The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum


Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page

Go Back   The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum > Middle-Earth Discussions > The Books
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-11-2002, 10:16 PM   #1
Evenstar1
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado (just east of the Misty Mts.)
Posts: 111
Evenstar1 has just left Hobbiton.
Boots Bombadil in LOTR

What do you think was the importance of TB in FOTR, and do you think it was a mistake to leave him out of the movie?
__________________
- Eve
Evenstar1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2002, 11:57 PM   #2
Tigerlily Gamgee
Hostess of Spirits
 
Tigerlily Gamgee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Meduseld
Posts: 1,056
Tigerlily Gamgee has just left Hobbiton.
Send a message via AIM to Tigerlily Gamgee
Silmaril

I am still a little up in the air about Tom Bombadil, what his purpose is as a whole, who he is, what he is..... I really need to re-read.
As for him being cut from the movie... I don't think they needed him there because they cut out everything that he was needed for (not that that is a good thing). I would've loved to see The Old Forest and The Barrow Downs in the movie (creepy!).
Tigerlily Gamgee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2002, 12:19 AM   #3
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bywater
Posts: 67
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took has just left Hobbiton.
Silmaril

I guess they cut him out because he didnt really lead up to anything, if you know what I mean, but im still not happy they cut him out. Maybe they found him too hard to portray [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2002, 03:21 PM   #4
Morquesse
Wight
 
Morquesse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Past the fields we know....
Posts: 202
Morquesse has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Actually, I think TB had an importance, because I think(but am not sure) that Merry's sword from the Barrow-downs was the only reason that he and Eowyn defeated the Witch king, because the sword was "Magic", meaning that it would not work to have a normal sword.
So without TB, we would not have the sword, which results less detail in the movie. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img]

Anyone is free to correct me if I'm wrong.
~M
__________________
I'm not ashamed to let you know I want this light in me to show. I'm not ashamed to speak the name of Jesus Christ.~Newsboys
Morquesse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2002, 03:37 PM   #5
Lhunbelethiel
Wight
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Francisco Bay Area (aka Bay of Belfalas)
Posts: 103
Lhunbelethiel has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Is Tom mentioned any where else in the triology besides in his chapter in FOTR and at the end of ROTK when Gandalf mentions him? He's like the Bobba Fett of LOTR... so much obsession and mystery about him! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]
__________________
*~~All that is gold does not glitter, not all who wander are lost, all that is old does not wither, deep roots are not touched by the frost...~~*
Lhunbelethiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2002, 10:35 PM   #6
Evenstar1
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado (just east of the Misty Mts.)
Posts: 111
Evenstar1 has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Interesting thought, Morque, about Merry's sword! I had never considered that!

The only reason I can come up with for JRRT including Bombadil, was to show that the Ring was not necessarily all-powerful over everything in ME. It kind of put the Ring into a perspective, hierarchally-speaking that is, for me. (Does that make sense?)
__________________
- Eve
Evenstar1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2002, 07:12 PM   #7
Lhunbelethiel
Wight
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: San Francisco Bay Area (aka Bay of Belfalas)
Posts: 103
Lhunbelethiel has just left Hobbiton.
Question

What about the similarities between Beorn in The Hobbit and Tom Bombadil in LOTR? Both were close to nature, both kept their travellers safe in their homes on their journey.... etc
__________________
*~~All that is gold does not glitter, not all who wander are lost, all that is old does not wither, deep roots are not touched by the frost...~~*
Lhunbelethiel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2002, 09:30 PM   #8
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took
Haunting Spirit
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bywater
Posts: 67
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took has just left Hobbiton.
Boots

Does anyone actually know why the ring didnt make TB invisible? [img]smilies/confused.gif[/img]
Bramblerose Gamgee-Took is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2002, 08:49 AM   #9
Nar
Wight
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 228
Nar has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

The ring had no power over Tom because he did not desire power for himself. That's why he was 'the master.' Don't ask me to explain how 'no desire for power' goes with being 'the master' --seems to be a Zen kind of idea, and I'm not qualified to explain Buddhism-- nor was Tolkien, as far as I know-- I think it's a convergence of like ideas responding to the same world.

Tom seems to have been intended by Tolkien to be a nature spirit, the spirit of the Shire or of Middle Earth. OF course, he was also an engima which Tolkien did not wish to explain.

