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

91–100 of 349 posts

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

#91

Post by illuminerdy »

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…

Yeah, I've never felt the way about Tom Bombadil that the author implies. I find his character fascinating. But I also understand why Jackson didn't include him in the movies. There's only so much you can do before a movie becomes unwieldy.

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

#92

Post by digdugdirk »

shaftoe444 wrote: post #22
samrocksc wrote: post #15

this is the best thing ever posted on HN..... going to restart the lord of the rings podcast now.

What podcast is that? I'm just reading the books for the first time.

Just seconding this request. Any and all podcast recommendations on the LoTR would be welcome.

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

#93

Post by libraryatnight »

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…

Your experience matches my own. For me and my circle Tolkien's works were a draw in part because of how much lore and detail was in the world and yet there were huge mysteries all over that ignite the imagination. Tom was one of those, and as kids he was a source of long debates about how powerful he was, and as we got older and read wider and deeper he still prompts conversation on nature, the nature of power, mystery in story telling - he's the reason I read the Kalevala. Anyway -Tom's awesome and this blog post did not resonate with me much at all, I was glad to see this and most of HN's comments in response.

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

#94

Post by ineedasername »

I always thought of Tom Bombidil as Eru, the creator, or at the very least was taking cues from Eru. Two pieces of evidence:

1) The song he gives, which seemed a positive one, and is not remarked upon as discordant or unpleasant. Eru created through song, and in that choir it was the introduction of disharmony that signified evil.

2) The passage where it's asked "who is he?" The answer is "He is." And then "he is as you have seen him". Tolkien was a religious person, and this passage has always seemed to echo that of the bible where a similar question gets the godly response "I am that I am". This echo always seemed to much to be a coincidence.

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

#95

Post by vintermann »

jeabo wrote: post #87

In the Silmarillion, the universe was created by the music of the Ainur. At first it was in line with the mind of Iluvatar (God) but Melkor sang louder and then in discord. Some fans theorize that this discord created Tom Bombadil, along with barrow wrights, Shelob, the watcher of the water, and the ancient creatures that Gandalf saw while chasing the Balrog under Moria.

The barrow-wights are undead, things that were once living humans and were buried in the mounds they haunt. They're not primeval beings.

Shelob has a canonical origin story, as I recall, as daughter of the primeval spider-shadow thing Ungoliant. The watcher in the water doesn't seem quite spectacular enough to be truly primeval if you ask me, but then again, Bombadil isn't especially flashy either, and we know he is primeval. Maybe it's more relevant that the watcher in the water wasn't always there, it only appeared around the same time as the balrog was dug up. Which sounds pretty un-primeval to me.

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

#96

Post by adrian_b »

KineticLensman wrote: post #66
simonh wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 l…

Even if I am not a native English speaker, when I have read "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit", many decades ago, when I was young, one of the main reasons why I have enjoyed them very much has been the distinctive language in which they have been written.

I cannot say what exactly made me believe this, but while reading them I thought that these books contain some of the most beautiful English language that I have ever read (and I have read many thousands of books). I have not changed my opinion later.

The movies have been fine, but reading the books has been a much more powerful experience for me.

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

#97

Post by bnralt »

permo-w wrote: post #40
jiggywiggy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds indeed more in line with what Tolkien said, although everyone can create their own version of the story of course. Tolkien: "But Tom Bombadil is just as he is. Just an odd ‘fact’ of that world. He won’t be explained, because as long as you are (as in this tale you are meant to be) concentrated on the Ring, he is inexplicable. But he’s there – a reminder of the truth (as I see it) that the world is so large and…

I really like this. In many many many works of fiction, if you are presented with an odd detail that seems extraneous to the plot or the aesthetic, there’s a huge chance that this will turn out to be some kind of pivotal point later in the story. I love that Tolkien was introducing them simply to create depth - and to a great extent - to provoke the feelings that bring about posts and discussion like this https://en.…

Kind of strange that the only other two authors they talk about are Ursula K. Le Guin and J.K. Rowling. I don't think the use of depth by either was particularly noticeable compared to other authors, and certainly nowhere near what Tolkien was doing (and I'm saying that as someone who would rather read Le Guin than Tolkien).

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

#98

Post by ineedasername »

ineedasername wrote: post #94

I always thought of Tom Bombidil as Eru, the creator, or at the very least was taking cues from Eru. Two pieces of evidence: 1) The song he gives, which seemed a positive one, and is not remarked upon as discordant or unpleasant. Eru created through song, and in that choir it was the introduction of disharmony that signified evil. 2) The passage where it's asked "who is he?" The answer is "He is." And then "he is as…

And to elaborate:

Rather than his surroundings being a symbol of the true Tom, I take this to be Tolkien's allegory of divine intervention, God himself reaching in and tilting the balance slightly, a little nudge while otherwise letting things play out. An extremely rare occurrence both in Tolkien's creation and his own religion, which is why Tom is not more widely known, except by Gandalf who rubs elbows with the Valar when not running around Middle Earth.

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

#99

Post by bo1024 »

eric_cc wrote: post #89

Tolkien on Tom in Letter 144: I might put it this way. 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…

Wow!
Post reply on HN