|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a.s.
Doriath
Dec 4 2007, 12:18pm
Post #1 of 13
(2408 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Chapter 7: In the House of Tom B--Tom
|
Can't Post
|
|
Soon after Goldberry announces that the hobbits have nothing to fear in the House of Tom Bombadil, Goldberry asks them to sit and "wait for the Master of the house". They sit in delight in low, rush-seated chairs and watch Goldberry busy herself about the table. Then Frodo speaks up and asks:
"Tell me, if my asking does not seem foolish, who is Tom Bombadil?"
1) Why does Frodo preface his question this way, with the thought that his question might seem foolish?
"‘He is,’ said Goldberry, staying her swift movements and smiling. Frodo looked at her questioningly. ‘He is, as you have seen him,’ she said in answer to his look. ‘He is the Master of wood, water, and hill.’
‘Then all this strange land belongs to him?’
‘No indeed!’ she answered, and her smile faded. ‘That would indeed be a burden,’ she added in a low voice, as if to herself. ‘The trees and the grasses and all things growing or living in the land belong each to themselves. Tom Bombadil is the Master. No one has ever caught old Tom walking in the forest, wading in the water, leaping on the hill-tops under light and shadow. He has no fear. Tom Bombadil is master.’"
2) Four times on one page now Goldberry has referred to Tom as "Master": three times in capital letters and once in lower-case. Why does she use this word, to describe Tom? What's the significance of "The Master" and "master"?
"A door opened and in came Tom Bombadil. He had now no hat and his thick brown hair was crowned with autumn leaves"
3) Tom now wears a crown, and it's made of autumn leaves. Why has Tom lost his hat and why is he wearing a crown of leaves?
The hobbits find themselves seated at table with Goldberry and Tom, enjoying a hearty if simple meal; and while they ate "as only famished hobbits can eat" "there was no lack". The clear water they are given to drink "went to their hearts like wine and set free their voices". Soon they were singing "as if it were easier and more natural than talking". [my emphasis/a.s.]
After supper, Frodo sleepily asks Tom if Tom had heard Frodo calling him, and Tom replies: "Did I hear you calling? Nay, I did not hear. I was busy singing".
4) Why is singing so important to Tom? Why is singing natural in the House of Tom Bombadil?
5) Is the meal magic? Is there magic going on in the House of Tom Bombadil?
Finally, let's get to the heart of the great mystery: who (or what...or, as I like to say, HOW) is Tom Bombadil? There are many speculations about this. Some say Tom is a Maia. Some say he is Eru manifested in ME. Some say he is a Nature god of some kind, a "local deity". There is even one fascinating (if perhaps a little tongue-in-cheek) theory that Tom is Dark Matter:
So, if this is true, it means that Tom existed from the Universe's early days. In this case, it becomes clear what Bombadil is. There is only one good explanation: Tom Bombadil is the Dark Matter making up 90% of the mass of the Universe.
Goldberry tells the hobbits that Tom "is". Tom himself tries to explain who he is to Frodo:
"‘Who are you, Master?’ he asked.
‘Eh, what?’ said Tom sitting up, and his eyes glinting in the gloom. ‘Don’t you know my name yet? That’s the only answer. Tell me, who are you, alone, yourself and nameless? But you are young and I am old. Eldest, that’s what I am. Mark my words, my friends: Tom was here before the river and the trees; Tom remembers the first raindrop and the first acorn. He made paths before the Big People, and saw the little People arriving. He was here before the Kings and the graves and the Barrow-wights. When the Elves passed westward, Tom was here already, before the seas were bent. He knew the dark under the stars when it was fearless - before the Dark Lord came from Outside.’"
6) Why does Tom say his name is "the only answer"? Who is Tom Bombadil?
Many seem to agree with Tolkien's statement that Tom is an enigma:
"As a story, I think it is good that there should be a lot of things unexplained (especially if an explanation actually exists);...And even in a mythical Age there must be some enigmas, as there always are. Tom Bombadil is one (intentionally)". (letter 144)
See here , here , and here, for examples of these kinds of discussions.
Much earlier, though, before writing the LOTR, Tolkien refers to Tom as "the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside".
7) Tolkien says that in a story there should be lots of things unexplained "especially if an explanation actually exists"; then he goes on to call Tom an "intentional enigma". He included him in LOTR both because he had already invented him (letter 153) and in order to include an intentional enigma. So...why are we still speculating about Tom B?
