
Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil - Jun8
http://km-515.livejournal.com/1042.html
======
Jun8
I seem to be in the small minority but I always found Tom Bombadil to be one
of the most curious characters in the LoTR, it's a pity he's usually edited
out in adaptations. And he's no transient character either, Tolkien later
wrote poems about him and he's also mentioned in _The Return of the King_.

I don't quite buy the explanation given in this post, although it was an
interesting read. I think Bombadil is beyond good and evil, he just _is_. From
[http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/1586/who-or-what-
wa...](http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/1586/who-or-what-was-tom-
bombadil):

"And even in a mythical Age there must be some enigmas, as there always are.
Tom Bombadil is one (intentionally)."

The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, No 144, dated 1954

~~~
dekhn
Agreed 100%. He's an aspect of nature in physical form, with all the danger
and ambiguity that nature brings.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
He is _underneath_ nature, primal and original. The ring was nothing to him;
it changed things in such a trivial way, to his understanding, as to be
irrelevant.

------
thenomad
This is a _wonderful_ reinterpretation of the existing "facts" in Middle-
Earth, and I'm very glad that it's trending on Hacker News some time _after_ I
used it in an RPG, to great effect.

There are rather a lot of hidden depths one can mine out of Middle-Earth,
often in directions its creator would probably not have approved of.

Along similar lines, for example, if you cross-reference the location of _Nan
Dungortheb_ , the Valley of Dreadful Death which is the last known location of
Ungoliant, with the Third-Age map of Middle Earth, you discover that it's just
a short way off the coast of the Western edge of Middle-Earth, more or less in
a direct line between the Grey Havens and Valinor.

Which does present an alternative, less happy hypothesis about what happens to
all the elves after they set sail for the Western Shore, and in turn begs the
question of why exactly they're being compelled to do so...

~~~
the8472
> more or less in a direct line between the Grey Havens and Valinor.

Elven ships go in a straight line while the sea follows the curvature of Arda.

------
qap
There is one major, major problem with this interpretation. He states over and
over again that no hobbit has ever seen Tom Bombadil. But that's not true. At
least one other hobbit has been described as knowing Bombadil--that is Farmer
Maggot (the one Frodo used to steal mushrooms from). Let me quote from the
story: "[Bombadil] made no secret that he owed his recent knowledge largely to
Farmer Maggot, whom he seemed to regard as a person of more importance than
they had imagined. 'There's earth under his old feet, and clay on his finger;
wisdom in his bones, and both his eyses are open'" said Tom.

Later, it is mentioned that Bombadil already had messages from Gildor that
Frodo & co were going through the forest.

I think the reason that Bombadil his hardly ever mentioned is the taboo which
Hobbits have of going on adventures. If they talked about their adventures in
the forest, meeting with magical folk like Bombadil, they would lose
respectability.

~~~
anp
This is addressed in the article:

"Now, in his conversation with Frodo, Bombadil implies (but avoids directly
stating) that he had heard of their coming from Farmer Maggot and from
Gildor’s elves (both of whom Frodo had recently described). But that also
makes no sense. Maggot lives west of the Brandywine, remained there when Frodo
left, and never even knew that Frodo would be leaving the Shire. And if Elrond
knows nothing of Bombadil, how can he be a friend of Gildor’s?

What do we know about Tom Bombadil? He lies."

The only word we have is Bombadil's. Not that I buy this interpretation, but
your complaint is addressed there.

~~~
rossdavidh
But, the Hobbits did have rhymes about Tom Bombadil, so someone among the
Hobbits knew about him. Not that it really detracts from the article, he was
just having a bit of fun.

------
jfmercer
"What do we know about Tom Bombadil? He lies."

The author fundamentally misunderstands Tom Bombadil, both in terms of where
he fits (or doesn't) into Tolkien's mythology, and in terms of Tom's
_literary_ purpose.

Tolkien _deliberately_ made Tom an enigma: "And even in a mythical Age there
must be some enigmas, as there always are. Tom Bombadil is one
(intentionally)" ( _The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien_ , No 144, dated 1954).

The following are three suggested articles that are far more intelligent,
subtle, well-researched, and balanced in comparison to km-515's rant.

Mark Fischer, _The Riddle of Tom Bombadil_ :
[http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/t/tombombadil.html](http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/t/tombombadil.html)

Steuard Jensen, _What is Tom Bombadil?_ :
[http://tolkien.slimy.com/essays/Bombadil.html](http://tolkien.slimy.com/essays/Bombadil.html)

Gene Hargrove, _Who is Tom Bombadil?_ :
[http://www.cas.unt.edu/~hargrove/bombadil.html](http://www.cas.unt.edu/~hargrove/bombadil.html)

~~~
anp
I get the impression that this is a _purposeful_ misunderstanding, mostly for
kicks and giggles. Maybe I'm wrong? But it certainly seemed tongue in cheek to
me, aimed at bringing a fresh perspective to a work that's already been picked
over a billion times by fans.

~~~
johnchristopher
That might because the author wrote that:

> Do I think that Tolkien planned things in this way? Not at all, but I find
> it an interesting speculation.

