mind of Illuvatar, not the song as sung by the Valar -- the song as it was meant to be, so while all that happens is included, the ending theme of Arda remade and healed is also in him.

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Nar ]

[Gandalf_theGrey]

* a grey-cloaked figure encircled by rising smoke of a matching shade enters through the mist *

Hail and Well Met, Nar.

* bows a friendly greeting *

Firstly, the summation and conclusion that you reach about Old Tom (quoted below) is just wonderful! I can hope to add naught more than applause. smilies/smile.gif

My intuition is that Tom is the song sprung from the mind of Illuvatar, not the song as sung by the Valar -- the song as it was meant to be, so while all that happens is included, the ending theme of Arda remade and healed is also in him.

On another note, your intuitive insight regarding Galadriel's Mirror strikes me as remarkable, because it serendipitously resembles part of a post I made ... fittingly enough, in Bethberry's "Picnic at the Bonfire Glade" RPG. (Which by the way ended all too soon by my reckoning, alas, as pass all such dearly precious moments. * waves wistfully and appreciatively to Bethberry smilies/smile.gif *

Here is the pertinent quote documenting that which occurred on Bombadil land:

* Except for these two, the path was now empty, tread smooth by earlier arrivals. Gandalf thought he sensed something. A strange melding of disjointed almost-memories, mingling with a cacaphony of voices, voices high and shrill with merry laughter, deep and low with hidden whispers. It was as though the throng around the feasting tables were every single one of them looking together into Galadriel's mirror simultaneously, swirling the water into a hundred shades of blue and green, sweeping around to create a whirlpool of alternate pasts, presents, and futures. Guests of a myriad of races converged on the Bonfire Glade Picnic. The whole of Time Itself converged as well ... now bent, now straightening, now a flickering chimera, now solid reality. *

Thirdly, I share your outlook regarding Tom being representative of Time. His title of "The Eldest" is graciously granted even by the Eldar, in their tongue rendered as "Iarwain."

Additionally, when Goldberry is asked by Frodo to name Tom's essence, she replies "He is." Words evocative of an ongoing continuous existence/state of being in time.

Gandalf the Grey

[davem]

Bethberry, Just a short response, because this is, as you said, getting too far off subject. Yes, as I said, i should really have said originally that I was stating my opinion, but its too easy when you feel something strongly, & it seems obvious to you, to treat it as a fact. Besides, to what extent is an 'objective' opinion on the arts just a collection of subjective opinions?I've never come across an 18th/19th century novel which I didn't have to force myself through. I just can't get into anything between the renaissance & Dunsany, Eddison, et al. I'm the same with music, Hildegard to Dowland, then Vaughn-Williams, Elgar. I exclude folk tales & folk music. Anyway. this is REALLY too far off subject. Blessed Be.

[Bêthberry]

Haunted by Clarissa indeed. We do need to find our way to chat, Nar. smilies/smile.gif

This can be a fruitful distinction between the earlier characters and moderns ones, yet, to me, the interesting thing is to watch the negotiations of those who do not have this control, because I think the issue of control is personal rather than political or social. But fascinating how you have introduced 'control'in discussion of Tom and Goldberry.

Your explication of "Tom as time and Goldberry place' is wonderful. *applause* It deserves to be quoted here again, even though Gandalf the Grey has already quoted it.

My intuition is that Tom is the song sprung from the mind of Illuvatar, not the song as sung by the Valar -- the song as it was meant to be, so while all that happens is included, the ending theme of Arda remade and healed is also in him.


In agreement with your argument, let me offer these two bits from my character "Bethberry"'s past in a previous RPG. I conceived of her as the daughter of Tom and Goldberry, in search throughout Middle Earth for her mother's lost voice. (The "Beth" comes from Sindarin for 'word'.) I think this will definitely show how an RPG can provide commentary and interpretation of Tolkien as meaningful as that in any discussion. This first quotation here comes from a battle scene with the Black Riders:

posted 02-05-2002 04:48 PM *Bethberry, seeing the difficulty all had in escaping, and worried particularly about the disappearance of Kailash, who was ill and would have a harder time fighting off the Riders, decided to take her own strategic offensive.*

*Riding hard off the path, she retraced the direction of several dwarves when they had first appeared, to be rewarded by finding a small cave, which could barely accomodate her small mare. Hurrying in, she dismounted, quieted Riverdance with a whisper, and explored the cave. She found what she was hoping for.*

*Kneeling close to a crevice, she began to sing a song of hope and encouragement, of succour and strength. By itself, the song could not repel the Riders, but it would give heart to those who fought with faith and valour ....*

*Echoing out of the mountain rocks as if it were a Great Music of the Flame Imperishable, the song went forth, bounding and rebounding and multiplying as each faithful heart heard it, until it created interchanging melodies, sometimes soft and sweet, sometimes terrible and awe-inspiring, blending out the clamorous brays of the attackers and revealing a sure theme to all, hope.


