Alas will no one else come to the defense of Tom.
Iarwain Ben-adar was known to Elrond but Elrond did not know who he was.
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, No 144, dated 1954
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, No 153, dated 1954
Elrond, from The Fellowship of the Ring II 2, The Council of Elrond
The Fellowship of the Ring I 7, In the House of Tom Bombadil
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, No 19, dated 1937
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, No 144, dated 1954
All these lead back to Tom as the Enigma. He was no more out of place then Beorn or the spirit of Caradhas and other strange creatures like the watcher in the dirty water outside the west gate of Moria. Not every creature was given a scientific niche. The Foul Beast were bread from what stock? Why could Beorn and some of his descendants shape shift to bear form? Who made the Black Arrow of Bard.
Elrond recognized his power and thought it was self restricted to his own little realm. He saw Tom as have the power of the earth to resist Sauron but no more.
For every person who did like Tom or felt jarred by him, there was a college student in the 60’s that identified with his being a free spirit and they loved him for it. I believe Tolkien was actually in some small way distressed by this. I loved Tom for the sake of his being a nature spirit and a creature in whom the music of the making ran strong.
(And again, I loved every aspect of the book, so I am not an objective poster on this subject)
You know how post-modern lit crit likes to talk about the role of the reader and narrator and use those viewpoints to analyze the structure of a book? Let’s see what happens when we do that to LOTR, one of the superficially least post-modern works of the last century’s high concept lit.
Who is the narrator of LOTR? How many levels of narrator can we identify?
Quoted parts of “lore” and “old tales/songs” Bilbo got from the elves.
Bilbo and the other Red Book authors (some of whom [Frodo] revised and tidied up the others).
Information on Gondor/Rohan/the Tooks which the Red Book authors got from Merry/Pippin.
Earlier and later chroniclers who preumably started/continued Shire history in the Red Book before/after the key events.
The translator/narrative voice.
The “compiler” of the appendices–finder/editor of info from many other sources.
The original narrator of the appendices (discourse on pipe weed).
The real JRRT, who may/may not have agreed with eveything these other “voices” said. As the universal “knower” of the book, he understands/intends that certain of the other narrators are limited/mistaken in what they record.
As examples, look at the “Dish Ran Away with the Spoon” song in Bree and what we learn about the destruction of Numenor in LOTR. In each case, the idea is to give a sense of truth lost in the depths of time and just poking throught a bit. The archives in Gondor will have some knowledge of the story, and so will the elves and so will the Ents and so will Hobbit folklore. Anyone narrating from any of those positions will have some truth but less than the whole story, especially when you consider problems of dead languages and translation.
Just a round about way of saying that Tom Bombadil doesn’t bother me. He is an artefact leftover from a story that the current group of narrators doesn’t know all about any more. While his story is incomplete and leaves us scratching our heads, he is very good for the atmosphere of an ancient world coming down to us in bits in inadequate translation.
Not sure if this was all addressed to me, or to DSYoungEsq, but my objection isn’t so much that Tom doesn’t fit the mythology of Middle Earth, which contains much that is unexplained or inexplicable, but that he represents a huge brick wall for the story’s momentum, adds very little to overall narrative, and badly undercuts the sense of the Ring as a source of ultimate evil and irresistable temptation.
I can’t speak for the Tolkien fan demographics of the '60s, but among latter day readers, the Bombadil defenders are overwhelmingly outnumbered by those who are baffled, put off, or generally indifferent to him. The fact that such an important figure (in terms of number of pages devoted to his exploits, if not his impact on anything that actually happens in the story) in the book holds so little relevancy to anyone outside a fairly narrow timeframe suggests that his character was largely a failed creation. Doubly so if, as you suggest, Tolkien felt that people in the '60s were identifying with Tom for the wrong reasons.