I personally find that Tom's lines are much improved by viewing him as a conduit for Illuvatar's apologia: Sorry, can't help you on the way, 'Tom has his house to mind, and Goldberry is waiting.' There's that explanation of existential suffering under an omnipotent God I'd been waiting for!

Of course, I do not for a minute believe Tolkien intended it that way. It's just a private moment of applicability for me-- Tom speaking as the secret fire in the world, explaining Illuvatar's point of view, a kind of green version of the voice from the whirlwind. (Book of Job-- sorry for the Bible reference, please don't kill me, I see many different areas of applicability in addition to the Bible)

Thus, I view Tom as Tolkien's nature spirit, not to be wrecked with 'too much information!' and also in my own way, chuckling quietly at how much my favorite author put into his book, willy-nilly.

I'm still searching the archives for the perfect 'Tom! Controversy!!' thread and the perfect 'Balrog! Wings, or not?!' thread -- no! don't help! It's a quest, see? If I was to get 'deus ex machina' help, my higher self can't happen!
Nar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 07:32 PM   #10
Kalessin
Wight
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earthsea, or London
Posts: 175
Kalessin has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Nar, your interpretation of Tom Bombadil as a subtle vehicle for Illuvatar is very interesting and perceptive.

I agree that your interpretation perhaps goes beyond what we might expect from Tolkien, but I think you are onto something. Exciting stuff!

The section with Tom, along with the episode of the 'hooded figure' that appears to the three members of the fellowship the night before Gandalf returns, are very mysterious. I wonder if a more interventionist editor might have questioned Tolkien on their inclusion before publication, in which case we might have more clues from the author himself. The slightly Biblical allusion suggested by the hooded figure and Gandalf's resurrection, can perhaps be effectively rationalised IF one accepts your reading of Tom Bombadil.

Rather than an explicitly allegorical reference to Christianity (in either case), which is very unsatisfactory (cf. earlier debates here), we may in fact be witnessing a most oblique intervention by Illuvatar - in both cases. Clearly it is 'his will' that Gandalf returns from 'death', so the apparition may be a glimpse of hope or change of fortune to the fellowship, who are by then thoroughly demoralised. And, as I said, your reading of Tom Bombadil as a 'literal metaphor' - mysterious, somehow disinterested, and yet utterly Good and nourishing - is compelling. Indeed, Tom's rescue of the hobbits from the barrow-wights is in fact necessary in order for the defeat of the Nazgul at Pellenor.

There are contradictions - but even Tom's nostalgic references to "times past" can be read as an observer rather than participant. Though you could argue for him as one of the Valar ... the Eldest (Manwe) ?

Fascinating! Akin to a moment of epiphany, Nar, my compliments [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

Peace
Kalessin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 08:08 PM   #11
Naaramare
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fort St John
Posts: 196
Naaramare has just left Hobbiton.
Send a message via AIM to Naaramare
Tolkien

Tom Bombadil . . .ah, if he had no other purpose in the story but for the dear old Professor to put in something to amuse his niece/grandchild/daughter/something or other childlike and female (as I've heard a rumour), well, he's given fans something to argue about ad nauseum.

It will always be a tentative belief of mine that Ben-Adur was one of the lesser Ainur who wandered Middle Earth before Arda was really begun as a project by the Powers. However, as to why the ring had no effect on him, I have a much more concrete theory.

From my (and my father, who is my fellow Tolkien-lover in my household of sceptics and cynics) readings of the text, it seems to me as if Ea has two very seperate "worlds". One is that which Men inhabit, the solid and textured world around us, the world of rocks and humans . . .and hobbits. The other is the "world" (if that is quite the word I'm looking for) of the Ainur and other spirits, wherein they do not wear their "garment" of humanoid form.

The entire theory is quite caught up quantum mechanics (numbers sets! one great ring, three elven rings, five Istari, seven dwarf rings, nine man rings . . .any physics students out there? ^^), but suffice it to say that these worlds used to lie perfectly side by side, but are now slipping apart. Witness the changing of the shape of the world when Numenor founders, and the retreat of the elves.

Now, the elves (I believe) exist in both worlds. This is born out by a comment of Frodo's after the Fords of Bruinen, when he asks Gandalf who the shining figure was and Gandalf tells him it was Glorfindel "as he appears on the other side" (I may be slightly misquoting). As a side note, I was quite pleased that they had Arwen glowing and shining when she first appeared to Frodo.