The second post comes from an episode in which Bethberry is critically injured during a seastorm:

posted 06-09-2002 12:04 PM *Bethberry lay insensible and motionless upon the thin mattress and wooden berth where Aglod and Arcon had left her. Yet her mind was in dream, far from stilled.*

Mother, Mother, the coracle spins and sways so wildly I cannot control or guide it. Sing me a song to quell the waters. I fear it will be torn to shreds. [NB a reference to a previous ride down the Withywindle in the character's past.]

Daughter, the flowing of all waters seeks its own rhythm and movement since the world was bent and the winds rounded. Each time has its own purpose and being. Ride with the waters rather than against them. Listen to the music of the current and catch its drift, for this is indeed a wild washing day.

*Slowly and wordlessly, Bethberry's mind recalled the song her mother had once sung for her and melded it to this new sea voyage.*

I grew where life had come to me, along
a reedy shore. And now I lie in foaming waves
Tossed far from known shore.
Around about us sweeps the cold,
with watery arms and stunning gale;
But through the wind I sing my song,
calling to shore and sea.
We seek a truth more noble here
Than greed or selfish passage.
A shadow spreads across the land,
which all of good would halt.
A seeing stone has fallen now into most idle hands.
It must be broke or brought to right,
as we have sworn to do.
We fain would seek your roaring swells
To guide us from the deep.

*The song seemed to reverberate not through air but through her body to the wooden rafters and beams, out the hull and thence sounded through the seas. From somewhere beyond the Outer Edge, Uinen heard the song from the daughter of one she had known and took compassion on the mariners. So Urinen turned to Ossë, saying, "For the love of the Teleri and the Falathrim, quell the torrent even though the world be bent."*

*And the waters grew calmer, but as they did, Bethberry became agitated, shaking in her small mariner's berth, wrapped in dream and soaked in brine and sweat.*


So, it would appear that you and I share remarkably similar interpretations. smilies/smile.gif


Looking forward to further discussions, and with a friendly nod to Gandalf in remembrance of journeys past, smilies/smile.gif

Bethberry

[ October 12, 2002: Message edited by: Bethberry ]

[littlemanpoet]

Well, this is delightful, Bethberry. I hadn't realized the connection to Goldberry. "This is a wild washing day." What a great line! (I may have gotten it wrong). It seems that you hunger for the same FEEL that I do - no wonder you post here.

Nar, I congratulate you on a fine explication of your intuition on Tom as Time and Goldberry as Place. You ought to write a book and get royalties.

[Nar]

Thank you very much, LMP. smilies/smile.gif

Davem: I can understand what bothers you about these books – I can’t say if they hold anything for you that you’re missing or not. I’ve always done my best analysis with books that triggered fear and loathing in me—I’ve NEVER written a good paper on a favorite book! Whether a character’s struggle is unwound and expanded into a fantasic landscape with scope for movement or confined explicitly to his/her own mind defines a completely different type of story.

Gandalf the Grey! * shimmers politely * Thank you kindly for the greeting and agreeable agreement! The song of Arda is a lovely idea, don’t you think? I’m not surprised we all respond to it so strongly. I like your thoughts about the mirror … it’s a wonderful idea. sweeping around to create a whirlpool of alternate pasts, presents, and futures … The whole of Time Itself converged as well ... now bent, now straightening, now a flickering chimera, now solid reality. I’ve always loved the whirlpool archetype, it’s very powerful in all its manifestations. I love your notion of ‘the whole of time converging’ –very nicely phrased. A wonderful image!

Luthien also used water for magic … I think it was the Lay of Lethien from HoME 3 that was the clearest. Bother. I can’t find the book to quote it, but when she grows her hair for her dark cloak that hides her and puts enemies to sleep, singing, pouring out water from a pitcher and moonlight are all involved. This seems to me to be a precurser to the magic Galadriel uses in her mirror. Water-song; it’s an interesting theme. This ‘bonfire in the glade’ thread sounds lovely. I’ve looked once at the RPG threads, there’s some lovely writing there. Alas, my persona’s completely unsuited to join in.

Before you wander on, Gandalf the Grey, I have a small request … could you possibly blow one of your smoke-galleons for me? You see, being in a lexical frame of mind when I designed this persona … well … I’m not a dwarf or an elf or a hobbit, I’m an orcish interjection (Nar! is my full name and I was spoken by Snaga –I come from quite a bad paragraph, but I’m trying to better myself) --sigh—I’m really not very good for role playing and I’m not strictly canon – I’m a sub-created word-spirit about two inches high and there’s very little I can do other than inhale the foam off ale –one of my few pleasures in life-- and shout ‘Nar!’ very loudly in my enemies’ ears, --not entirely useless to comrades, but not as good as beheading an orc, obviously-- but I do feel I could sail a smoke-galleon about, and it would break the tedium of my days, so if you wouldn’t mind … Thank you!

(The "Beth" comes from Sindarin for 'word'.) That’s very interesting, as when I created the ‘Nar’ persona, I decided to be a word (I was very much inspired by Tolkien’s letter about the mote of dust in the beam of loving attention that was its guardian angel)

Listen to the music of the current and catch its drift, for this is indeed a wild washing day. That’s lovely! That’s the sense of ‘mastery’ or should I say ‘mistressy’ (or perhaps ‘mistress minstrelsy’) I was thinking of.
Around about us sweeps the cold,
with watery arms and stunning gale;
But through the wind I sing my song,
calling to shore and sea. I like those lines very much. Songs and ocean storms, how well they go together! A wave is such a strange thing, water rising/falling, propelling the image of that rise/fall forward onto fresh ocean—it’s an event, really, an event on water, an event that chains across the ocean, but it seems like a thing. If you can see your wave’s medium, as you can with water, you can see the event. If a force in motion pulses a more ephemeral medium, air say, then you can’t see it, though you may feel the wild wind on your face. "For the love of the Teleri and the Falathrim, quell the torrent even though the world be bent." That’s a lovely line! I agree, the RPG has certainly unleashed something in you – strange all the things that can draw understanding out of you, so many things pulled together that you don’t know quite where it came from!

[ October 13, 2002: Message edited by: Nar ]

[ October 13, 2002: Message edited by: Nar ]

[Gandalf_theGrey]

Bethberry:

You certainly honor your Bombadil lineage. smilies/smile.gifIn keeping with our theme, one could even say you uphold your legacy and carry it forth to the world as a lithe stream current glinting with a clear voice on its course in the steady noble light of noonday sun through latticed leaves. The writings of your adventures show as much. * bows * And "For this is a wild washing day" is a remarkable turn of phrase, as has already been noticed. I would also add that your being "a woman of indeterminate age" aptly fits, as Time both reveals and conceals.

Nar:

So your name is in no way related to fire, then, Nar and not Nár. * Steps closer to peer at you closely and thoughtfully. His eyes narrow just noticeably enough that the surrounding wrinkles begin to deepen. Considers your name's meaning as spoken by an Orc, but all the while, the wizard's expression never hints at unkindness. *

As for "the whole of Time converging" being a wonderful image ... such instances are best undergone in small doses. * finds himself at a loss for words * Thank you for the compliment. * bows *

Not a Dwarf or an Elf or a Hobbit, are you, you say? Well, neither am I! smilies/smile.gif As chance would have it, I am in fact acquainted with another two-inch-tall creature ... a "wingly" named Ivie (from the Barrow Downs chat). Likes to perch atop my hat, she does. It's really very endearing.

As for your request that I provide you with a smoke-galleon for your wind-cruising, I am happy to oblige.

* Indraws a breathful of Old Toby. Exhales a fine ship with timbers of lilac-purple smoke, sailes of muted blue smoke, wafting about on a smokey cloud of misty sea-green. *

At your Service,

Gandalf the Grey

[ October 14, 2002: Message edited by: Gandalf_theGrey ]

[davem]

I have to say I'm not really connecting with these ideas of Tom as Time & Goldberry as Space. For me Middle Earth is 'real', as real as this world, & I tend to think of the inhabitants as 'beings', not 'characters'. There's something RJ Stewart says in The Underworld Initiation, along the lines of , The inhasbitants of the Inner worlds are REAL within their own dimension, & not figments of your imagination - if you treat them as such, they will respond as such. OK, not entirely relevant to a work of literature. But I do experience Middle Earth as a true, valid, inner reality. I think the danger of pushing allegory & analogy too far is that you 'break a thing, to find out what it is made of'. I can see similarities between Tom & Merlin, etc, but for me, Tom & Goldberry are 'real' beings, within their own world, & if you push interpretations too far, the whole thing is likely to unravel for you.

