Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011) • Hacker News Board

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

#311

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:08 PM UTC

mrex wrote: post #270

thehappypm wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t explain why nobody has heard of him for thousands and thousands of years, and yet the Hobbits stray right into his path Willy-nilly

I think there is some "fortuitous things just keep happening to these people" in much fiction, and certainly the LOTR series, right? If you or I was given a knife that glowed when trolls were around, that would probably be the most amazing thing that ever happened to us. To Frodo it's a footnote, right along with "met and was rended minor aid by the oldest corporeal creature in the universe". Ultimately, I can only o…

[deleted]

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

#312

Post by thehappypm » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

JohnBooty wrote: post #303

gumby wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC Gandalf knew who old Tom was. That being said, I thought that his appearance in the book was just a contrivance to introduce the sense that this was all middle earth, successor to an older earth older than the "old" things of Middle Earth, perhaps a purer and less subtle place. We have such a brief time with him in the books but he's one of my favorite characters because of his hints of depth in the narrative an…

I thought that his appearance in the book was just a contrivance to introduce the sense that this was all middle earth, successor to an older earth older than the "old" things of Middle Earth Yes. On a nuts and bolts level, he has a single purpose: so that the reader knows there are things older than elves; things that elves (and maybe even wizards) don't know about. I see why many people hate Tom, particularly many…

He is the reason why they can kill the witch king

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

#313

Post by WJW » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:19 PM UTC

jrumbut wrote: post #272

ethbr0 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's admittedly in a different part of the book, so may be linguistic styling rather than lore-indicative, but the Old Forest felt more "wild" than "evil." In the Old Forest, there were certainly dangers, including some lethal ones, but loosely organized and operating independently. More druidic. Whereas Sauron / Morgoth were far more hierarchical in structuring their domains, exerted dominion over their forces, and…

It's possible to have a disorganized evil! Maybe I just like a secret villain. I always assumed a component of the forest was a way to keep Hobbits at home and home with the Hobbits.

Interesting, because I've always seen the hobbits as being so insular that they wouldn't need any conspiracy forest to keep them inside the Shire: it was such a paradise (and most hobbits so "boring") that nobody felt any desire to venture outside. Bilbo and Frodo were very much viewed with suspicion for their world-wandering ways, after all.

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

#314

Post by xxs » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:24 PM UTC

WJW wrote: post #310

xxs wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He declined that... Tolkien said Tom Bombadil had been 'invented'. He considered his wife Edith: to have been Lúthien, so that would make Tolkien - Beren. "I never called Edith Lúthien – but she was the source of the story that in time became the chief part of The Silmarillion." Tom Bombadil predates the story of the ring. It's placed there as a very powerful creature - still would lose to Sauron if all the world fel…

I suppose it would come down to if you think the Ring could influence the reader of the story, if it were possible for the reader to actually acquire the Ring. Tbh, it seems obvious to me that any ordinary human would probably fall to its pernicious influence. I certainly would, and its powers are such that I just can't imagine any human could resist its charms. Yet, Bombadil is completely untouched by it. Tom Bombad…

Much like Tom, the reader is out of that world, so the ring power doesn't extend... the reader can see the unseen (Frodo/Bilbo having the ring on) and so on.

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

#315

Post by badloginagain » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:26 PM UTC

throwaway_4ever wrote: post #249

sn41 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of the (apocryphal?) anecdote about Diogenes the cynic: Diogenes was eating bread and lentils, when Aristippus told him that if he would only be subservient to the king, he would not have to live on bread and lentils. Diogenes replied that if you learn to live on bread and lentils, then you never have to be subservient to the king.

Stories of Diogenes are always entertaining. 'He destroyed the single wooden bowl he possessed on seeing a peasant boy drink from the hollow of his hands. He then exclaimed: "Fool that I am, to have been carrying superfluous baggage all this time!"' 'while Diogenes was relaxing in the morning sunlight, Alexander the Great, thrilled to meet the famous philosopher, asked if there was any favour he might do for him. Dio…

Not gonna lie I'd watch his unhinged YouTube videos.