Next: songs, dreams, visions in the House of Tom Bombadil
a.s.
"an seileachan"
Forgiveness means giving up all hope of a better past.
~~~Landrum Bolling
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Dec 4 2007, 5:26pm
Post #2 of 13
(2043 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The problem with Bombadil is not his identity.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
There are many myterious beings in LotR, including Goldberry, for example, and her river mother, or the river Bruinen, or Caradhras, or the Balrog, or Treebeard, or the Mouth of Sauron. Some are explained in the Appendices or The Silmarillion, and some are not.
Bombadil keeps coming up because he is so flamboyantly magical, toying with the Ring, instantly appearing when a rhyme is sung, banishing the Wight; Master, as Goldberry calls him, without fear. This is very different even from Gandalf, who often expresses his fear.
"Tell me, if my asking does not seem foolish, who is Tom Bombadil?"
1) Why does Frodo preface his question this way, with the thought that his question might seem foolish?
In his letters Tolkien says that Frodo asked the wrong question -- he should have asked "What is Tom Bombadil?" But that hardly justifies Goldberry's deliberately mysterious answer. Tolkien did not want to explain, and so he has Frodo ask the wrong question, and Goldberry and Bombadil give mysterious answers. He also makes Frodo shy and hesitant to ask any questions, so that he does not cross examine Goldberry or Tom when they give him deliberately mysterious answers.
2) Four times on one page now Goldberry has referred to Tom as "Master": three times in capital letters and once in lower-case. Why does she use this word, to describe Tom? What's the significance of "The Master" and "master"?
Apparently Tom is the Master because no one can master him, not because he masters others. He "is the Master" (capitalized) because he "is master "(not capitalized). As I said, deliberately mysterious.
"A door opened and in came Tom Bombadil. He had now no hat and his thick brown hair was crowned with autumn leaves"
3) Tom now wears a crown, and it's made of autumn leaves. Why has Tom lost his hat and why is he wearing a crown of leaves?
Actually it doesn't say he is wearing a crown, it says his hair is crowned, which might just mean that falling leaves got caught in his hair. This is similar to the throne imagery used for Goldberry in her chair. Tolkien is being deliberately ambiguous, implying a lofty status for Goldberry and Tom, as if they are queen and king of something, but also offering the possibility that they were just sitting in chairs and had leaves in their hair.
4) Why is singing so important to Tom? Why is singing natural in the House of Tom Bombadil?
Tolkien liked singing. I'm not sure there is any other reason. But the singing of Bombadil is much more like the hobbit songs we have heard than it is like the songs of the elves or the Rohirrim or the Eagle or the bard who sings about Frodo and Sam. There is something hobbity about Bombadil, except for the whole "Master" business. He's like the local god or guardian angel of hobbits.
5) Is the meal magic? Is there magic going on in the House of Tom Bombadil?
There is certainly magic going on in the House of Bombadil, but, as in Lothlorien, it is all around but hard to point to. Note my favorite piece of magic, Bombadil using his hand as an umbrella by waving off the rain.
6) Why does Tom say his name is "the only answer"? Who is Tom Bombadil? Tom's name is the only answer to "Who are you?" As Tolkien says in his letters, Frodo should have asked "What are you?" The answer, I think, is a Maia or similar immortal spirit. At least that is the only answer that fits into the mythos of The Silmarillion. But of course Bombadil isn't really a part of that mythos, so maybe there is no answer.
7) Tolkien says that in a story there should be lots of things unexplained "especially if an explanation actually exists"; then he goes on to call Tom an "intentional enigma". He included him in LOTR both because he had already invented him (letter 153) and in order to include an intentional enigma. So...why are we still speculating about Tom B?
I'm not sure if a good explanation exists for Bombadil. At the Council of Elrond Gandalf did his best to remedy the situation, saying that Bombadil had no power over the Ring and that he was an untrustworth guardian. But that strikes me as damage control after Bombadil has already been portrayed as the one creature in Middle-earth who has nothing to fear from the Ring. Bombadil is an anomaly, not because he is immortal or magical but because he is so flamboyant about it, and so fearless. Even in a world of wizards and elves, he stands out, causing some to wonder if he is God. Tolkien says no, he is not God, but it is a sign of Bombadil's anomalous nature that readers would even ask if he might be God.