The fact that they exist on both sides is why they must withdraw, but I digress.

Following this, I don't believe that elves, wizards or other beings that inhabit both worlds would become "invisible" when they put on the ring. Humans and hobbits become so because they have nothing of that other world in them. The One Ring serves to act as a channel for the wearer, for both worlds. For a human or a hobbit, it simply transports them *entirely* into the Other World.

It's obvious that the lesser rings would have granted Bilbo invisibility, or Gandalf would have figured his ring for the One Ring quite a bit earlier. Yet Galadriel and Elrond bore rings of power, and did not become invisible. As did Gandalf. And, for that matter, Saruman---and, of course, Sauron.

Yet the Nine Riders did and were only truly visible to those who could see that elusive "other side" of existance.

Thus, Bombadil does not become invisible because he is already very grounded in that other world. He can see it and act upon it as he is; he need not be dragged into it as a human or a hobbit must.

I can't quite decide whether the dwarves inhabit both worlds or not, though. ^~ I lean towards the idea that they do, as they are said to have a "place set apart for them in the halls of Mandos", but I'm not entirely sure.

The ring has no power over Bombadil for the same reason it has little over Sam: what would they want with it, anyway? What good would it do them?

My thoughts on the subject. I believe I've been coherant. If not, I'll return and clarify.

[ May 23, 2002: Message edited by: Naaramare ]
__________________
"I once spent two weeks in a tree trying to talk to a bird."
--Puck, Brother Mine

si man i yulma nin equantuva? [my blog]
Naaramare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 10:01 PM   #12
Evenstar1
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado (just east of the Misty Mts.)
Posts: 111
Evenstar1 has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

I've been away from the boards for a while (sinus infection -- better now!), and WOW! This has suddenly become an extremely interesting topic! Cool!

Lhun - I need to re-read The Hobbit, but I will look for the similarities the next time through! Thanks!

Nar & Kale - I DEFINITELY need to read the Sil (it's next on my list, after I finish the Tolkien biography I'm reading)! But your ideas are clear and I find them totally fascintating. (Though I don't know enough right now to be able to get into a discussion on that level.)

Naar - First of all, now that you bring out the "numbers" concept (1-3-5-9), I feel so stupid for not having noticed it before! Very astute! Secondly, I, too, am fascinated by the concept of the beings who live in "both sides" at once (as noted about Glorfindel, et al). Very interesting thought about that being the reason that the Ring had no invisibility-effect on TB -- b/c he was already "grounded" in the other side. But I disagree with you on your point that the reason the Ring had no effect on him was b/c he had no desire for it.

The concept of a Ring of Invisibility dates back at least as far as the philosopher Plato, who imagines the "Ring of Gyges," which makes its wearer invisible. This leads to a discussion of Justice: If a man came into possession of the Ring of Gyges, surely he would use it to obtain all the wealth and power that he could for himself. The argument back is that the Just Man would not do this. The counter-argument to this is that no man is that just. Indeed, in LOTR, Tolkien spends a huge amount of time telling us how the temptation of the One Ring is so difficult to refuse. He, himself, is re-stating Plato's case about human weakness and the veritable improbability of the existence of a person who could be so purely just as to be able to refuse a ring of power. (Not even Gandalf, or Galadriel, would trust themselves to be able to withstand the Ring's power!) Therefore, I do not believe that Bombadil was "above" the Ring's power for the "lack of desire" reason.

In LOTR, TB is referred-to as being "fatherless." This tells us that though he takes a manlike form, he cannot be a man. In fact, we learn that he is the "oldest of the old" (yeah, he and Fangorn). It is for this reason that I believe, rather, that he is able to withstand the temptation of the Ring's power: because he was an entity who was in existence before the Ring was created. Even though Sauron poured all of his own power into the Ring, and even though Sauron's "world" grew larger and stronger while Bombadil's was getting smaller, TB's "being" superceded that of the Ring, thus rendering it powerless over him.

Those are my thoughts, anyway... [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]
__________________
- Eve
Evenstar1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 10:18 PM   #13
Naaramare
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fort St John
Posts: 196
Naaramare has just left Hobbiton.
Send a message via AIM to Naaramare
Tolkien

Evenstar1--For the numerical set, I must give credit to my father. He's a physics and quantum mechanics nut with a strong side interest in Tolkien and he often drags me along for the ride.

