7
submitted 4 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Not this one. Also I've seen it a hundred times on Reddit.

Probably a pretty open ended question and discussion on wtf Tom Bombadill is with another deeply knowledgeable LOTR nerd.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

I tend to like the interpretation that he's Sauron's opposite. Completely free of desire and will to dominate.

Disclaimer: not sure I would call myself a "deeply knowledgeable" LOTR nerd.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

I will happily mind your disclaimer but there's a critical event that really makes this character truly bizarre. He wears the ring and doesn't give a damn - all of Gandalf, Giladriel, and Sauron himself are affected by the rings. Gandalf and Sauron are possibly on the same "power tier" as Maia (Galadriel is lesser but still psychicly impressive). It's arguable that Gandalf is a false Maiar and actually an avatar of Manwë but Tom's nonchalance with the ring likely puts him above the Maia - Tom could be a Vala but it's really unclear who he'd be (possibly Lórien but its unlikely) due to his relation to Goldberry and disposition ... They're all well known and it's unlikely they could evade detection in Arda... it's possible that Tom Bombadill is Illúvatar himself which lets us handwave a lot of issues but that makes Goldberry even more confusing... also everything more powerful than a Maiar is sworn to (or restrained from) interfering in Arda.

Tolkien was a dedicated world builder and also a myth teller and we might just have to accept the unfulfilling explanation that Tom Bombadill is the mysterious guide that defies explanation and that's all there is to it - his character is completely isolated from the rest of the mythos and this from a nerd who has a detailed lineage of kings for Gondor including the "not at all relevant to the story" kin strife of Castamir... so I reject any claims that Tolkien just "forgot" about Bombadill - the omission of history was clearly intentional.

Anyways, I've spouted off like a nerd long enough. It's an excellent topic to delve into and there are some great hints pointing one way or the other.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Bombadil, like Ungoliant and the “nameless things” seem to have been left intentionally unexplained, though I’m no Tolkienologist.

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
7 points (81.8% liked)

Asklemmy

43424 readers
1467 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS