Its also worth to remember that Tom Bombadil was created way before LOTR, and the Hobbit, it was a character of a poem. So in a way it was "created" before Iluvatar :D it may well be just an "Easter egg" of sorts of its own previous creation and that became a wonderful addition. And I think that the power the ring has over someone is not related to the power of the user but somehow on how much can offers to the wearer how much can tempt him/her, is not that tempting for a hobbit because hobbits usually don't seek power; I think the ring has no power over Tom because the ring has nothing to offer to him, Tom doesn't "want" stuff, has the power that he needs no more, no less; live as he please. I like the fact that he transcend all the drama and the fact that he doesn't share "who" he is is because he doesn't care, all you need to know about him is that he is who he is, nothing behing the curtain, all about him that is important is in plain sight, the rest is unimportant. I really like Tom Bombadil.
The theory I came up with a few decades ago was that Tom and Goldberry were in fact Tulkas and Nessa. They maintain a window/doorway to The West through which Tom and Goldberry can see, but no one else can. The Entwives were summoned to the Old Forest to insure that the whole species wasn't obliterated. Eventually, The Man Ents would find their hidden Entwives and have the choice of staying in Middle-Earth, or passing through Tom's portal into The West. Since no Ent would ever want to get onto a ship of sawed planks, and they were needed across The Sea, Tom and Goldberry were tasked with maintaining a doorway, until The Ents' work was done in Middle-Earth. That's not canon, but whatever.
I find it likely that Tom is something as old as the Valar and Maiar, perhaps a side-effect of the Song who didn't come about entirely by design, or perhaps even existed independently outside the machinations of gods. There's some form for this in-story of Ungoliant and the like. This seems reflected also in comments regarding Tom's ability to withstand the Ring, but only whilst in his domain, and not in the face of a fully restored Sauron knocking at his gates. It at least gives us some idea of the extent of his power in any case.
I think that Tom is actually Tolkien. He saw the first raindrops and acorns because he wrote them, and he doesn't interfere greatly with the storyline for the sake of the readers.
I thought this the entire time! Maybe Tom is Tolkien's idea of a perfect life, living in peace in his own little paradise with a beautiful wife, forever.
I personally kind of think that Tolkien is much like Bilbo Baggins. Both went away on an unexpected journey (like the Quest to Erebor for Bilbo and the First World War for Tolkien), ending up as an old, well respected writers who lived a happy life until the end of their days. This and the Bombadil-Tolkien theory are both possible ways that he has embedded himself into his own writing.
@Nicky Bobby lol The idea they removed Tom from the movies so as to keep everyone unenlightened is hogwash nonsense. He also didn't create Middle Earth.
@Nicky Bobby I do agree with that. I believe Tom is an anomaly of sorts in the world of Middle-Earth, one who cannot be quantified by any definitions or laws of the world we are aware of. In a way, I think he is outside of even Eru’s influence and creation; that is why the One Ring, and the powers of Sauron and Melkor have no effect on him. That would also explain his state as he “is”, neither entirely good nor evil, allied with neither Eru nor Melkor, but merely existing in his own plane.
"In the beginning there was Eru, the One, who in Arda is called Ilúvatar; and he made first the Ainur, the Holy Ones, that were the offspring of his thought, and they were with him before aught else was made. One day the Ainur asked Eru, ' Who is that guy in blue coat and long hat?' and Illuvatar replied "I don't know, he was already there when I arrived." And thus the mystery of Tom Bombadil continues.
If the ainur was the offspring of Erus thought, maby bombadill is the offspring of Erus unconscious? Since he is master, free to roam as the unconscious..
I love how Gandalf's reasoning behind Tom not being a good ring barer is because the ring has SOO little effect on him, He'd just forget about it and misplace it.
@@danielshafer1212 The problem is that the ring is like a tracker device of today broadcasting its position and letting a device know it is around to be found. It is the tracker tech of fantasy.
@@thefrener794except that the ring cannot be found by any specific person. It's more like a constantly ringing alarm clock. (FYI in the books neither sauron nor the nazgul can feel the presence of the ring, special magical circumstances not withholding)
He’s the first and the oldest… in Tolkien’s mind. He existed in there as a quirky little adventurer long before the Valar or Ëa or anything else Tolkien created. I think he mentions somewhere in his letters that he would make up stories about bombadil with his brother when they were kids. That’s why he’s unconcerned with everything in middle earth. He sat quietly in Tolkien’s mind, watching the whole legendarium come into existence, and then he plopped himself into it because it looked fun. He exists outside the narrative. He can come and go as he pleases. He’s his own master! Not even his own author can control him!
I think you have come up with the definitive description of Tom Bombadil. I would add that it has been great fun for people fond of the tales of all things Tolkien, to try and fathom of who and what Tom is.
