Serving animals in HOBBIT film

[Sir Kohran]

Originally Posted by Finduilas

Well, if you want to be beaten, sure. I never said so.

I might suggest broadening your horizons.

-- Fol

Yet you imply it. You said davem and the others that love Bombadil were 'more intelligent'. Then you say the equivalent of 'so what does that make those who don't?', implying the opposite of 'more intelligent' - essentially those who do not love Bombadil are 'less intelligent'.

[Folwren]

I admit, what I said was very mean and not nice at all, and I deserve to be reprimanded for it, but you can take it at what it's worth - which is very little, for it was said in sarcasm. I have been insulted consistently by StW and once or twice by you and have said nothing and I guess my patience just popped. I'm not going to apologize, though I should, and I wish I would get in trouble for it, just so I could complain to the mods. To what end? None, because everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

But, sheesh. Just because some people think that Bombadil is a waste of paper and time doesn't mean that everyone has to agree and it doesn't mean that you're right about what you think about him.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

Folwren.... you deserve no reprimand . Your posts are from the heart and good spirited so you deserve only a smile. You did phrase it in such a way as to allow only the good on your side while the evil took the other side. But that is okay because davem just did the same thing

I suppose any reader unfamiliar with British folklore may struggle with Tom - though many readers with no such knowledge take to him straight off.

So those of us who do not like TB struggle with him out of ignorance having no knowledge of British folklore. We could be experts on British folklore and still not like the doggerel spewing mess of primary color. But it demeans the other side so much more when you can say their opinions are founded from lack of knowledge.

By the way, I simply love JRRT's digression into ME history and wish there were even more of it. Cannot get enough of the historical end of things. And I sincerely say that.

The idea that the entire book revolves around this terrible and powerful Ring which can corrupt anyone and must be destroyed or civilization will fall stops dead in its tracks by the introduction of a character who
a- can wear the ring with no effect
b- has no interest in it at all
c- seems to be the one being over which it has no power over but could not care less
d- will do nothing to help the situation
e- does absolutely nothing to further the basic plot or advance the story

You cut out TB from the book, you lose nothing but doggerel and the worst set of mismatched brightly colored clothing in the history of literature.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

The idea that the entire book revolves around this terrible and powerful Ring which can corrupt anyone and must be destroyed or civilization will fall stops dead in its tracks by the introduction of a character who
a- can wear the ring with no effect
b- has no interest in it at all
c- seems to be the one being over which it has no power over but could not care less
d- will do nothing to help the situation
e- does absolutely nothing to further the basic plot or advance the story

Yes - I stated that the Bombadil 'mythus' was imported wholesale into M-e. The Hobbits have crossed into another 'world', where different rules apply, & for that very reason are able to get a new perspective on the Ring, the Quest & the nature of their world.

You cut out TB from the book, you lose nothing but doggerel and the worst set of mismatched brightly colored clothing in the history of literature.

No, you lose one of the most fascinating things Tolkien ever wrote, & you lose some of his most beautiful & evocative writing.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by davem

No, you lose one of the most fascinating things Tolkien ever wrote, & you lose some of his most beautiful & evocative writing.

I'd still shove Bombadil in Orudruin (along with his chapters) if he started spouting his sub-vogon poetry at me and you wouldn't want to sit next to him on a long haul flight. However I usually content myself with pretending he doesn't exist and eliding the early chapters....

[Meriadoc1961]

Sauron the White wrote:

"The idea that the entire book revolves around this terrible and powerful Ring which can corrupt anyone and must be destroyed or civilization will fall stops dead in its tracks by the introduction of a character who
a- can wear the ring with no effect
b- has no interest in it at all
c- seems to be the one being over which it has no power over but could not care less
d- will do nothing to help the situation
e- does absolutely nothing to further the basic plot or advance the story"

I disagree completely. Bombadil is an incarnation of Iluvatar, the creator. He is, therefore, light-hearted and care-free because he is the creator. He "will do nothing to help the situation" is faulty, for he intervenes and saves the ring and the hobbits who were trapped by the Barrow-wight, who was a servant of the Dark Lord. But I agree he "will do nothing to help the situation" directly involving the destruction of the ring for Tolkien understood the concept of free will. Iluvatar did not make his creation one that was filled with programmable robots. His creatures could think for themselves and make choices based upon right or wrong because he created them as moral beings (sound familiar?). He does advance the plot of the story because it is he who gives hope, both to Sam and Frodo, as well as to Gandalf and other characters in the book. Bombadil (Iluvatar) is the light that Sam realizes could never be reached by the darkness.

Merry

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

Originally Posted by Meriadoc1961

Sauron the White wrote:

"The idea that the entire book revolves around this terrible and powerful Ring which can corrupt anyone and must be destroyed or civilization will fall stops dead in its tracks by the introduction of a character who
a- can wear the ring with no effect
b- has no interest in it at all
c- seems to be the one being over which it has no power over but could not care less
d- will do nothing to help the situation
e- does absolutely nothing to further the basic plot or advance the story"

I disagree completely. Bombadil is an incarnation of Iluvatar, the creator. He is, therefore, light-hearted and care-free because he is the creator. He "will do nothing to help the situation" is faulty, for he intervenes and saves the ring and the hobbits who were trapped by the Barrow-wight, who was a servant of the Dark Lord. But I agree he "will do nothing to help the situation" directly involving the destruction of the ring for Tolkien understood the concept of free will. Iluvatar did not make his creation one that was filled with programmable robots. His creatures could think for themselves and make choices based upon right or wrong because he created them as moral beings (sound familiar?). He does advance the plot of the story because it is he who gives hope, both to Sam and Frodo, as well as to Gandalf and other characters in the book. Bombadil (Iluvatar) is the light that Sam realizes could never be reached by the darkness.

Merry

Hmmm... that is a good point, but I didn't think of Tom as a reincarnation of Iluvatar, he gives hope to the Hobbits though. Especially when they got trapped by the Barrow-wight, and he also saved them... now I wouldn't want to be trapped in a plane for a flight that has some long hours with Frodo, but not with Bombadil.

[Lord Halsar]

Originally Posted by Meriadoc1961

Bombadil is an incarnation of Iluvatar, the creator. He is, therefore, light-hearted and care-free because he is the creator. He "will do nothing to help the situation" is faulty, for he intervenes and saves the ring and the hobbits who were trapped by the Barrow-wight, who was a servant of the Dark Lord. But I agree he "will do nothing to help the situation" directly involving the destruction of the ring for Tolkien understood the concept of free will. Iluvatar did not make his creation one that was filled with programmable robots. His creatures could think for themselves and make choices based upon right or wrong because he created them as moral beings (sound familiar?). He does advance the plot of the story because it is he who gives hope, both to Sam and Frodo, as well as to Gandalf and other characters in the book. Bombadil (Iluvatar) is the light that Sam realizes could never be reached by the darkness.

Merry

I believe that it is clearly stated on some of the most Tolkien-informatable sites, *cough* *Encyclopedia of Arda* *cough, cough*, that Iluvatar has NO physical incarnation in Arda WHATSOEVER save for the Flame Imperishable itself.

[Lalwendë]

Without weirdness like Bombadil or Bilbo I fear Lord of the Rings might stray too far into 'sword and sorcery' territory, a world of rights and wrongs and muscular heroes. But it doesn't. It is a world with enigmatic figures who cannot neatly be put down on one 'side' or another. Bombadil brings depth and interest. He, along with figures such as Shelob, Fell Beasts, Dragons, Eagles, Woses and Barrow-wights, shows us that this is a diverse world, populated by beings outside the usual Elf/Man/Dwarf hierarchy.

In our own world we have Men as a species, plus a lot of animals we understand (or at least think we do, who can explain the mind of the domestic cat? ), but we also have creatures we do not understand. We have tales of Loch Ness Monsters, Yetis, Boggarts, Fairies, etc. Had Tolkien created his own world without all of these types of things then it would have been all the more poverty stricken, grey and depressing for it.

Stylistically, if one of Tolkien's aims was to create something he could dedicate to England then it was only right that he create something with odd, enigmatic figures in it, such as are found in English folklore already. And narratively, those three chapters with TB form a valuable bridge between the familiarity of The Shire to the more perilous realms; the Old Forest is a foreshadowing of Fangorn, the Barrow Downs of the Paths of the Dead or Shelob's Lair.

[Mithalwen]

Personally I dislike Beorn, I dislike Bombadil, (in Rowling's ouevre I dislike Hagrid.. is his a pattern?) but I don't think it is a question of intelligence more of how you view Tolkiens' world.

Having followed the relevant parts of the Chapter by Chapter.. I know that some downers I respect greatly like Bombadil and see him as the means in which the everyday world moves into fairytale and myth - that no doubt is a gross simplification at best but I have not the skill to express it better. I do see what they mean but I still don't like Bombadil et all and find it jarrs and mars the near perfection of Tolkien's created world. I am not one of those who like to pretend to themselves that it is real but I like the plausibility of it all. Bombadil just always feels he belongs in a different book. Surely not a matter of intelligence just personal taste?

While I am no great apologist for the films - I watched them...enjoyed aspects never felt very inclined to watch again... I would point out that the BBC radio version which had a lot more time at it's disposal also omitted Bombadil - even though the scriptwriter liked him (and made the Adventures of TB separately).

Bombadil is a difficult and complex character for those of us who know Tolkien's word intimately - how hard would it be to make sense of him in more simplistic media?