This sets up what could have been a great continuation of the story. A whole new way to look at lotr.
Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
71–80 of 349 posts
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#72Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#73> 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…
Absolutely thought "I must be living in a bubble" when I read this: I don't think I've spoken to a single book-reader who wasn't vocally disappointed by the omission of Tom from the films. He was certainly one of mine & my sibling's favourite characters.
And beyond that, I thought the first half or so of this reading (that Bombadil is a lot more than meets the eye) was also common.
But he is definitely one of the most interesting characters and one of the best ways the story shows it is taking place in a big world with a lot of different things going on.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#74About a week ago, I (mid 20s) began reading LoTR for the first time, despite having seen the movies long ago. I knew books are always richer in content than movies, but Tom Bombadil was the first radical departure from the movies that I encountered, and the weird encounter was an exciting switch that made me perceive the story I’m reading as new and different from the story I’ve seen.
The group has not yet arrived to Rivendell (so no spoilers please :))
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#75A 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.
1000 years is a pretty long time. Looking at literature from the 11 century, Beowulf is the only thing that stands out as still having any impact and continuing to be adapted and widely read today.
Information storage and transmission over the next 1000 years should be quite a bit better, so more work will survive and have a shot at continuing relevance, and Lord of the Rings certainly has a shot, provided epic fantasy keeps its popularity as a genre. Being fairly foundational is likely to keep it important to the genre to the point that I think we're just asking if humans in that future will still care to experience these kinds of stories at all, but you are pushing the point at which all that tends to still be read that far into the future are national foundation myths and religious scripture.
It'll definitely last more than a century, though. The Hobbit was published in 1937. A century is only another 15 years away.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#76About a week ago, I (mid 20s) began reading LoTR for the first time, despite having seen the movies long ago. I knew books are always richer in content than movies, but Tom Bombadil was the first radical departure from the movies that I encountered, and the weird encounter was an exciting switch that made me perceive the story I’m reading as new and different from the story I’ve seen. The group has not yet arrived to…
No post body was provided.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#77This reminds me of the fan theory that Tom Bombadil is secretly the Witch-King of Angmar: http://www.flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/bombadil.htm
the first two points really don’t help the credibility of this theory. it does actually get better after that
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#78I always loved Bombadil. A discordant note among wizards of great power and elves of slender form and perhaps a metaphor for Nature itself, but I also have enjoyed a lot this take on the character.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#79[deleted]
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#80Ok, 2 points: 1. I'm surprised LiveJournal still exists. Genuinely. I used to have one, a loooong time ago. 2. I was always fascinated by Bombadil, he seemed to me like the embodiment of nature itself, or forests. At least, that's the concept he seemed to represent to me. I admit I skipped reading the lyrics though. This is a fascinating theory although it is quite different than what I would conclude from the same e…
George Martin was still publishing his blog there until pretty recently, so that forced it to stay in somewhat of the public eye as the only place to get any official updates on when Winds of Winter might finally be published.