This is exactly what I see in Tom. He's oldest because out of universe he actually is. He doesn't "belong" in lord of the rings but he's there. Tolkien wanted to find a place for him somewhere and so Tom just showed up. I think yours is the most likely/accurate "theory"
IMO it is important to remember that Tom Bombadil was a children's story that Tolkein wrote which predates the LOTR. IIRC it was written for his grand daughter when she was small. He may have included Bombadil in TLOTR as a nod to his now older grand daughter, she may have enjoyed that. Bombadil does not have to be anything in the LOTR, he is himself - Tolkein's oldest character, still kicking and doing what he does with a child like innocence. In a way he represents the innocence of childhood, complete with a child's ability to ignore what is of value to adults. Years ago I thought Bombadil was simply Tolkein putting himself into the story, as authors sometimes do, I am not confident of that now. Bombadil was, though, a character that would be able to connect very well with young children, even though he is eldest.
I completely agree. Also he being a part of the complete story which is the song of the ainur, he is a helpful harmonic piece that helps the song go in the direction that iluvatar created
I think Tom represents story telling for the sake of simply telling a story. Every other character has some deeper meaning to the story. Every other character moves the plot along. Not Tom... Tom is just there for fun. If any character represents Tolkien himself it's Gandalf, not Tom. In the end Gandalf goes to talk with Tom because Tom is what a story should be like, simple childish fun for the pure sake of having childish fun.
Tom Bombadil is also kind of the exception that proves the rule. LOTR is so rich and real because every character and event has a backstory and lineage to the creation of the world itself. Tom is unique in that he was an opportunity to throw in a likable character for yucks and giggles and not have to provide an explanation or lore.
Tom is Eru's hippy brother who was couch surfing when Eru made Middle Earth, and he's still there. And he'll always be there and Eru can't do a thing about it.
I think Tom is just a wholesome character of his own self. Just a happy gift from Eru to whoever meets or encounters him. A slice of positive music that Eru just willed into existance 😊
This is gold. Imagine having that kind of family secret, the rest of the world wondering what he really is, only for him to be a reminder that his children heard about him first hahah
@@ZPtyy It's a fun idea, but when I read Tolkien in the '60's, I remember Tom talking with Bilbo and then Frodo, and then (I think) Frodo and Sam came upon him in a tree, trapped. He told them vital information, so I thought he should be featured in the films, but hey...
Tom Bombadil was the name of a Dutch doll Tolkien's children used to play with and, by extension, an imaginary persona inspired by that doll. I think he's nothing more than that in the LotR - a fictional character from another story who's made a crossover. He existed before the LotR was written (hence eldest), wasn't created or born by anyone inside the story including Eru himself (hence fatherless), is completely alien to its cosmic hierarchy and, at the end of the day, cannot understand and interact with the world the way any normal character would.
That's the theory that's always made sense to me. After all, a big metaphorical aspect of LOTR is Tolkien lamenting the rurality of his upbringing becoming gradually destroyed by industrialisation, but go to any old (even ancient) rural church in England, as Tolkien surely often did, and a bearded Green Man with a curious, slightly mirthful, slightly knowing expression will be watching you froma ceiling boss, or a hidden corner, or as a gargoyle or grotesque. The Green Men are the ancient, silent, almost hidden guardians of 'Green and Pleasant' Albion, here long before us, and doubtless long after us.
This is so obvious to me from the text! If you read it literally, it's almost too easy to figure out. People assume it's way more complicated than that.
this was akin to what I aòways though as well, Tom represents the spirit of Middle Earth/Arda/Nature itself, which matches directly with the fact that if everything falls to the dark lord, so will him. He exists on a different "axis" compared to the valar and maiar, which is why he's not affected nor cares about the ring. He's forgetful as nature reinvents itself all the time, and has no power over the Nazgul as those are powered by the non-earthly power of the rings.
Tom Bombadil is one of my favorite characters in the books. He reads like a character from a children's fantasy book, which considering the overall tone of The Lord of The rings, is a breath of fresh air.
I was listening to the audiobook while I was at work, and the sudden change in tone and pase just totally felt like the hobbit, because I listened to it right before starting the Lord of the rings
Debatable if that is a cool moment or just ruins and diminishes the struggle all other characters go through. No matter what theories we have in papper, Tom Bombadil is a reminiscent character from the hobbit, wich was written as a children's book as gift to Tolkien son. He has no place in a more mature book like the Lord of the rings and even if looked at as a call back connecting the books it is still out of place.
@@Jowjoneking iirc Tom, as a character, is one of Tolkein's oldest. Before The Hobbit. But your point is, in my estimation, a silly one. What Tolkein did was create an entire universe that's all interconnected, so his older characters "belong" in his world just as much as new characters. I would even go so far as to say there's no distinction to be made between new and old characters, because it's a living world where they all exist together.
