Tom is the oldest in that he’s Tolkien’s oldest fictional creation. Tolkien made him up one day for his children’s bed time story. In this context, it explains why Tom feels so off from Middle Earth. Personally, I like the character and I’m surprised to hear that a lot of people didn’t like him.
Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
81–90 of 349 posts
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Back when Aint it Cool News was popular I would see tons of people complaining about Bombadil's absence. Personally, I hate Tom, not because he is childish, but because of the damn songs.
Hah, I love Tolkien, but I still skip all the songs. They just never work for me in written text.
I was like you once, then I read The Hobbit to my son and had to (HAD TO) sing all the songs to him. It kind of forced me to slow down and appreciate them as atmosphere enhancing and world building that really does improve the experience for me.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#83> 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…
100% agree with you. Tom was my favorite character and an essential one in my opinion. I was one of those people that was deeply disappointed by his absence.
Tom is entirely beyond caring about "good" or "evil". His peace is such a vital contrast to every other character and has stuck with me over time.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#84> And yet no hobbit has ever heard of him.
This is just not true. At a minimum farmer maggot is supposed to have known about Tom Bombadil.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#85I've always felt that Tom Bombadil was the Jar Jar banks of lord of the rings. Completely pointless character that I love for that exact reason.
Except no one loves jar jar
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#86> 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…
> But I know a lot of people who find Tom irrelevant to the plot.
Probably the people who most need to understand why he is in there.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#87In 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.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#88A 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 would argue it's the one piece of fiction from the last 100 years with the highest likelihood of staying power for the next 1000 years. If any piece of fiction from this period of time is still important in human culture in 1000 years (taking for granted that humans still exist), I think it would be Tolkien's work.
I will venture further out on the speculative limb, and predict that in 1000 years when virtual reality subsumes reality, that Middle Earth (and the larger Tolkien world) will become the dominant reality - as it doesn't and may never have any competition for that role.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#89Tolkien 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', renounced control, and take your delight in things for themselves without reference to yourself, watching, observing, and to some extent knowing, then the question of the rights and wrongs of power and control might become utterly meaningless to you, and the means of power quite valueless. It is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there is a war.
The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien 144: To Naomi Mitchison. April 1954
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#90> 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 seen both sides. My first time reading it I think I was just baffled. Now I enjoy him as an enigma.