> To speculate further and more wildly:

------
fideloper
Part of me loves speculation like this, but the other part of me wonders if
the speculators are aware that Tolkien (and authors in general) is/are "just
another imperfect human".

Did Tolkien think of any of this? It's his world. Speculators creating their
own fantasy around it aren't really speculating, but making up their own
version.

It's like the "nerd at star trek convention" finding plot holes. The reality
is a staff room filled with writers working under deadlines and restrictions.
However there seem to be people who want/need (and speculate) that every
possible detail can/should be nailed down into something that makes absolute
sense.

Maybe someone just wasn't very creative one day, or wanted to move onto a
bigger plot point.

Anyway, this is just one dude's (me) point of view, maybe the speculators are
more imaginative and better at life, and I'm just a cynical old man.

------
bitwize
This is the "Squall is dead" of LotR fan theories. Tom Bombadil exists outside
of the struggles for control Middle-earth because he, like the world, is far
older and more inscrutable than any of the persons or races contending in
those struggles.

Alternatively he is the spirit of "Just repeat to yourself it's just a story,
I should really just relax".

------
agentultra
I thought Tom Bombadil was one of the more interesting characters and was
disappointed with his absence in the movie adaptations as he always seemed
central to the theme; the spirit of a disappearing time and age.

But then again blockbuster movies rarely have time for such symbolic
exposition.

If you like Tom as a character, you might like the book all about him:
[http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Tom-Bombadil-J-Tolkien-
eboo...](http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Tom-Bombadil-J-Tolkien-
ebook/dp/B00KA104ZA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1438379388&sr=8-1&keywords=tom+bombadil)

It's quite amusing.

------
mcphage
Is he that unpopular? Me and most of my friends like him, and we're
disappointed that he got left out of the movies.

~~~
jfmercer
The author of the article, km-515, is the first person I've _ever_ heard of
who does _not_ like Tom Bombadil.

~~~
Macha
For a competing anecdote, most of my friends who've read the books say they
ended up skimming most of the Bombadil section and found it quite boring.

I suspect Bombadil is disproportionately popular among the people who like to
critique what they read compared to the general public.

~~~
scopecreep
For me it wasn't so much him as all of the songs IIRC. Once I started just
skimming the songs/poetry he became much less annoying (I'm horrible at
deciphering meter and it just trips me up). The first words out of my mouth
upon seeing the first film was "they left out Bombadil".

Had been looking forward to hearing one of those songs.

------
hyperion2010
Bombadil is possibly my favorite enigma in all of Tolkien's work. You can dig
all you want, but there is nothing, no lore. My own interpretation is that he
is not part of the music of the children, but somehow an incarnation of the
natural world that was created along side it. Tolkien focuses very much on how
the music determines course of the history of middle earth, but Tom seems to
be a kind of reminder that nature doesn't really care about us and will
continue long after we are gone (unless we destroy it, but Tolkien's
experience of the 20th century made human destruction of nature of secondary
concern behind our destruction of our fellow man). Of course, the liar
interpretation is always possible, but seems to undermine the importance of
what the character represents.

------
_pmf_
I've always dreamed of a movie featuring Samuel L. Jackson as Tom Bombadil.

~~~
D-Coder
"Elvish, motherfucker! Do you speak it?"

------
dmead
are the entwives the trees that are under his control? is that what happened
to them?

------
ErikRogneby
Wow, live journal is still out there. I am impressed.

------
intrasight
Very much enjoyed that analysis. Shows there is still much to contemplate in
LoTR.

~~~
danharaj
If you can get a hold of it, I absolutely love Ursula K. Le Guin's writing
about Lord of the Rings in The Wave in the Mind, one of her nonfiction
collections. Lord of the Rings has true depth and longevity.

------
pmalynin
My friends and I always considered Tom Bombadil to be Tolkien's interpretation
of the Christian God, as he was a Christian himself it isn't that far fetched.

~~~
gitpusher
I agree that Melkor's narrative is essentially the same as Lucifer's: God
created the world, and fathered a quantity of powerful and benevolent beings
to watch over it... until one of them goes rogue, eventually becoming their
Evil counterpart. But if Tom Bombadil pre-dates even the Valar, then he
doesn't really fit into that Biblical narrative. He's definitely not "God".
There already is a God (Eru/Iluvatar), and he's utterly absent from world
affairs after the Creation.

We all "know" that Lucifer was an angel who disagreed with God (or some such),
who then banished him from Heaven... But do we really know that? The Bible
doesn't actually say much on the topic. All we know is that he was once in
Heaven, and was cast out. We don't know if Lucifer was born there (as opposed
to merely visiting) or if he was even an angel at all!

Most of us believe the Serpent and Satan to be one and the same... but the
Bible never says this. It's entirely possible that they are two separate
entities, with different explanations. If Melkor is the Serpent (who corrupted
the Elves), then perhaps Bombadil is the _real_ original evil. Possibly even
the one who corrupted Melkor in the first place?

The Bible, much like Tolkein's mythos, has many inconsistencies + leaves a TON
to speculation. That's half the fun (if not most of it) :-P

------
a3voices
I'm just happy that other people are as fascinated by Tom Bombadil as I've
always been.