I think the existence of Tom Bombadil is Tolkien's lesson for us that no matter how deeply we try to understand the workings of the universe, there is an inherent mystery under it all that cannot be analyzed and neatly interpreted by the scientific method or comprehensive theological frameworks. We all might have an encounter or two with that which cannot be explained and rather than obsess over making rational sense of these experiences, at some point we can just throw up our hands and accept there is a kind of enchantment to the world - mysteries, that, like Tom Bombadil, owe us no explanation. If Tolkien provided us with a Middle Earth that had airtight, logical history and everything was explainable, it would actually be a less fantastical world than the one we live in.
Me while Reading the books years ago: "Who's this guy?" Me while watching this video now: "What the hell is this guy?" Me, a moment before my death: "Let's Hope there's an afterlife, I must ask Tolkien Tom Bombadil's true identity" Me in the afterlife: "tell me, who's Tom Bombadil?" Tolkien: "He Is"
@@dr.vikyll7466 (this maybe a bit too real) Just because he puts up the charade of being happy doesn’t mean he actually is aka depression you act happy but in fact you are sad
I like that Tolkien didn’t explain everything, whether intentionally or not, because trying to formulate theories and make sense of certain things is really awesome and fun
@@michami135 well, not exactly. As he points out in the video, “He is” is the classic deity claim. Which is why some insist that he is Eru Himself, incarnate. But no, that doesn’t fit either 🤷♂️
Thank you for this. Things are not going well in my life so I decided to finally read these books to hide from my depression but I got hung up on Tom Bombadil! He's such a fascinating character and I can't stop wondering and it's driving me crazy, but this really helps! So thank you.
He was Tolkien's favourite toy as a kid. He had this doll of an old bearded guy with a hat and named him Tom Bombadil. When he started writing stories, he used to include him on them, LOTR is not the only Tolkien's book in which he appears. He is the only creature/thing in middle earth that was not created by the music of the Ainur because it existed before out of that world. It is usually said that he is the personified Tolkien but I believe he is more of a privileged spectator of the worlds that his friend creates. He existed before any of them, he can go from one to another and he is not restrained by the rules of any of them. I would say Iluvatar could be closer to being a representation of Tolkien in his own world. But that's just guessing
I like this theory. Tom Bombadil standing completely apart of the whole world, having fun, singing and dancing, master of his own realm because he is not only a creation of Tolkien, but a friend. And as a true friend, he has free reign on Tolkien's creation because he can be trusted not to mishandle it and let it unfold as it is, with the privilege of being there himself to witness in person. It's even a beautiful thought if you think about it, that such a deep creative mind such as Tolkien would still hold his favorite toy with such regard as to give him the premier seat to witness his most beloved creation.
I like this theory also. And it begs the question, who and what is Goldberry? She seems to be his match and is comfortable with who and what he is which could be a sign she is his equal.
I have a similar line of thinking to the embodiment of the music, I was happy you tied Ungoliant into that theory also. I believe Tom and Ungoliant were beings that existed before Ea was created. If Eru Illuvatar existed before then, it is fair to assume there were other beings that existed before Eru decided to create the Valar and their song. I believe they are both just a good and evil being that were attracted to the song and came to it for different reasons, Tom because he enjoyed the music and wanted to be a part of it, and Ungoliant because she wanted to feed on it or heard the dissonance and it resonated with her. Gandalf even mentions even more unspeakable beings in the depths, which I believe would be similar beings that were just in the same space as Arda as it was created and were trapped inside of it. My evidence for Ungoliant is that Melkor feared her initially when he came upon her, however Melkor knew they were the most powerful of the Valar, and would have no reason to fear any creation of Eru Illuvatar. In my opinion it makes sense for why they do not fit in any specific class or order of Illuvatar's creation or children, because they are not part of Illuvatar's creations.
Re: comments below that Tolkien saw himself and his wife as Luthien and Beren: In Tolkien's biography, you read that while he was courting Edith, they went on a picnic in the woods where she danced. Imagine her as lovely young woman in a flowing 1900's dress, dancing in the woods like an elf-maiden. What a romantic scene! And Tolkien, the poor mortal, falling hopelessly in love. BTW, I did my own Tolkien tour in Birmingham and visited their graves. Very touching! There are the names Beren and Luthien on the headstones. People leave little notes, some written in elvish, some with drawings, rosaries and flowers on the graves. It's beautiful.
Being a romantic the first time I heard this I did have a lump in my throat. When lockdown is over if you come up to the Midlands I will take you to what I believe is the inspiration for Brandywine Bridge. And possibly the Old Forest as it’s right by Cannock Chase and Tolkien lived there for a while!
