What connection between Goldberry and Ulmo?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

If I'm not mistaken, doesn't the presentation of the ATB suppose that it was probably written by Hobbits (most specifically, Bilbo and possibly Frodo)? While they were both more learned in Elvish lore than other Hobbits, there was much I'm sure they didn't know. Not to mention Bilbo's fondness for poetry, which often leans one in the direction of what sounds good rather than what presents an accurate picture of historical fact. It's not much to go on, alas. What is fact, what is fantasy? Enquiring minds want to know, but may never have an answer.

Tolkien's introduction to ATB is one of the funniest things he ever wrote! It's especially a treat to read if one has also read some of his 'serious' academic work. I've always rather fondly thought of it as his personal reply to those academics who ridiculed his work on the Legendarium, appended especially to such verse as appear in ATB.

But alas, alas! If all we have are hobbit translators for LotR and ATB, what works does that leave us with with any hope of--dare I say it--'canonicity'? Only I suppose those edited by Christopher Tolkien, whose work very much doesn't fall prey to poetry but is the very stuff of impeccable scholarship.

Originally Posted by Eönwë

But Tom and Goldberry are sort of equal.

They are opposites, yet the same and they balance each other out.

All depends on what one means by "sort of equal" I think.

Originally Posted by davem

There is a third Bombadil poem which Tolkien didn't include in AoTB. It appeared in a 1969 collection called 'The Young Magicians' (story here: http://bromwell.dpsk12.org/stories/storyReader$179 )

Whatever would we do without the inspired efforts of principals such as the erudite Mr. Jonathan Wolfer.

Originally Posted by skip spence

As for the Goldberry's connection with Ulmo I can't think of anything clever to say

That's probably how we all felt reading Esty's enlightening associations from her music perusals.

Originally Posted by Legate

These are interesting points, however I think they both present the extreme point of view.

And is there a problem with extreme points of view?

Originally Posted by Legate

Last, as a related thing to Goldberry-Tom relationship in the poem, I would link here to Mr.Hookbill's thoughts posted here, which I find very good, very interesting and inspiring.

It is interesting, isn't it, how an idea pops up on one thread and doesn't seem to go anywhere and then presents itself again on another thread! I myself found the esteemed Mr. Hookbill's so inspiring that I was moved to offer yet other ruminations on Tom, which hypotheses are every bit as illuminating as any or all other ruminations I have ever offerred about the character.

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpos...6&postcount=52

Frankly, and I shall be serious now, I think as Tolkien was just starting work on the sequel to TH he hankered after not only his thoughts about his composition of his children's bedtime story but also other writings he made for his children. And voila! There were Tom and Goldberry in LotR. I rather suspect there is a missing story which Tolkien wrote for his children about balrogs, and in the telling of it he had to entertain ever so many questions from his children, who clearly knew of Smaug's wings, about whether balrogs had wings, that the good father was prompted to make said appendenges as enigmatic in LotR as they were in this story as well.

[Ibrîniðilpathânezel]

Hmm, it's been so long since I read ATB, I shall have to add the amusing introduction to the list of reasons to dig out my office!

On the whole, though, I enjoy the speculation over these vague and sometimes contradictory questions that seem to have no hard-and-fast answers (and for the record, my personal feeling about balrogs is that they do have literal as well as metaphorical wings -- it's hard to spread a metaphor to the walls -- but that they are there only for show, an aspect of a chosen Maia form intended to strike fear into the hearts of foes by making them appear bigger and more powerful and thus more terrifying, thus also making them the largest "penguins" of ME, flightless). Everyone will come up with answers that make sense to them, if they feel they need an answer, and if they don't, all well and good, too. "Canon," I think, doesn't need an absolute answer for everything. Facts may provide proof, but they so seldom fire the imagination, IMHO. Arguments, oh, yes. I cannot help but think of friends I used to have who were armchair historians, sharing their love of history -- until they hit upon a subject for which one's preferred favorite source conflicted with the other's preferred source. More than just flames always ensued, and in the end, nothing was resolved because they couldn't even agree to disagree. Much better, I think, to endlessly speculate, and agree that there is no one answer, because the only source who could have provided one is no longer with us, and did not leave that desired answer behind.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And is there a problem with extreme points of view?

Not at all!!! As long as we know they are extreme (wow, I believe I just summed up very nicely a large part of my overall worldview).

Originally Posted by Ibrîniðilpathânezel

Much better, I think, to endlessly speculate, and agree that there is no one answer, because the only source who could have provided one is no longer with us, and did not leave that desired answer behind.

I would say it this way: I think the most important thing is the dialogue (said Socrates ), it is not about convincing others that your view is the only right one, but the outcome of debating the stuff and not just dropping it is that we may learn something (and besides that, also that we communicate with each other). It may be that something will be answered (like that someone comes and says "oh, I found that in Letter 1201 Tolkien indeed states that Balrogs don't have wings at all, only no one has noticed that this far"), and something not, but we are going to gain something by discussing it instead of simply dropping it away as unanswerable at the very beginning.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Not at all!!! As long as we know they are extreme (wow, I believe I just summed up very nicely a large part of my overall worldview).

And in this case of said comments about Goldberry and her consort, what makes them extreme?

Originally Posted by Ibin

Much better, I think, to endlessly speculate, and agree that there is no one answer, because the only source who could have provided one is no longer with us, and did not leave that desired answer behind.

Yes, I guess somewhere Tolkien left us a rainbow, eh?

Oh, and, just to avoid any off-topic skwerls, I think Ulmo is waay too serious for the likes of Goldberry and Tom.