The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Tom Bombadil

Balfrog · 12-15-2015, 09:15 PM

Before moving on – its probably worthwhile re-visiting Tolkien's very mysterious letter to P. Mroczkowski – that appears to be the backbone behind this new theory.Why its full contents have never been disclosed is disappointing – for it may directly and unequivocally hold the key (or at least other essential clues). Priya obviously thinks though, that there enough clues to solve Tom with what we know right now. Gathering the info. together - this is what we have:

the simultaneity of different planes of reality touching one another ... part of the deeply felt idea that I had ... Beyond that too I feel that no construction of the human mind, whether in imagination or the highest philosophy, can contain within its own "englobement" all that there is ... There is always something left over that demands a different or longer construction to "explain" it ... This is like a "play", in which ... there are noises that do not belong, chinks in the scenery', discussing in particular the status of Tom Bombadil in this respect.

A viewing at auction led to the following being additionally noted:

Here Tolkien uses the analogy of a theatrical performance, where as well as the play that is being performed, there are chinks in the scenery which give glimpses of another different world outside - that of the producer and stagehands (and the author!). TB does not belong to the main pattern of the Legendarium, as can be deduced from the fact that the Ring has no effect on him whatsoever - he is outside the problems of power that involve the other characters. Tolkien says that he was tempted to 'tinker' with him to bring him into line, but (most unusually for Tolkien) he resisted that temptation.

What else could Tolkien have had in mind if he stated “this is like a play”. Could there have been any other reason than Priya's hypothesis that he was thinking analogously or allegorically?

And if a play – surely there must have been a theatre involved?

And why would the world outside have off-stage characters such as: “stagehands”, the “producer” and the “author”?

And if Tom didn't truly belong in the play – could it be that instead he belonged to the world outside?

Doesn't this questioning and logic path reasonably lead us to suspecting that Tom might have been thought of as an off-stage character too?

Could Tolkien think and write allegorically? We shouldn't be hasty to dismiss such an idea. Tom Shippey in The Road to Middle-earth devoted a few pages to discussing this – and the answer was most definitely yes. So I guess in relying on this renowned scholar's wisdom – I would say Tolkien could have done this for Tom. Perhaps this is why no one has been able to figure him out?
Perhaps our own aversion to thinking of Tom allegorically – because we have been conditioned to think that way knowing Tolkien's dislike – has stymied progress.

One remark Tolkien made I feel has great synergy with the proposed theory can be interpreted as that we will never able to understand Tom unless we think unconventionally. Taken from Priya's work (original source Hammond & Scull's 2014 editing of The Adventure's of TB) :

“Tom Bombadil … won’t be explained, because as long as you are … concentrated on the Ring, he is inexplicable.”

12-15-2015, 09:15 PM	#7
Balfrog Haunting Spirit Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 87	Before moving on – its probably worthwhile re-visiting Tolkien's very mysterious letter to P. Mroczkowski – that appears to be the backbone behind this new theory.Why its full contents have never been disclosed is disappointing – for it may directly and unequivocally hold the key (or at least other essential clues). Priya obviously thinks though, that there enough clues to solve Tom with what we know right now. Gathering the info. together - this is what we have: the simultaneity of different planes of reality touching one another ... part of the deeply felt idea that I had ... Beyond that too I feel that no construction of the human mind, whether in imagination or the highest philosophy, can contain within its own "englobement" all that there is ... There is always something left over that demands a different or longer construction to "explain" it ... This is like a "play", in which ... there are noises that do not belong, chinks in the scenery', discussing in particular the status of Tom Bombadil in this respect. A viewing at auction led to the following being additionally noted: Here Tolkien uses the analogy of a theatrical performance, where as well as the play that is being performed, there are chinks in the scenery which give glimpses of another different world outside - that of the producer and stagehands (and the author!). TB does not belong to the main pattern of the Legendarium, as can be deduced from the fact that the Ring has no effect on him whatsoever - he is outside the problems of power that involve the other characters. Tolkien says that he was tempted to 'tinker' with him to bring him into line, but (most unusually for Tolkien) he resisted that temptation. What else could Tolkien have had in mind if he stated “this is like a play”. Could there have been any other reason than Priya's hypothesis that he was thinking analogously or allegorically? And if a play – surely there must have been a theatre involved? And why would the world outside have off-stage characters such as: “stagehands”, the “producer” and the “author”? And if Tom didn't truly belong in the play – could it be that instead he belonged to the world outside? Doesn't this questioning and logic path reasonably lead us to suspecting that Tom might have been thought of as an off-stage character too? Could Tolkien think and write allegorically? We shouldn't be hasty to dismiss such an idea. Tom Shippey in The Road to Middle-earth devoted a few pages to discussing this – and the answer was most definitely yes. So I guess in relying on this renowned scholar's wisdom – I would say Tolkien could have done this for Tom. Perhaps this is why no one has been able to figure him out? Perhaps our own aversion to thinking of Tom allegorically – because we have been conditioned to think that way knowing Tolkien's dislike – has stymied progress. One remark Tolkien made I feel has great synergy with the proposed theory can be interpreted as that we will never able to understand Tom unless we think unconventionally. Taken from Priya's work (original source Hammond & Scull's 2014 editing of The Adventure's of TB) : “Tom Bombadil … won’t be explained, because as long as you are … concentrated on the Ring, he is inexplicable.”