As you obviously know, the graves are not in Birmingham, they are in the Wolvercote cemetery just North of the ring road around Oxford. I just didn't want other readers to go to Birmingham to look for his grave as your comment gave the impression that the graves were in Birmingham.
As a child I immediately thought that tom was the embodiment of the earth, married to the daughter of the rivers. The elves talk about how Sauron can corrupt and break mountains, thus being able to eventually even overwhelm tom. His songs and control over the things in the natural world I attributed to him being wise and having experienced everything that has happened since the beginning of ardas history
While the idea that he’s the song kinda already covers this, this is the gist I got. Tom is Arda, hence why it would take the entire world asking him to take the ring, and the worry that if Sauron conquered the world he would have power over Tom Bombadil.
I know the Hobbit was a story for his kids, so maybe Tom Bombadil is simply a character from another story he told his kids, something akin to Winne the Pooh. So Tom showing up in Lord of the Rings is simply a fun throwback to his first few stories, and lends credence to him being the Oldest and coming before the Dark Lord, he literally was made and existed in stories before anything else, and landed in Middle Earth
Tolkien himself wrote the most likely answer. In one of the many letters (16 December 1937 - To Stanley Unwin), back when he was still starting to think about The Hobbit's sequence, he asked "Do you think Tom Bombadil, THE SPIRIT of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside, could be made into the hero of a story?" Tom is a spirit. No doubt about that. The theory of him being a spirit of the Music is good, but more likely Tom was one of the countless spirits created by Eru himself before Time. The Ainur were not just Valar+Maiar. There were other spirits, lesser than Maiar but still powerful, roaming around. Tom is likely one of them
You need to remember that that letter was written discussing the aspects of a possible sequel to The Hobbit, before Bombadil was included in the mythos Tolkien was crafting. We also see that Tolkien used the words "the spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford and Berkshire countryside". You cannot take those words out of the equation. This is Tolkien talking about what Bombadil _represents,_ not is in the lore of Arda. Don't put too much weight to those particular words when discussing Bombadil's origin.
@@MasterBombadillo I know about the time period when the letter was written. That doesn't change the fact that, to Tolkien, Tom was a spirit. He was a spirit outside the Mythos of Arda, and so he would continue to be inside of it. At least there's no evidence pointing Tolkien would change his classification. What Tom represents is what he is. As he was a spirit of a vanishing area of the real world, he is a spirit of a vanishing area of the secondary world (after all, the Old Forest was a vanishing spot, one of the last parts of ancient woods in Arda, destroyed by the hands of Men and Enemy). Not Eru, for there was no embodiment of Him; Not Tolkien, for he himself said he was not part of Middle-earth; Not Vala, for ALL were named; A lesser Maia perhaps, but no evidence of that; A spirit (either a manifestation of the Music or a lesser Ainu), why not?
@@leonardofaber5823 That doesn't add up actually. You can't take an explanation talking outside the whole mythology and give that the kind of authority you give it right now. You can consider it, certainly, but it's not a certainty Tolkien ever thought about Bombadil in that term. A "lesser" Ainu that comes to Middle-Earth would still be a Maia. After all, Maiar are all of the Ainur who came to Middle-Earth that aren't Valar.
I like how every character in LOTR has a huge amount of backstory and explanation for their existence, one of the most vast and detailed stories of all time. Then you also have tom bombadil
Tom Bombadil is... content. Does Tom want for anything? No. He has a house, he has Goldberry, he has a little patch of land to call his own. I don't really see Tom wanting.... anything, really. Which is why the One Ring does not work on him. Just about everyone who has wielded the One Ring (or tried to take it) is not content with their lives when they get it. Isildur, Smeagol, Bilbo Baggins, Frodo Baggins, Boromir, etc. The One Ring whispers into their ear that "Oh, I can help you achieve what you desire..." But Tom Bombadil wants nothing. Thus, there is nothing for the One Ring to try and tempt him with.
This is why I felt the argument against Tom being an Ainur was a bit weak. The ring simply doesn't effect Tom because it has no desires or needs to work upon. Gandalf and Sarumon both came to Middle Earth with definite goals, and so could be tempted towards corruption. Tom, not so.
having no desire such as described in this thread is not something a mortal, or something mortal adjacent can achieve. PS - not able to screw with the mind of is one thing, not making you invisible and you being able to see others who are is another thing.
@@xBINARYGODx The ring didn't always turn people invisible or cutting Sauron's finger might have been harder than it was. Gandalf himself says that the ring offered powers in proportion to the one who wielded it. I would guess neither he or Galadriel would turn invisible for instance.