Personally, I think Tolkien wishes he were Bombadil, and insisted on inserting him into the story because he liked him so much. I think he is a sort of Mary Sue character, if an author can be guilty of inserting a Mary Sue character into his own story. Bombadil is about Tolkien's wish fulfillment. Fortunately, Bombadil is only in the story for three chapters, and even there he really doesn't do much except rescue the hobbits. He takes the place of Gandalf in The Hobbit, appearing to save the hobbits when they have gotten into trouble, and then bows out of the story.
I like Bombadil, and I wish Tolkien had exercised more restraint with Bombadil. Tolkien wouldn't have had to change the essential character at all; he just could have made Bombadil's powers more subtle and ambiguous, as he does with Gandalf or Elrond or Galadriel or Arwen, or even Goldberry.
(This post was edited by Curious on Dec 4 2007, 5:28pm)
|
|
|
weaver
Gondolin
Dec 4 2007, 6:48pm
Post #3 of 13
(1874 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Tell me, who are you, alone, yourself and nameless?"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"Tell me, who are you, alone, yourself and nameless?"
That's my favorite line of the whole passage in which Tom tries to explain who he is to the hobbits. It has a great "on-the-edge-of-Faerie" kind of feel to me, and I like how Tom turns the tables on Frodo, by asking him who "he" as part of his answer.
And of course naming things is big in Tolkien so talking about "knowing my name" and "being nameless" has a lot of layers to it.
Weaver
|
|
|
Celeborn
Registered User
Dec 5 2007, 12:49am
Post #4 of 13
(1884 views)
Shortcut
|
I think that Tom is not explainable by any type of character known in Tolkien's world. I like Tom, I like the message, and I like the foreshadowing to the end; however, I think that he belongs to the spirit of Book I and II. By the time the reader gets to books IV and V, I think he appears (in retrospect) as somewhat dissonant with the story. His character is now dissonant because it is perhaps too far removed from the internal logic of the book ; however, I don't think (and I think Tolkien said this?) that the discussion of who or what Tom is improves the point of his appearance or the story.
In a way, Tom is the anti-story. He shows an entirely different way to live which is good, and bad. He doesn't seem to desire power which is good. But he doesn't seem to care enough to remember others or the trouble of the world... which is bad.
He doesn't share the relative characteristics of other Maiar or appear in the Sil. He has boundries so he isn't much of a nature spirit. He is too ridiculous to be an elf, man, hobbit, or dwarf. From a literary perspective, I think Tom should have been altered or left out; but I'm glad he's in. :)
Does anyone have the link to the 2004 discussion on this chapter. I'm dying to know what I wrote! :)
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Gondolin
Dec 5 2007, 5:16am
Post #6 of 13
(1854 views)
Shortcut
|
For the Reading Room's second discussion of The Lord of the Rings, check hatster's archive. The "In the House of Tom Bombadil" discussion was led by Lottelita in about 20 threads, Oct. 14-18, 2002 (her first two posts were titled, "I love this chapter!" and "I hate this chapter!"). The boards were incredibly busy then: there were also some side-discussions posted by Ataahua, Inferno, and Curious, and later some long follow-up posts by Curious (one of which was highly contentious) and then a mini-series by NZ Strider that he titled the "Bombadillion".
The first discussion of this chapter, c. 2000, can be found by checking the lasselanta archive. That week was led by Aelric and seems to be the oldest Reading Room material that has been preserved (or was that pre-RR, when the discussion was still on Main? Paging Kimi!)
However, I recommend not looking back at any of the previous discussions off this chapter until the week is over, so that you're not influenced by earlier responses.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Nov. 26-Dec. 2 for "The Old Forest".
|
|
|
Kimi
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Dec 5 2007, 5:25am
Post #7 of 13
(1862 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm fairly sure we were in our shiny new Reading Room by then. IIRC, only the very first chapter discussions were on Main, as it soon became obvious that they would be overwhelmed there. I don't think any of the discussions on Main made it into the Lasselanta archive.
The discussion for this particular chapter can be found here.
  
Promises to Keep: a novel set in 19th Century New Zealand.
The Passing of Mistress Rose
Do we find happiness so often that we should turn it off the box when it happens to sit there?
- A Room With a View
|
|
|
Celeborn
Registered User
Dec 5 2007, 4:45pm
Post #8 of 13
(1833 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I've got it, don't worry about the past discussions!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
GaladrielTX
Dor-Lomin
Dec 6 2007, 1:39am
Post #9 of 13
(1814 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks for the link. I was surprised I posted as much as I did. I incorrectly remembered myself as being more of a lurker.
~~~~~~~~
Formerly known as GaladrielTX
|
|
|
SilentLion
Ossiriand
Dec 8 2007, 8:25pm
Post #10 of 13
(1841 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thinking about about Tom Bombadil
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I haven't had much chance to participate in this week's discussion for a couple of reasons. the end of semesters are always insanely busy, and also i've always been baffled by the Bombadil chapters. But I've followed and enjoyed the discussion as usual. I'll weigh in a little bit on the who is Bombadil question.
First, I think he's clearly one of the Ainur. His approach to accomplishing things and solving problems through song is an echo of the great music. Really cool magic happens through music, like the creation of the two trees or the encounter between Luthien and wolf-Sauron. Latter day magic accomplished through incantations is a pale imitation of the real thing which Bombadil practices.
But I don't think Bombadil was just one of the crowd of competing choirs at the Great Music. His songs are silly little ditties, that I imagine serving as brief countermelodies among the competing great themes of music, the way a classical composer might incorporate a few bars of a folk melody for a moment of comic relief in a larger, more serious work. I envision Tom's little tunes as a source of amusement to Illuvatar, and annoyance to Melkor.
Like many other of the Ainur that came into Arda, Tom chose to adorn himself in the likeness of the Children of Eru, but unlike the others we know of, he didn't choose a form of great nobility - a king or hunter or a warrior. In fact, Tom's form resembles most Hobbits more than any of the other Children of Illuvatar. He's short (though taller than hobbits), dresses in bright clothes, loves silly music and good food, and goes about his business merrily unaware of the outside world. It's probably not an accident that he ended up in right next door to the Shire. He's not explicitly there as the Hobbit's protector, but he is a friend to some hobbits, and his presence in the Old Forest does provide the Shire with some degree of protection.
Even though Tom is one of the Ainur, I don't know if he falls into the classification of "Valar" (like Manwe, Varda or Morgoth) or a "Maia" (like Gandalf, Saruman, Sauron or the Balrogs). I think he was more of a one-of-a-kind sort of spirit. For example, Ungoliant was a spirit that came into Arda from outside, that fell outside the classification and hierarchy. Her single-minded lust to posess and devour light and life enabled her to overcome the Valar on a particular day and situation where she had element of surprise, and for a brief time, she was also able to overpower Morgoth. She certainly wasn't more powerful than any of the Valar on an absolute scale, but in the right time, place, and situation, she prevailed.
Tom is sort of an anti-Ungoliant. He loves Arda and the living things on it for what it is, though he explicitly rejects wanting to possess any of it for himself. I don't see any logical inconsistency with the idea that in a particular situation - in his own house - the Ring has absolutely no power over him, even if on an absolute scale, Sauron is much more powerful.
Usually, I sort of ignore the Tom Bombabil chapters, as a silly diversion from the more important storyline that Tolkien loved too much to edit out, but this time through, I'm thinking that they do serve a purpose. Even in the context of the epic battle between good and evil, Tolkien is saying that there is more. During the seige of Minas Tirith later one, Tolkien conspiciously inserts a rooster crowing that cares nothing of wars or good or evil. Tom is a lot like that rooster. He's good, but he's not a part of the battle of good and evil that Gandalf and Sauron are leading. Old man Willow is evil, but it's not clear that he's a part of the that battle either. He exists for an entirely different purpose and moves in an entirely different world, that maybe once in awhile comes into contact with hobbits and Gandalf.
|
|
|
Curious
Gondolin
Dec 9 2007, 2:01pm
Post #11 of 13
(1819 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tom as the anti-Ungoliant, and Tom as the rooster -- I like both those thoughts!/
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Gondolin
Dec 11 2007, 5:22am
Post #12 of 13
(1808 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"There is something hobbity about Bombadil, except for the whole 'Master' business."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
However, we have recently learned of the "Master" of Buckland. And before that we were told that Frodo found it pleasant to be "his own master". And Sam and Gollum will both call Frodo "Master".
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Dec. 3-9 for "In the House of Tom Bombadil".
|
|
|
|
|