Dad also wishes to impart that the rings+istari add to 25 and they are the numbers of the representations of a fiveXfive group and that five is the demensionality of the Kaluza-Klein equation. If anyone's interested in thinking about the theory. As well, the fewer rings/powers in the set, the more powerful the individual ring/power.

The Istari are thus *living* rings. Which makes Gandalf a double-ring.

As to Bombadil, what I meant was that, unless he happens to be Illuvatar Himself out for a bit of fun (another theory I like), his entire world and thought is focussed on his little strip of land. Within that place, within his boundaries, the ring is useless. Thus, he has no use for it and no reason to want it.

The same can be applied to Sam. Sam is a very elemental creature. He wants more than anything to go home to a well-ordered Shire where he can make a gorgeous garden and go on making sure Mr Frodo doesn't go wander off a cliff somewhere. The Ring has no use in the scenario he desires most; thus his desire for the Ring is not really overwhelming.

Hence the reason a hobbit, and not a dwarf, man/woman, elf or Istari could "safely" carry the Ring. They all had desires which the Ring could satisfy. Sam didn't. And from what I read of Bombadil, neither does he. That's not to say Sam/Bombadil is incorruptable, but the Ring just has nothing (really) to offer them.

But I digress. . . .I do that a lot.
__________________
"I once spent two weeks in a tree trying to talk to a bird."
--Puck, Brother Mine

si man i yulma nin equantuva? [my blog]
Naaramare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 10:36 PM   #14
Evenstar1
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Colorado (just east of the Misty Mts.)
Posts: 111
Evenstar1 has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Naar - first of all, your dad is waaay above my head! (Kaluza-Klein, huh? Well, physics was the one subject I failed in high school!) But I am still very intrigued by the numbers idea (though I am evidently quite beneath understanding it)! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

Secondly, I think I see where you're coming from now, with the desires of Sam and Tom Bombadil. In fact, the more I think about it, I think we're arguing kind of the same thing, but from different angles. (You see, the more I thought about what you were saying and about what I was saying, they both wound up in the same place in the end!)

P.S. I like digression! It's what makes the world go 'round! [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
__________________
- Eve
Evenstar1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2002, 10:46 PM   #15
Naaramare
Wight
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fort St John
Posts: 196
Naaramare has just left Hobbiton.
Send a message via AIM to Naaramare
Tolkien

Eve-- my father is way above my head. As I said, I get dragged along for the ride. Literally, in this case; he first explained this theory to me in the van whilst we were on our way to see the Movie (the nearest theater showing it was three hours away). The basics of it fascinate me enough to hold on through his explanations of the more esoteric stuff, however.

And I'm glad we agree. Hell, I'm glad I made sense . . . I have a tendancy not to. And yes, digression is fun. Some of the most interesting conversations I've ever had were big long digressions.
__________________
"I once spent two weeks in a tree trying to talk to a bird."
--Puck, Brother Mine

si man i yulma nin equantuva? [my blog]
Naaramare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2002, 08:13 AM   #16
Nar
Wight
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 228
Nar has just left Hobbiton.
Sting

Naar-- thank your father for his theory-- I remember just enough of my math major to know what fields & rings & ideals are in Algebra. I really enjoyed it. Maybe you & your father could write it up as an article for Barrowdowns-- I'd love to see it all laid out-- maybe then I could understand it! This is off-topic, but I collect fantasy/horror stories with mathematical themes. One is Frank Belnap Long's The Hounds of Tindalos, in which the biblical temtation & fall is reimagined as a sin against geometry-- yep, biting into that apple wasn't about sex or lust for knowledge, it was a sin because a perfect sphere was violated with (evil!) angles Quote: 'man, the pure part of him, is descended from a curve!' The hero tries to escape the embodied angles (the hounds) by plastering his room into the interior of a sphere. That is the nuttiest pulp fantasy/horror story I know. Although the mathematics is incoherent, Long's heart's in the right place.
Nar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2002, 10:28 AM   #17
Perelin_Took
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Silmaril

WOW! THAT LAST PERSON WROTE A LOT! SO I DIDN'T READ IT. TOO LONG FOR ME. WELL, I DONT KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT! IM JUST A MISIMFORMED..........WOW.....BIG WORD......
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.