I think Tom, like Gia in Greek mythology, is the embodiment of the world itself. The first raindrop, the first well, everything. In contrast, he could as well be the embodiment of the music as it created the world and the lands. Tom rembers the first raindrop, Tom is. Tom was first and might be the last when darkness comes. Plus, his song songs are stronger songs, and his feet are faster. I love Tom Bombadil.😁
@@SixSioux That's extra funny coming from you, RC. But if you came down here to make fun of my Dungeons and Dragons joke in the comment section of a video about the esoteric debate over the nature of an obscure fantasy character, you may be playing to the wrong crowd.
That hits home Thaddeus. While I've not done it I've sure given up retired characters for other Storytellers to use in their future stories. It's great fun when I have the chance to check in with them and catch up on my creations.
Tolkien talked about Tom being purposefully enigmatic because some things should be mysterious. I think that was Tolkiens way of stoking the readers imagination. The beauty of books is that the readers mind helps construct the world the author created. So Tom Bombadil can be whatever the reader imagines him to be.
This is exactly what I think as well. A great writer leaves some things open for the reader to insert themselves into. Each reader is different, and trying to control every single aspect of your story means that there's nowhere for the reader to fit themselves.
..Here is where Tolkien's Catholic piety and Biblical influence cannot be dismissed...Tom B. is the anthropological manifestation of God... like unto, Daniel's "Ancient of Days" (see Daniel 7:9)...Tom, much like the original LORD God, of Genesis , is not transcendent from nature, but rather delights in its goodness. We are told, the Almighty even enjoyed the Garden of Eden in the cool of the day (see Genesis 2:8); ...and yes the true nature of God, always remains an enigmatic mystery...and Tolkien's, Tom B., captures that wonder perfectly... After all Bombadil remains the only being on Middle Earth apparently powerful enough that the "evil" Ring of power...is really only a golden ring...that is because all of creation is ultimately subject to Him...even tyrannical plotting of Evil, itself...and this Tom B. merely chuckles at (see Psalm 2:1-4)... ...Don't you know His name yet?.. (see Exodus 3:13-14 & John 14:8-10)...
@@IAmBael That would also fit with how Tolkien approaches questions in his Letters. He doesn’t present himself as _the_ authority on Arda, just someone who’s spent a lot of time thinking about it.
And that is wisdom plenty of modern fantasy writers have completely forgotten. They're in such a hurry to explain and flesh out their hard magic system, creature biology and background lore that they forget the importance of mystery in a story. Fully explaining how everything works makes the world feel small, regardless of its size. You always wanna leave something just beyond the horizon so that no matter how much your story expands the reader always has the impression that there's more because what they imagine to that space will always be more amazing and epic than what you can possible create.
IIRC, Tom Bombadil was in LOTR because Tolkien's daughter, Priscilla, had a favorite doll by that name, and he promised her that he would include the doll in the story he was writing.
Maybe she described him how Tom has to be like in the story, just being a happy man living his own in the forest and cannot be harmed by any means, and Tolkien added it like this without any further explaination.
I like the idea that Tom is the embodiment of the Music of the Ainur, but I think he’s just simply himself, as Tolkien intended. If anything else, he’s the gentle yet immutable representative of the sovereignty of goodness in the world that stems from Eru. He’s the one being that doesn’t fit a category and that mystery brings us ultimate comfort. Much like the mystery of the Holy Trinity in our own world. And that is an encouraging thought. 😊
“Tell me, who are you alone, yourself and nameless?” has always been my favorite line in LOTR. It clears my mind and leaves me staring into the middle distance for a weirdly long time. Works better than a Zen koan for me. Great video as always!
Tom is the most profound and mysterious section of the book, and he's right next door to the Shire. AND when Gandalf comes back to the Shire with the boys, but won't help them clean their house, he goes off to a LONG discussion with Tom. Why would an angelic being need to go off for a long visit with a singing simpleton? Maybe there is much more to Tom than meets the eye? Everything about Tom is my favorite part of the book, including Frodo's anticipatory dream of the Undying Land (Paradise).
"Tom's a guy who loves the forest, who is happy and sings constantly, and is just generally positive to everyone." Seems very much on brand for Tolkien as an aspiration. He doesn't need to be an incarnation of Eru, or the music itself, or anything. He is a person living how a person should. He's living the ideal Tolkien life, in tune with nature and poetry, with a decency in his soul. He's Tolkien's Righteous Man.
Tom is an ideal. He is the character that is in tune with himself and the world around him. He is a gardener and a loving husband. He is unchanged and unchangable by any and everything. He is the living embodyment of a garden at midsummers eve. He is the summer solstice at it's height and his sun never sets.
Not far off from what Tolkien said; he described Tom Bombadil as a personification of the English countryside. But Tolkien also said that strictly isn’t who Tom is, it’s just how he came up with the inspiration.
#4 is definitely my favourite. I've always loved the idea of the gods of this fantasy world creating the universe through their music, it's a beautiful idea. Bombadil being a personification of that music makes complete sense with what we know of his character. Before I heard this theory, I'd always thought of Tom Bombadil as a "glitch", some unintentional note played during the Ainur's music that ended up creating something unexpected. That would explain why he wasn't interested in the war or the rest of the world, as he wasn't originally meant to be part of Eru's design. Also explains why his powers are unlike any other being in Middle Earth. Perhaps Eru's surprise at hearing that unexpected note led his thoughts to create Bombadil, before he regained focus back to the composition. I like the "music personified" theory a lot more, though. I never liked the "Bombadil is Eru" theory, that's just so overdone in fiction, having God living on earth as a regular person.
oooh I like this. mixing #4 with your theory -- an unintended consequence of Melkor's dissonance and Eru's effort to correct it, could have momentarily created a strange harmony that didn't exactly fit anyone's purpose, but nevertheless is a part of the music. that dang circle of 5ths, it can come back around and get ya, lol. Tom lives in harmony with all things the music created, as he was created with it, yet his particular harmony was not intended by either party, so he simply exists as a part of the music but not for anyone's specific purpose, Eru or Melkar.
like if you have two people play random music on two pianos, eventually at some point harmonies will appear unintentionally. And if harmony is the medium of creation, well then when you've got two musicians battling for control over the music in real time, it's sensible to think that there could have been a few unintended harmonies in the mix before Eru smoothed it back out. Harmony without purpose, it just exists on its own.
I think there are some things for which there will never be an explanation. Too many people think that because some things in Tolkien's mythos are so detailed in their explanation, that necessarily means _everything_ has a detailed explanation, and that's just not true. This was one man's creation, and one man can only come up with so much, especially when the majority of it came out of inspiration and not deliberate invention.
Tolkien described Tom Bombadil’s inspiration to a friend in a letter as “the spirit of the English countryside.” My personal theory: Tom Bombadil is the personification or genius loci of the lands that would become England as the ages pass in Arda. In this, Goldberry would likely be the rains and waters of England. It’s why he was there before the Valar, because the Valar entered Arda after he was made. It’s why he has boundaries: because England has territorial limits (history laughs at the irony). The areas around the Shire were to someday become the location of England, which would explain why Tom Bombadil wouldn’t leave. It’s why he can’t control weather, because he’s just the land, so the weather affects him. It’s why the ring does nothing to him, because he’s not a being. When it’s mentioned that he could fall to Sauron, it’s because he can be affected the way Hollin was affected by Elves, and Minas Morgul affected by the Nazgul. When it’s said Bombadil can’t resist Sauron “unless such power is in the earth itself”, it’s a literal statement. The land can’t defend anything if people don’t defend the land. It would also be why he regards Farmer Maggot in regard: Farmer Maggot loves and respects the earth, and Tom Bombadil respects him in turn. Being England’s genius loci would also account for Tom being “master”, and commanding to an extent what’s in his bounds, but not being all-powerful. This is also why he ignores the struggles of the world: Until the second music, he’ll just continue existing no matter what happens. He’s willing to save hobbits because they love the land, but he’ll do no more. I doubt Tolkien would endorse any single theory other than Tom Bombadil is Tom Bombadil, but Tom Bombadil as England’s genius loci is possibly the closest he would get to endorsing one.
I figured he's supposed to be some kind of earth or nature spirit, possibly an embodiment of the land of Arda itself. The fact that he's lived for as long as he did might symbolize the vitality of the land. It might not be a familiar concept within Judeo-Christian culture, but nature spirits are quite common in other cultures. Even English folklore has prominent examples, ie. the lady of the lake in Arthurian legend.
Hi there NOTR - I've just found your channel here and I really love this episode about Tom - I wanted to say that all the illustrations and artwork are really excellent and I'm glad you credited all the artists in the description area. Much Thanks !
I think Tom Bombadill is the incarnation of the Secret Fire. There is a passage during the music of the Ainur where its described that the secret fire is put in the centre of the world to burn, before the Valar enter it. If Tom Bombadil is indeed oldest and fatherless, it makes sense that he was there BEFORE the dark lord came from Outside. He was there before The Valar entered the world, because Eru had put him there as the secret fire and he had taken a form of his own. He is the *secret* fire.
@@kubaparcinski5942 "Therefore Ilúvatar gave to their vision Being, and set it amid the Void, and the Secret Fire was sent to burn at the heart of the World; and it was called Eä." It was supposed to be "at" not "in" my apologies.
I like to think that Bombadil is the personification of nature in Arda. This goes along with a lot of his characteristics, including his inability to finally stand against Sauron. Sauron can (and does) destroy nature when he wants to. But nature is indifferent to the battles between good and evil, it just continues doing what it does as long as it can. Bombadil can control Old Man Willow, a creature of nature. Bombadil can banish the barrow wight because it is unnatural and does not belong. Bombadil was there before anything, because nature had to be created by the Valar at the beginning of the world, and perhaps they made a personification of nature to help them with that job. Saying that Bombadil is actually Tolkien is fine for an out-of-LOTR explanation, but within the universe Tolkien created, Bombadil serves a purpose too.
@PurpleOwlAnimation that wouldn't stop him being the spirit of nature. It would depend on whether he emerges from nature when it comes to be, or whether he transcends actually existing nature.
I'd have to say he likely isnt the personification of nature, as there are others such as Carnan who very little is known about and is also immensely old and, as Celebrimbor suggested, will be around long after any other being. I believe Tom Bombadil is more of a being that was created in the dismay of the music of the Ainur, while Melkor's influence caused evil entities to spawn, it may have also caused manifestations of ones in the middle. Tom is a good being, but he isnt 'good' as in on the side of light. Tom keeps to himself besides something here and there, meaning he isnt like any other beings made to be good. Because of this I believe he is either from beyond the Music, as he is dubbed "The Fatherless" which could mean he is not from Eru's influence. Or that he is "Fatherless" in the sense that his true origin is unknown to all and that he was spawned from the disruption of the music.
I think that the old English folklore of “the green man” had some inspiration for Tolkien’s Bombadil. He would have possibly lectured on him at Oxford, his face is all over the place in Oxford carved in stone and wood (most notably on the “Narnia door” in the St. Mary’s corridor). No surviving stories of the character exist, so Tolkien May have been creating his own green man myth. If I’m not mistaken, Bombadil was a creation of Tolkien’s before he wrote The Hobbit, so perhaps some of Tolkiens old poems and children’s stories are making it into his LOTR epic for fun.
I'm surprised you seemed to overlook the most obvious explanation: Tom Bombadil is a self-insert of Tolkien into his own story. Tom lives the life that Tolkien would love best. And I think a lot of men would also love to live like him: Master of his own domain, with a beautiful young faithful wife, being merry and strong, without having to subjugate others. Self-sufficient and free.
Yes, that would explain how Tom Bombadil can be more powerful than Iluvatar. He is the personification of the true God of the story, the author himself.
That theory isn't mutually exclusive with any of the other theories. Yes, he's almost certainly a self-insert, but that doesn't explain his origin within the books' universe. He still needs a backstory.
@@StandardGoose We know he is either Eru himself, a direct creation of Eru, or some entity created by the music. He needs a legit in universe backstory. I don't see him as Eru for a number of reasons. I don't really see him as an opposite to ungoliant. I think he was either created directly by Eru to care for the earth sort of like how God created Adam. The first being. If not then he is a creation from arda itself in some way sort of like an avatar. Your thoughts?
The theory that Tom Bombadil is the incarnated music of the Ainur also holds up under the idea that Tom’s power is comparable to the power of “the earth itself.” Arda was created by the Music, so Tom’s power, which derives from the Music, would be very similar to the power invested into Arda, which also derived from the Music. In other words, being an incarnation of the spirit of the Music would make Tom essentially the spirit of Arda itself.
The music of the Ainur created Ea itself, of which Arda (and Middle Earth) is but a small part. Bombadil as the incarnation of the music should have mastery over creation second only to Eru himself - he shouldn’t be threatened by a Maia like Sauron if that was the case
I have always thought of Tom Bombabil as an embodiment of the natural world, the earth, of creation, or "the music of the Ainur". In the world but not of it. A sort of male "Mother Nature".
This was my opinion as well, after the video. Tom is "Father Arda" (derivation of mother earth), the physical incarnation of the spirit of the planet itself.
One of my favorites is the idea that he's a creature born from the Discord in the Song between Melkor and Eru just like the Nameless things. The idea that even from such conflict something kind and good can be created is comforting. The idea that he's Tolkien himself is also a neat one. Very meta and puts his comments about seeing everything first into place because he literally wrote them.
Personally I think the second is an ugly idea. It's just very typical and egotistical to insert oneself as some ageless god-like entity into your work.
Maybe it’s just that Tom bombadil was created before the lord of the rings so was able to view it through Tolkien as he is tolkiens or one of tolkiens first characters.
Imagine a Silmarillion movie which begins with a young Tolkien having an encounter in the forest with Tom Bombadill and the latter telling him about the story of the Middle-Earth.
I've always considered Tom to be like the Spirit of the Earth itself. Or to be more precise: He and Goldberry always reminded me a lot of Oberon and Titania. There is a LOT of old mythology spread throughout Middle Earth, so I feel like the Fairy King and Queen who behave very similar to Tom and Goldberry would be a very likely inspiration.
