This is the only hint we get of its effect on Bombadil:
"‘Show me the precious Ring!’ he said suddenly in the midst of the story: and Frodo, to his own astonishment, drew out the chain from his pocket, and unfastening the Ring handed it at once to Tom.
It seemed to grow larger as it lay for a moment on his big brown-skinned hand. Then suddenly he put it to his eye and laughed. For a second the hobbits had a vision, both comical and alarming, of his bright blue eye gleaming through a circle of gold. Then Tom put the Ring round the end of his little finger and held it up to the candlelight. For a moment the hobbits noticed nothing strange about this. Then they gasped. There was no sign of Tom disappearing!
Tom laughed again, and then he spun the Ring in the air - and it vanished with a flash. Frodo gave a cry - and Tom leaned forward and handed it back to him with a smile."
later…
"[Frodo] waited for an opportunity, when the talk was going again, and Tom was telling an absurd story about badgers and their queer ways - then he slipped the Ring on.
Merry turned towards him to say something and gave a start, and checked an exclamation. Frodo was delighted (in a way): it was his own ring all right, for Merry was staring blankly at his chair, and obviously could not see him. He got up and crept quietly away from the fireside towards the outer door.
‘Hey there!’ cried Tom, glancing towards him with a most seeing look in his shining eyes. 'Hey! Come Frodo, there! Where be you a-going? Old Tom Bombadil’s not as blind as that yet. Take off your golden ring! Your hand’s more fair without it."
Tolkien on Bombadil and the Ring:
"Tom Bombadil is not an important person – to the narrative. I suppose he has some importance as a ‘comment’. I mean, I do not really write like that: he is just an invention, and he represents something that I feel important, though I would not be prepared to analyze the feeling precisely. I would not, however, have left him in, if he did not have some kind of function.
The story is cast in terms of a good side, and a bad side, beauty against ruthless ugliness, tyranny against kingship, moderated freedom with consent against compulsion that has long lost any object save mere power, and so on; but both sides in some degree, conservative or destructive, want a measure of control.
But if you have, as it were taken ‘a vow of poverty’, renounced control, and take your delight in things for themselves without reference to yourself, watching, observing, and to some extent knowing, then the question of the rights and wrongs of power and control might become utterly meaningless to you, and the means of power quite valueless. It is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there is a war."
I mean, we’re kind of getting into the weeds here – to the extent that “magic” means “can do anything” – but for all I know, the ring just mindlessly pumps out a signal that lowers the inhibitions and amplifies the cravings of the current wearer, and maybe even occasionally acts as a hallucinogen (bearing in mind that, here in the real world, there of course are hallucinogens that are just unthinking chemicals, just like addictive substances can be unthinking chemicals too).
Just to switch universes for a moment, IIRC the X-Men once had an up-and-coming member who could hit folks with a “now see the illusion of your greatest fear” power; and until that illusion appeared, even she didn’t know what was going to pop up: the idea is, she just switches her power ‘on’, and then it just triggers the key part of someone’s brain without her reading the guy’s mind or whatever.
I know that someone or other says that about Bombadil – but what always has me scratching my head, is what Bombadil actually does, on his own initiative:
It’s just a jumps-out-at-me point I keep coming back to, is all.
The chemical in ergot poisoning makes people see blood dripping down the walls. The chemical certainly doesn’t have “blood dripping down the walls” coded in its molecules; that’s just how the human brain reacts to it.
The X-Men analogy is a very good one: the Ring could very easily work in a similar way, having the effect of prodding at “weak spots” without knowing what they are…or even what a “weak spot” itself is.
I will say with Bombadil it is at stated by Gandalf, who seems to have some familiarity with him. Bombadil in the book seems to think of the Ring as a joke, a cute novelty; he seems to know a lot about Middle Earth’s history, but does not grasp (or care to grasp) the grave danger of the Ring; it is to him naught but a harmless, amusing trinket - That can be shown by the way he acts when he puts the ring on. He has no real interest in it other than as a curiosity. Which does go along with what Gandalf says about him. He would not understand, even if asked by all the free peoples of the world to guard the ring, why this would be important. Rings, wraiths, Sauron - they are just passing, not very relevant, fancies to be a being as old as he. And if you take the author’s word as “gospel”, this is what Tolkien had to say:
“He is master in a peculiar way: he has no fear, and no desire of possession or domination at all. He merely knows and understands about such things as concern him in his natural little realm. [He represents] the spirit that desires knowledge of other things, their history and nature… and entirely unconcerned with ‘doing’ anything with the knowledge…”
Basically, Tom does not care enough about these things. He saves the Hobbits because he views it is right, not because he views it as being of any particular importance; he does also not kill Old Man Willow, even though Old Man Willow is evil. He is an isolationist; he does not concern himself with the wider world overall. He will be kind and patient with those who came into his little domain, though.
He also notes, though, that Tom’s ineffectiveness is only in the view of Rivendell. Thing is, he put Bombadil in the story as a mystery only he would understand.