[littlemanpoet]

Goldberry is, perhaps not "space", but "Place". After all, a sense of Place is a very strong element in good fantasy.

[Nar]

*sailing around the room on this most glorious smokeship* 'Wheeeeeee! Thank you, Gandalf the Grey! Hoist the Jib! Belay the haubards!' (Um, what is that thing you belay as I think it's not haubards!)

We'll have to agree to disagree, Davem. But let me clarify, since I misquoted myself in my second post with 'space'. What I originally said was 'He is time and she is place' and I'm much happier with that, Goldberry as 'place' --'space' introduces a cosmic-Einstein-sci-fi quality that wasn't in my mind at all when I wrote that line. Mentally, I was within Arda, with a humming in my mind from something I'd never grasped before.

In my discussion of Tom I was speaking of the spirit of time in Arda, and it is the song of Arda that created and contains the land and its history-- well, I won't repeat my whole argument! In my discussion of Goldberry I was speaking of the spirit of a place in Arda that sums up what the land is meant to be.

There's no need for you to agree, Davem! I'd like to make sure, though, that you're disagreeing with my thought and not a more abstract interpretation that I didn't intend. I was seeing Goldberry as the spirit of the river with its riverbanks, not as the spirit of 'Space, the final frontier...' aiee, no!

This first sequence from the Shire through the Barrrowdowns has alway felt to me like a 'microcosmos' rehersal of the whole of the book -- the author trying out all the elements that will later reappear in a grander, larger way. Gildor and the starlight feast a precursor to Elrond and the Council, Old Man Willow a precursor to the ents, the Barrow a precursor to the the blasted lands around and in Mordor and the way through Sammath Naur to the cavern where the world, and souls, are won or lost.

I must say that Tom and Goldberry feel to me like they have something more in them (put there by Tolkien's mind and indeed by the back of Tolkien's mind, his mythic unconsciousness) in a way that Merry or Pippin or Frodo do not, that even Elrond or Galadriel do not. The psychology of Goldberry and Tom is elusive, their sayings are cryptic, self interest is never a part of their thoughts or the slightest temptation --as it is for Galadriel for all her wisdom and resonance as a character. Goldberry and Tom just do not talk or track like members of any of the races of Middle Earth.

Because I see this first section of the book through Barrowdowns as the writer's working his way into the themes of the book, playing with the elements that will later appear, as a microcosm of the whole of the book and the whole of the land, and because Tom and Goldberry DO feel different from all other characters, I'm very comfortable with viewing them on multiple levels: as specific characters, as mysterious and mythic beings intimately connected with the Shire, the old forest, the Brandywine, and the Withywindle, and as the heart of Arda and Arda as a world and creation myth for England.

You are correct, Tolkien did hate allegory (Saruman = appeasing politician, etc.). However, he accepted the idea of applicability. I don't think that this is a case of 'applicability', however. I think that Goldberry and Tom are quite literally spirits in Arda, and I'm discussing which spirits they are. Tolkien himself called Tom 'the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside' (Letters, #19). I think that a deeper interpretation of what the 'spirit of the land' is becomes possible when the creation-story of Arda enters the picture, because this land is created with a song, and all its history comes from that song. The song of creation is taken from the beginning of the Silmarillion and it is there stated that echoes from the song linger on in the ocean. Tolkien's ambition to create an English myth I took from Letters, #51 and I believe that's the letter reprinted as the preface of the Silmarillion.

[davem]

Nar, Yes, I can see what you mean, & I did misquote you - ~I was writing it at work, & didn't have a lot of time. I do wonder how much weight we can give to Tolkien's statement/interpretation of Bombadil being the spirit of the Berkshire countryside. There's definitely something of the spirit of that place in the Old Forest - more so as it appears in the Bombadil poems- the first of which preceded Toms appearance in LotR by some years, but I get the feeling that a great deal of Tolkien's own interpretation of characters was done 'after thee event'. There are very strong Pagan thems in the stories, which Tolkien himself became very uncomfortable with in later years - the Gods/Valar thing, etc. Tom Is a very Pagan figure. I'm wondering how much 'explaining away' Tolkien did, in order to keep the Legendarium (in his own mind) sufficiently 'orthodox.
All that said, The Hobbits weren't rescued by 'the spirit of the Oxfordshire/Berkshire countryside'. They were rescued by Tom Bombadil. You can end up with metaphors interacting with metaphors, & the whole thing & falls apart.

[mark12_30]

Bethberry: singing, smiling, dancing, light-hearted lass, you've quite blown my mind with the idea of "Bag End to Barrow" being a preview of the whole epic. This is going to take quite some time to think through. I love it. *Yeowza*.

[ October 16, 2002: Message edited by: mark12_30 ]

[Nar]

I believe you're referring to my post, not Bethberry's, and I thank you kindly, Helen. smilies/smile.gif Bethberry's is the one with the excellent poetry and 'most wild washing day' and I had the 'Bag End to Barrow' sequence as a microcosm of the whole quest. (You put that much better than I did, by the way).

Ah, Davem, yes, I heartily agree that Tom's Tom. I'm not surprised if Tolkien was uncomfortable with the extreme intensity his nature themes took on --there certainly are pagan elements in Tom (which I think consistent with the 'spirit of the countryside' idea). I think that that idea of Tom and the 'countryside' was always there, though. I think Tolkien's feelings about the landscape he moved to were always a motivating force for the creation of Tom. As far as I know, these feelings date to his boyhood, so they would have been available when he created Tom. I don't suppose we can ever determine this for certain. As to the issue of whether Tom's singing does connect to the role of the creation-song in Arda -- well, we can't determine that. All I can say is that the idea doesn't disturb Tom's presence in my mind when I think of the story. I have long felt that Tom was a whole of some kind connected with Arda. I hope my arguments are not interfering with your vision of Tom. Let me re-affirm: Tom is Tom!

[mark12_30]

My goodness, Nar, you are quite right. (You fooled me completely by jumping onto Gandalf's smoke-ship and sailing it around-- I was sure that was Bethberry.) I do apologize for the confusion.

(By the Bye, Nar, Did you ever have any further thoughts re: Sindo? Please PM me if you did, I've been wondering!)

[littlemanpoet]

Now there's an interesting juxtaposition: Tom Bombadil applicable as an Adam figure, and Tom Bombadil having a pagan aspect to him. I like the combination, even if they do seem contradictory on the face of it. Harking back to a not so recent post anymore, Tom is perhaps an Adam type who became pagan because English speakers were pagan. But I think there's more. I don't think you can have a true Adam without a pagan component. Wow! Now, isn't this a major tangent? But maybe not. Perhaps, what starched shirt xians call pagan is actually being in tune with the natural world, which we are given to understand, our Adams or whoever our history calls them, were. Somehow this does have something to do with why it FEELS different near the Shire, but I'm just brain gushing at the moment and can't see it clearly. Can anybody help?

[davem]

Littlemanpoet. Adam having a Pagan element or dimension. Depends how deep you want to go. It's also dependent on your understanding of Pagan. Paganism has different forms, from the primal Shamanic tradition, which Tom seems to partake of, to the Highly developed 'mysteries' of the classical world, or the Druids, which he doesn't. In other words, you have to define your concept of 'Pagan' before you can ask whether there's a Pagan dimension to Tom.
Maybe you also have to define what you mean by 'different' before you can get an answer as to why its 'different' near the shire!

[davem]

Actually, LMP, there is a specific connection between Adam, Paganism & the Traditional Elves & Faeries of folk belief. Its too heavy to go into on a Tolkien site. If anyone is interested, look up The UnderWorld Initiation, Earthlight & Power Within The Land, all by RJ Stewart, or try his Dreampower website.

[littlemanpoet]

Yes, davem, the particular "pagan" I was thinking of was from the primal Shamanic tradition . Thanks.

As to "different", I prefer to keep the term loose; it helps engender interest in the topic to have a somewhat general topic title. Besides, it allows others to think "outside the box" along with me.

Could you PM me the link to the website you named?

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[davem]

LMP, web address for RJ Stewart's site is www.dreampower.com/ (http://www.dreampower.com/)
This is a site that deals with pagan themes, but the major stuff is in the 3 books I gave. Principally, he is a shamanic teacher, working with the Celtic Faerie Traditions. What that means is that in the Pagan Traditions of the Celts, Faeries & Elves are considered real, contactable beings. Speaking personally, & whether you believe this or not, using the techniques in Stewarts books, I have had experiences of contact with these beings, who are both like & unlike Tolkien's Elves. They are beings of the Land. I won't go into too many details, but if you follow some of the visualisations in the books & on the web site, you might start to get some understanding of 'why it feels different near the shire'.
As I say, this is too far off from a Tolkien site. But lets just say, not EVERYTHING Tolkien wrote is just fantasy, there are Elves out there. I speak from experience.null (http://www.dreampower.com/)

[littlemanpoet]

Hmmm. This reminds me of Jung's darker side. Yes, I'm well aware of what you're talking about. I've had my share of experiences. Frankly, this feels nothing like what I FEEL in Tolkien. What I'm talking about has little to do with occultic practices (which I do not mean to demean or cast aspersions upon by so naming them). Tom and Goldberry don't feel heavy with recondite power. I had to look that word up after I used it, I don't know where it came from, but it was right-on. T & G are what they are, having no need for shadows and intermediary ritual. In fact, the sense I get from R.J. Stewart is more akin to the sense I got reading of the Nine Ringwraiths on Weathertop. Not to say evil, necessarily, but heavy with spiritual weight and reverberating with spiritual tembre. Recondite power. It feels foreign, alien, other, whereas Tom and Goldberry feel like home, boots and coat, land and river, cup and bowl, bread and wine. Wholesome.

T & G are Time and Place. Yes, Nar, I like that. I still don't know why, completely, though your development of the idea is fetching and creative and rings true.

[ October 17, 2002: Message edited by: littlemanpoet ]

[davem]

Lmp. As I said, its out of the range of a Tolkien site. But you asked about Adam & Paganism. The site is very limited in comparison with the author's books, especially Earthlight. I suspect you've skimmed the surface of the site, seen the Tarot images etc, & dismissed the whole thing. Most of Stewart's work is based in the celtic shamanic & Faerie traditions, which is a Living Inner Tradition, with its roots in the same sources as Tolkien himself used. You may, validly, feel that the Pagan Traditions are not for you. But the links to the Traditions behind Tolkien's sources are there, more & deeper than I think you realise from what you say. As John Crowley said in his novel Aegypt 'There's more than one history of the world'. What I feel uncomfortable about is having my spiritual path dismissed as 'dark & dangerous' by people with a superficial knowledge of it - this isn't meant as a personal attack, so please don't take offence - its more of a 'general' attack! Tolkien's works are a modern manifestation of ancient Traditions, with deep roots. The same Traditions are also manifestng in the modern Pagan movement. Its not a coincdence. But I do feel this is way off track now, & its not worth following any further.

[mark12_30]

Spring thaw is on its way, whispering that deeper in the woods there are songs to be sung and dances to be danced if only I knew what they were...

"For he comes, the human child,
To the water and the wild."

The Journey of Desire; the Sacred Romance; Wild at Heart; it's time I read Eldredge's books again... before the peep-frogs start to sing.

[Liriodendron]

"For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood in every spring
there is a different green."

Can't wait to see this season's green! smilies/smile.gif

[mark12_30]

I went tramping, the day before yesterday. Trespassing, actually, the land is posted... smilies/eek.gif but I had Frodo on the brain, and how he loved tramping around the Shire. I live in New England; it ought to be prime tramping territory. It's wild, certainly; but it's also largely private. People buy up the wilderness in order to protect it, and then of course they don't want you hiking through it.

So I brought m'dawgs, ducked my head as I passed the glaring, white "POSTED" signs, and walked a bit. It was a start. No Bombadil sightings, no Gildor. Not yet. Not even an Old Man Willow, although there was one tree that reminded me of the hobbits taking refuge under the roots, only much smaller...

Next trip will be a couple of miles away, in some open woods (open to hikers and hunters, not descriptive of the growth, I mean.) There I will resume my search for... something. Faerie, faraway song and dance, a glimpse of Bombadil or Gildor, but thinking more of Smith, and his Queen of Faerie.

lmp, the idea of "writing serious fantasy" has not faded. I just haven't found the start of the path into Faerie yet. The road goes ever on and on, but the beginning of the path eludes me at the moment.

I'm looking, though.

"For he comes, the human child..."

[ March 21, 2003: Message edited by: mark12_30 ]

[Iarwain]

Remember though Mark that while the path eludes you now:

Still round the corner there may wait
A new road or a secret gate;
And though I oft have passed them by,
A day will come at last when I
Shall take the hidden paths that run
West of the Moon, East of the Sun.

Perhaps someday we will all find that path, and wonder down it through Hobbiton and Bywater, and out into the wide wide world.

'Till then,
Iarwain