However, I have to admit that I find Humble Servant’s interpretation pretty good. If I read the books again (I’ve read them at least half a dozen times in my life, but lately have found that high fantasy novels just don’t hold my interest anymore. I’ve no definite plans to go back to LotR again anytime soon.) I’ll try to keep that in mind when I get to his section of the novel.
I would argue that such “brick walls” are a significant chunk of the story’s momentum. All through the books, we have a chapter or two of action, alternated with a chapter or two of safe havens. Tom’s house was just one of the safe havens. Was he any greater a barrier to the story’s momentum than the Elf encampment in the woods of the Shire, or the house in Buckleberry, or Rivendell, or Lothlorien, or Faramir’s cave?
Yes, definitly. There’s a difference between shifting gears and slamming on the brakes. Rivendell didn’t halt the momentum of the story: rather, it effectively began to ramp the momentum back up after the climax at the ford, and of course was essential for the formation of the Fellowship. Lothlorien served as a similar breathing space after the exhausting drama of the balrog, and Faramir’s cave served as a necessary last respite for Sam and Frodo before their almost certainly fatal trip into Mordor. (I don’t recall anything about the house at Buckleberry, and only a very little about the elf camp near the Shire. Wasn’t the latter just a momentary glimpse of passing elves, or am I conflating the book and the movie again?) Bombadil, however, doesn’t come after an appropriate climax, and does little to nothing to forward the story. Obviosuly, I’m arguing a subjective interpretation of what constitutes an “appropriate” climax, but most of the people I know who were unable to get through the first book stumbled during or shortly after Bombadil’s interlude. That suggests to me that Tolkien lost the motive thrust of his narrative at that point, and had to expend some effort to get it back.
Who are you, and what have you done with the real Qadgop?
For the record (and leaving our Bombadil discussion for the minute) the following characters are named as being at the Council of Elrond in The Book:
Gandalf (Wizard)
Elrond (Elf)
Galdor (Elf)
Glorfindel (Elf)
Erestor (Elf)
Several other unnamed Elves of Elrond’s household
Legolas (Elf)
Gloin (Dwarf)
Gimli (Dwarf)
Aragorn (Man)
Boromir (Man)
Bilbo (Hobbit)
Frodo (Hobbit)
Sam (Hobbit)
Not everyone present is named but the description of how many members of the non-Elvish races are present seems to be careful and complete. So, no men other than Aragorn and Boromir. Therefore as far as the book goes Dale and Laketown don’t seem to have any representation at the Council, unless Gloin is acting on King Brand’s behalf in addition to Dain’s.
I also wondered who the mystery men in the movie were. I figured they weren’t from Gondor because they show Boromir arriving at Rivendell alone. In the end I decided they must be Ranger elders or something.
(What’s your objection to the crippled Orc? Just that it’s distracting and unneccessary?)
The elf camp was an early overnight stop and gave Frodo the chance to talk things through with Gildor Inglorion, whence we get the famous quote “Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards…”, plus some confirmation that the Black Riders are indeed the servants of the Enemy, and that Gildor does not know all about them but does not wish to tell Frodo all that he does know for fear of frightening him.
It’s also Sam’s first meeting with the Elves and affords Frodo opportunity to ask Sam if, having seen Elves face to face, he is content to adventure no more, and for Sam to affirm his determination to see things through. I think that it is at this early stage that Sam has the foreboding that he has something to do before the end.
The house at Bucklebury is where Frodo reveals his true intentions to his friends, and they in turn let on that they not only knew a sight more about his affairs than he ever suspected, but have made some useful preparations without which Frodo, already dogged by the Black Riders, would probably be in serious trouble. Aside from that there’s just a big mushroom supper and some high jinks with bathwater.
I’ve just re-read the Silmarillion and am re-reading the Trilogy right now. One thing that puzzles me about Glorfindel is that he died in the Silmarillion. He was killed by a balrog. Unless the Glorfindel in the Trilogy is different from the one in the Silmarillion, it would appear even Tolkien made a few continuity errors.
Not true and Tolkien even addressed this.
Glorifindel’s corpoate body did die and the fall of Gondolin but at the Halls of Mandos he was reincorporated and sometime in either the second or third age he came back to Middle-Earth.
I personally always thought he must of come over on the ship that brought the 5 Istari (Saruman, Gandalf, Radagast, Alatar and Pallando) They came to the west around 1000 TA.
Elves do not pass beyond the world, they are bound to it. Many Elves come back after a healing to walk in Aman again but Glorifindel is the only know case of an Elf of the Light that returned after the Host of the Valar destroyed Angband.
There are two schools of thought on the issue. One is that Glorfindel was reincarnated (a possibility that Tolkein hinted at in some other writings), the other is that it’s a different Glorfindel (Tolkein did re-use quite a few names: Echtelion and Denethor were Elves in Beleriand before they were Men in Gondor).
On preview, I see that jrfranchi has explained the re-incarnation theory. I hope he will tell me which book I can find it in, as I am curious.
I don’t really see Old Man Willow as being climactic, not in the way that Frodo’s encounter with the black riders at the ford was the climax before the slower scenes in Rivendell, or the bridge of Khazad Dum was the climax before Lothlorien. It was, in the parlance of Dungeons and Dragons, a random encounter, and nothing really built up to it or built upon it. It was pretty much an excuse to introduce Tom Bombadil, and both could have been cut without losing much of the over all story.
Okay, I remember that stuff now. Somehow, I’d forgotten about Frodo and Sam stopping to talk with the elves; I thought they’d just seen them in passing. Obviously, my memory of these parts of the book is too vague to comment with any definitiveness, but I recall these parts as not being as long and involved as the Bombadil interlude, and as such, not as big a drag on the forward movement of the plot.
The **Tolkien Letters ** contain Tolkien’s comments on Glorifindel specifically.
The Silmarillion goes into the life cycle of the Elves and talks about the Halls of Mandos. It even specifically mentions that Feanor’s mother Miriel was one ofthe few Elves that never returned for the halls.
FTR, I have read the Silmarillion (indeed, I find I like it more than LOTR), and I do recall the mention of Miriel never returning from the halls. However, I don’t believe there is any specific mention of anyone who has returned.
Maybe Qadgop the Mercotan can come in with some more details.
I do vaguely remember a reference to Elves returning, but I can’t dredge this out of my memory and I am not at home.
Some general comments on the discussion thus far - I think the meeting with the elves in the Shire & the interval at the house in Bucklebury were very important episodes, for more reasons than I go into here. Mostly because they help to develop the hobbits’ characters and their relationships to each other. As for Tom Bombadil, I don’t particularly enjoy the way that episode was written, but I think it was an important episode nonetheless. Old Man Willow foreshadows the meeting with Treebeard; the episode with the barrow-wight was an important test for Frodo, a wonderfully spooky scene with intimations of the long history of Middle-Earth, and it gave Merry a sword to smite the witch-king with.
and in reply to Qadop the Mercotan, who wrote “Anything that makes me consider the tale in new ways is a plus to me. Otherwise it would be a closed chapter to shelve and forget about, not a continuing study of a complex creation. But I’m sort of strange that way, I guess.” – Well, I’m strange in the same way, I guess, since I feel exactly the same.
Actually, jrfranchi, I believe JRRT wrote that the Istari came over in at least 3 different ships. Saruman and Radagast on one, Allatar and Pallando on another, and Gandalf alone and last, IIRC). I don’t think he ever said who Glorfindel hitched a ride with.
I don’t have my sources at my fingertips at the moment, but I’m fairly sure that’s how it was described.
Not returned to Middle-Earth, other than Glorfindel. and JRRT definitely intended that Glorfindel of the first age was the same as the Glorfindel of the 3rd age.
But there were a number of writings about elves leaving the Halls of Mandos to walk again among their kin in Valinor.