The way I see it is to think of the Ring as a nuclear weapon. The only good thing for all peoples would be for it to be destroyed - because as long as it exists, someone will be tempted to use it. Bombadil would not be tempted to use it, but he would also be ineffective in guarding it because he wouldn’t see why it is important. He is the ultimate isolationist. He understands the conflicts going on in his world, beyond his borders, but he cares nothing for them; they do not concern him; he has no dog in the race, nor any interest in having any. He looks at the ring the way one would an amusing trinket. He would not understand the ring’s gravity or its value, out of a lack of caring to do so.
Imagine Bombadil’s attitude as a sort of living Lend-Lease policy: “We are not against Hitler, nor are we in favor of Hitler, nor are we at war with him, but here, take these weapons from us.”
On Bombadil, by Tolkien:
“I don’t think Tom needs philosophizing about, and is not improved by it. But many have found him an odd or indeed discordant ingredient. In historical fact I put him in because I had already ‘invented’ him independently (he first appeared in the Oxford Magazine) and wanted an ‘adventure’ on the way. But I kept him in, and as he was, because he represents certain things otherwise left out. I do not mean him to be an allegory – or I should not have given him so particular, individual, and ridiculous a name – but ‘allegory’ is the only mode of exhibiting certain functions: he is then an ‘allegory’, or an exemplar, a particular embodying of pure (real) natural science: the spirit that desires knowledge of other things, their history and nature, because they are ‘other’ and wholly independent of the enquiring mind, a spirit coeval with the rational mind, and entirely unconcerned with ‘doing’ anything with the knowledge: Zoology and Botany not Cattle-breeding or Agriculture. Even the Elves hardly show this: they are primarily artists. Also T.B. exhibits another point in his attitude to the Ring, and its failure to affect him. You must concentrate on some part, probably relatively small, of the World (Universe), whether to tell a tale, however long, or to learn anything however fundamental – and therefore much will from that ‘point of view’ be left out, distorted on the circumference, or seem a discordant oddity. The power of the Ring over all concerned, even the Wizards or Emissaries, is not a delusion – but it is not the whole picture, even of the then state and content of that part of the Universe.”
I would not go as far as to say the ring is wholly without sentience.
The ring is a good part of Sauron after all.
It may lack a great degree of intelligence, but then that is not what Sauron put of himsef
into the ring. Not that Sauron created it with the intent in mind that it would be a self returning ring of course.
But the ring is part of him, it does want to return to the rest of itself.
It isnt intelligent enough to selectively pick it’s hosts, it just calls out to whom ever will hear its voice. If it was smart, it would have never chosen Smeagol.
Smeagol is too enamoured with the ring itself, just to have it, he doesn’t care much for its power beyond getting something to eat, at least not in the way Sauron needs.
The ring needs a host who would either think to side with Sauron, thinking they would be his partner, or someone who would attempt to use it to confront Sauron at which point it would turn on them.
Either way, it comes to Sauron and he becomes whole again and can retake physical form and regain his full power.
Had that had happened, the blade that was broken would be shoved up a not yet kings arse.
Of course, “The Hobbit” was published in 1937, and “Lord of the Rings” in 1954, and Tolkien himself said that when he was plotting “Lord of the Ring”, he decided that he would use Bilbo’s ring as the magic object. So,
(1), Yes, you may admit some influence from WWII. Although he laughed at the idea that any survivor of WWI would need WWII as inspiration, we can admit the influence of the atom bomb as an example of WMD while he was finishing the books.
(2) Yes, the back story can be forced to fit the sequels. But it wasn’t written that way. Legends don’t have to be entirely consistent, and the Hobbit was a childrens book with a magic ring that made you invisible.
Heh. You know, when you put it like that . . . Smeagol had the ring for hundreds of years; but that’s okay, because he “doesn’t care much for its power beyond getting something to eat.” And then it wound up with Bilbo Baggins for decades; but that’s okay, too, because he’s a low-key homebody who’ll freely give it up after being fairly unambitious for the better part of a century. And, as someone noted upthread, Sam wore it for a while; but that’s okay, because he knew in his heart that the one small garden of a free gardener was all his need and due. And as I noted upthread, it was okay when Tom Bombadil put it on; because, well, he already has everything that he wants, and so the ring tempts him into playing the conqueror’s game even less than it does the guys who each spent decades shrugging at the possibilities.
It’s almost as if the ring is just, uh, not really all that tempting?
To hobbits and nature constructs, sure. But it sure was quite tempting to everyone else. Corrupted Boromir pretty quickly. Corrupted earlier owners pretty badly, too.
But that’s just it: Gandalf assumes it’ll lead him into a spiral of addiction or whatever, and so never puts it on, right? Just like how Galadriel assumes it’ll lead her into said spiral of addiction, and so never puts it on either? And so we never actually get to see what would happen if either of them did put it on, just like we never actually get to see what would happen if Boromir put it on? And as for earlier owners, that’s, what, Isildur? Who, yes, sure, granted, kept the ring, and wore the ring; but what, exactly, was he ever tempted to go out and do with it?
With Smeagol one has to consider that it was (in cosmological terms) not long after Sauron had been defeated that the Ring came to him. It didn’t need to exert its full power of corruption yet. Sauron was broken, literally; he was a shadow of his former self after his defeat in the Second Age. He had neither the strength of spirit or even any physical shape to wield the Ring or contend with the West. He had no pressing need of it yet, so it had no need of him.
The same is true of when Bilbo took it. It knew it’s Master was rising again. But the time had not come yet. Still, it “knew” on some level that it needed to leave - it needed to get out from under these dark and dank mountains, away from this simple vile creature or it would never get back to its Masters.
But there was no urgency yet. Sauron was rebuilding his strength - and he was strong enough now to call to the Ring. But he was not at full strength yet. It simply knew it needed a new, safe guardian who had little ambition, until the time was right for it to rejoin its Master.
You could say it chose Smeagol and Bilbo BECAUSE they were so simple and lacking in ambition, because such beings were the surest option for its safe-keeping. They would not throw it away, but neither would they attempt to use it to become more than what they were.
But if they did put it on, the story would end. It’s because Gandalf and Galadriel know their own limitations. They know the power of the Ring, and know they would not only be too weak morally to take it off, but that even if they were to use it for good, for a time, their good would become perverted to evil.
Boromir didn’t even need to put it on for him to go from a noble warrior-lord to a murderous lunatic with delusions of grandeur, and that was just from a few days’ worth of exposure to it. Now imagine if someone who was much more powerful - who could contend with Sauron - actually wore it? That’s why Gandalf and Galadriel passed their tests. Think of it being akin to Jesus being tempted in the Desert by Satan. They could have everything in the world. They could order the world in their way for all time. But they refused; they passed the test.
Look at Smeagol. As soon as he put it on, he murdered his best friend, and became a creepy, digging, stealing thing, a degenerated form of himself.
Also, according to Tolkien, the MANNER in which one acquires the Ring has an impact on its effect on them. Bilbo did not become wholly corrupted in part because he did not kill to get it; because he chose MERCY.
Or as a more eloquent fan wrote:
"I believe that the Ring affected Bilbo the least, and Tolkien himself, through the voice of Gandalf, tells you why. Pity and mercy— the two qualities Bilbo exhibited when he spared Gollum, even while claiming the Ring as his own. Beginning his ownership with such noble emotions and not using the Ring for greedy purposes ‘innoculated’ him against its evil effects for a long while. It was only toward the end that he began feeling its impact.
Isildur had the Ring only a short time, and while he claimed it against Elrond’s advice, there is no evidence that he did so with evil intent. The sneering Isildur of Peter Jackson is not Tolkien’s, he is depicted as a noble man, but one still enchanted by the Ring’s beauty and lure. This clouded his judgment, but did not warp his character. What might have happened had he possessed the Ring longer can only be speculated. Eventually, no matter how noble, he would have fallen.
Frodo was obviously affected far more. Sauron was awake, activating the Ring, as it were, calling it back to him; the Morgul knife made him more susceptible; and he was actively trying to destroy it. Small wonder that it conquered his will in the end, but only after he brought about the conditions to achieve the Fellowship’ s goal, an amazing deed.
As for Gollum, well; a mean, greedy soul possessing it 600 years; the only surprise is that while it ruined him, he never faded."
You misunderstand Tom Bombadil perhaps.
The ring has 0 effect on Tom, the ring has no meaning to him at all.
Sauron has no real meaning to him at all.
If he saw someone attacked before his eyes, he would act in the moment, simply because it was the right thing to do, but beyond that nothing.
If you gave him the ring, he would probably forget about it, or leave it laying someplace, or something weird like that
Tom is beyond the ring, beyond Sauron, beyond Arda even, he was here before Arda and will presumably be here long after.
There isn’t even anything that Sauron, nor the ring, could even offer Tom. He is already more powerful than anything on Arda, and has everything he could possibly want, which is not much.
How do you tempt or threaten an immortal natural force that is sentient and wants nothing?
Tom is a strange character, he is probably the one thing that could swat Sauron like a bug, and would Sauron directly attack him, he very well might.
And yet outside of that moment of direct conflict nothing, Tom never thinks hey this Sauron guy is getting pretty bad, maybe i should go slap him up a bit.
He simply doesn’t think anything of it unless you make him, and then only for the moment.
He is kind of part of something so much bigger that Sauron and the ring and any troubles in middle earth seem smaller than the smallest gnat landing on the worlds largest picnic table. You have to keep showing him the gnat or it simply goes out of his thoughts.
And thats about where Tolkien left him, with little explanation, just an enigma that does not quite fit in his place and yet has always been there.
Sadly Tolkien would have needed to live probably 300 years so “Finish the tale” so to speak, Sauron may now be with out voice body or power, but the song of discord goes deeper than that.
In the very fun LOTR role-playing game that What Exit? ran here a few years back, our party of adventurers actually visited Tom Bombadil once. I remember my character biting his tongue to keep from rudely urging Bombadil to get up off his ass and come help fight all the evil in the world.