Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

km-515.livejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 349 posts

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#61

Post by dbingham »

jfengel wrote: post #39
Trasmatta wrote: post #29

> Possibly the least liked character in The Lord of the Rings. A childish figure so disliked by fans of the book that few object to his absence from all adaptations of the story. I've been a fan of Tolkien for decades, and this doesn't match up with my experience at all...Tolkien fans seem to generally love Tom, and many were deeply disappointed that he wasn't in the movies (even though his exclusion makes perfect se…

Possibly. But I know a lot of people who find Tom irrelevant to the plot. It looks more like a silly digression just at the time the book had shifted from "Hobbit sequel" to serious epic. He talks in poetry that can feel singsong and childish. Tolkien fans seem to focus on the bit with the Ring, which is an engaging enigma without a resolution. It makes him seem very important and powerful, but the story doesn't expl…

The comments on this thread make it seem more likely that your circle of people who disliked Tom is the outlier rather than those of us who thoroughly enjoy him as a character.

Also, I submit as evidence this scifi.stackexchange thread: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/1586/who-or-what-w...

I think Tolkien fans, on average, have long enjoyed the mystery that is Tom.

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#62

Post by Insanity »

michaericalribo wrote: post #36
jyriand wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fuck livejournal for hijacking my back button on mobile. Edit: obviously, I replied under wrong comment.

Press and hold back on iOS to choose the page to return to

Cool, TIL

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#63

Post by carapace »

tevon wrote: post #3

To me, Tom Bombadil is the introduction of natural magic. He is nature, indicating to the reader that there is a source of magic beyond the elves, Wizards, and Sauron. There are many magical creatures in Middle-Earth without a described source, which to me makes the whole story feel more magic. The Ents probably being the chief example. Another important role of Tom’s is his introduction of magic and power outside of…

He's the Green Man, older than gods, and more real.

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#64

Post by NeverFade »

tevon wrote: post #3

To me, Tom Bombadil is the introduction of natural magic. He is nature, indicating to the reader that there is a source of magic beyond the elves, Wizards, and Sauron. There are many magical creatures in Middle-Earth without a described source, which to me makes the whole story feel more magic. The Ents probably being the chief example. Another important role of Tom’s is his introduction of magic and power outside of…

> There are many magical creatures in Middle-Earth without a described source, which to me makes the whole story feel more magic.

As far as I know, this isn't true. Virtually all creatures and major characters in LotR have a clear source in the lore Tolkien developed. Of course, only a fraction of this lore is in LotR itself, and the rest was in notes published after his death, e.g. in The Silmarillion.

That's precisely what makes Tom Bombadil such an eye-catching exception.

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#66

Post by KineticLensman »

simonh wrote: post #52
boringg wrote: post #26

A random thought just occurred - and I welcome speculation. Do you/we think Lord of the Rings will have staying power in human history 1000 years from now or only last one century or so? Inherent assumptions: humans will survive 1000 years and so will books.

I think it will be studied and valued indefinitely, if not for anything else, due to it's massive impact on literature and popular culture in this era, which shows no sign of waning. If anything in my lifetime it's influence has increase dramatically. Nobody in the future interested in the culture of the 20th and 21st century, and quite possibly well beyond, could ignore it. Having said that, will non-academics in th…

> That's harder to say because in large part it depends how much language evolves.

LoTR is interesting here because it explicitly contains examples of language change. In fact language change was one of Tolkien's original motivations for developing the history of Middle Earth - to provide a historical context for the evolution of Elvish. E.g. Elves being sundered during the First Age and then developing independent languages. Even Frodo is aware of 'high' Elvish. The language of the Rohirrim, to the hobbits, sounds something like Old English does to us.

Tolkien himself uses archaic modes of English to describe some of the events near the end of the story, some of which might already be difficult to understand for modern readers. One example is when he states that some characters were 'in the van' meaning 'vanguard' rather than a road vehicle.

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#68

Post by rossdavidh »

Trasmatta wrote: post #29

> Possibly the least liked character in The Lord of the Rings. A childish figure so disliked by fans of the book that few object to his absence from all adaptations of the story. I've been a fan of Tolkien for decades, and this doesn't match up with my experience at all...Tolkien fans seem to generally love Tom, and many were deeply disappointed that he wasn't in the movies (even though his exclusion makes perfect se…

I think it depends on whether or not it's the sort of fan who read the books once, perhaps after seeing the Peter Jackson movies, or the sort of fan who reads them every few years. You are perhaps the latter sort.

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#69

Post by nonameiguess »

jfengel wrote: post #39
Trasmatta wrote: post #29

> Possibly the least liked character in The Lord of the Rings. A childish figure so disliked by fans of the book that few object to his absence from all adaptations of the story. I've been a fan of Tolkien for decades, and this doesn't match up with my experience at all...Tolkien fans seem to generally love Tom, and many were deeply disappointed that he wasn't in the movies (even though his exclusion makes perfect se…

Possibly. But I know a lot of people who find Tom irrelevant to the plot. It looks more like a silly digression just at the time the book had shifted from "Hobbit sequel" to serious epic. He talks in poetry that can feel singsong and childish. Tolkien fans seem to focus on the bit with the Ring, which is an engaging enigma without a resolution. It makes him seem very important and powerful, but the story doesn't expl…

It provides some pretty key context to where Merry got his blade from and why it is able to break the spell and make the Witch King killable. Bit of a better explanation than Eowyn's "I am no man."

Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)

#70

Post by gaoshan »

boringg wrote: post #23

This take almost makes him sound like nature inherent. Quiet in the background of all the activity of humans, elves, orcs etc but always ready to take over the world again as soon as those creatures depart or diminish.

This is roughly how I always viewed him.
Post reply on HN