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

#316

Post by valarauko » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:28 PM UTC

rottingchris wrote: post #309

joe_the_user wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about Tolkien (and I think good story telling in general), is he gives a feeling of consistency, depth and complex choices. But that's completely different from needing fine-grained consistency between chapters of a long book. I'm not a Tolkien expert but I think are a whole variety of "plot holes" one can point to but these don't particularly matter for the development of the story, where the main thing is…

Elrond had heard of Tom Bombadil. There was silence. At last Elrond spoke again. [...] The Barrow-wights we know by many names; and of the Old Forest many tales have been told: all that now remains is but an outlier of its northern march. Time was when a squirrel could go from tree to tree from what is now the Shire to Dunland west of Isengard. In those lands I journeyed once, and many things wild and strange I knew.…

> In those lands I journeyed once, and many things wild and strange I knew. But I had forgotten Bombadil, if indeed this is still the same that walked the woods and hills long ago, and even then was older than the old. That was not then his name.

My takeaway from this was that Elrond wasn't sure if this was the same person - strongly speculated to be, and probably correct, but not someone Elrond had personally known or corresponded with. It felt like this was the first time he'd heard the name Tom Bombadil, and made an educated guess that it was probably old Ben-adar. Tom, meanwhile, had contact with Gildor at the very least.

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

#317

Post by netmonk » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

Tom is the most important character of this masterpiece. Only a few knows. All other dissing Tom are just posing and not real fan.

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

#318

Post by josephmosby » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

mrex wrote: post #270

thehappypm wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t explain why nobody has heard of him for thousands and thousands of years, and yet the Hobbits stray right into his path Willy-nilly

I think there is some "fortuitous things just keep happening to these people" in much fiction, and certainly the LOTR series, right? If you or I was given a knife that glowed when trolls were around, that would probably be the most amazing thing that ever happened to us. To Frodo it's a footnote, right along with "met and was rended minor aid by the oldest corporeal creature in the universe". Ultimately, I can only o…

> his fantastic universe is pervaded by an overwhelming force of goodness that seeks to bring events to their right conclusion through divine providence.

That is, in fact, explicitly stated in The Silmarillion.

"Then Ilúvatar (the God/Yahweh creator spirit) spoke, and he said: 'Mighty are the Ainur (the angels), and mightiest among them is Melkor (Satan / the fallen angel); but that he may know, and all the Ainur, that I am Ilúvatar, those things that ye have sung, I will show them forth, that ye may see what ye have done. And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined."

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

#319

Post by sfjailbird » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:43 PM UTC

ergonaught wrote: post #260

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’ve hated Tom since the first time I read the series, which must be over 40 years ago now. I’ve hated him on every reread. Leaving him out of the films was one of my happiest moments. Sooooo we exist…?

You and me both. He seems like a copy/paste from some children's book Tolkien had lying around, which he then threw in as filler for LOTR. Of course, hardcore fans come up with more or less tortured explanations for the glaring inconsistencies.

I say that as someone who has held up LOTR as some of my favorite books my whole life. I started re-reading them recently after 20 years and had to quit after Tom Bombadil.

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

#320

Post by WJW » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:48 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #166

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tom represents the Great Mystery, the great unknown of the beyond that is all seeing and all knowing and all powerful. Omitting him is like omitting the whole premise of the book. It's like making a movie based on the Bible but omitting the Resurrection of Jesus.

Sorry, but that just doesn't compute for me at all. Tom is a silly character with no gravitas. He puns his own name just to make it rhyme with "yellow" -- over and over again. And there is nothing in Tom's story that is even remotely comparable to the Resurrection. The Resurrection is a key event in the Bible story. It is something that happens to change the dramatic arc of all mankind . In Tom's story, nothing happe…

Tom is perhaps silly, but just the fact that he can is seemingly immune to all the Ring can do (with it being implied to be the most powerful artifact in all of Middle Earth, strong enough to even influence Maia like Gandalf) makes him have enough gravitas. If anything, his silly antics make him even more intriguing: how did he gain that power and is it because or despite his silliness?