I really like the theory claiming Tom is the first character created by Tolkien based on his childhood toy. He can appear in many worlds but doesn't belong to any of them. It also nicely fits the recurring theme of the world trying to capture him and Tom easily avoiding the traps. Being with him for so long Tolkien also gave him many of his personal traits and gave him power to occasionally act as his Deus Ex Machina. Then again, knowing how creative process works, it's also very likely that he was just semi-accidentally written into LOTR without any specified theory developed by Tolkien beforehand. He would do that with other aspects of the Middle Earth and then had to revisit and rewrite them to make things more consistent. Tom was just left there as he was.
Who is Tom Bombadil: Tolkien’s Green Man - or something else? Is JRR Tolkien’s Tom Bombadil, from The Lord of the Rings, just a whimsical and fantastic character created by the Professor simply as a literary device or an entity devised from a deliberate or subconscious extraction from deep and ancient mythology? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-t8wmyXdai5Q.html
J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis were good friends and influenced each other’s writing. To me the existence of Tom Bombadil in LotR is parallel to the existence of Father Christmas in Lewis’s The Chronicles of Narnia. They’re both jolly old men who help out the hobbits/children and though perhaps they could assist the good in combatting the evil, they take a passive side and disappear from the story almost as quick as they came.
I just discovered these videos and I absolutely love them, thank you! Tom is 100% the music incarnate. He's not all of the music but just a piece of it among many. He does what he does and that is all.
And that's the reason he thinks ents is the most interesting part of Gandalf telling Tom the story about the destruction of the ring post-lotr. Ents = living trees moving around, which is fundamental to how nature and existence works. He'd find that interesting. That's what I've always thought of him.
Tom is the embodiment of the soul of Middle Earth, of the Anima Mundi of the alchemists, of the Holy spirit of christianity. Tom is not bound by time. He is always in the NOW. He does not think. The past and the future do not exist within him. He just IS, always. He represents the connection with the ALL that one acheives through enlightenment. A state of pure bliss. He incarnates a state of being that was before the Fall, when Adam and Eve just took care of the Garden, before they ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and became aware that they were naked. Before suffering existed. He is life itself, seperated from death. He is Master of ''tree, hill and water''... ie He is master of the elements of Water and Earth, not of Air and fire. This paragraph should be of particular interest also, when at the end of ROTK Gandalf says: "I am going to have a long talk with Bombadil: such a talk as I have not had in all my time. He is a moss-gatherer, and I have been a stone doomed to rolling. But my rolling days are ending, and now we shall have much to say to one another."
Perhaps Tom Bombadil is the spiritual manifestation of the “silence” or rests before, within, and after the music. Like the reprieve between the 3 songs. He may be a result of the spaces between each song holding them together. This would explain why he doesn’t intervene and is master of a realm that is inaccessible to those who are part of the songs themselves. Him intervening with the path of the fellowship of the ring would be like the song ending short before the final movement. He is the unheard part of the full composition passive, yet essential for the entire progression of events.
..Here is where Tolkien's Catholic piety and Biblical influence cannot be dismissed...Tom B. is the anthropological manifestation of God... like unto, Daniel's "Ancient of Days" (see Daniel 7:9)...Tom, much like the original LORD God, of Genesis , is not transcendent from nature, but rather delights in its goodness. We are told, the Almighty even enjoyed the Garden of Eden in the cool of the day (see Genesis 2:8); ...and yes the true nature of God, always remains an enigmatic mystery...and Tolkien's, Tom B., captures that wonder perfectly... After all Bombadil remains the only being on Middle Earth apparently powerful enough that the "evil" Ring of power...is really only a golden ring...that is because all of creation is ultimately subject to Him...even tyrannical plotting of Evil, itself...and this Tom B. merely chuckles at (see Psalm 2:1-4)... ...Don't you know His name yet?.. (see Exodus 3:13-14 & John 14:8-10)
I have a theory that is essentially unrelated to the books themselves. "The Adventures of Tom Bombadil" was a story Tolkein wrote for his child to make him happy in between writing The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. As we can see just like Santa Claus and other stories, its a story about a jolly person who brings joy. Considering Tom was written before the Lord of the Rings, Tolkien probably included this already existing character because he liked him and wanted to include a story his kid liked. This means there isn't much looking into who or what Tom actually was, because in essence he was and "extra" thing included in the story. He doesn't have a true origin in the story because he didn't come from the story. It's like if Bugs Bunny met Mickey Mouse somehow, they might exist together if written that way in a story but came from two completely different source materials originally. It creates an interesting enigma for sure but I believe that is the out of book explanation.
@Chris S. I am not sure if it was on purpose that you mentioned it. Mickey Mouse did meet Bugs Bunny once, and only once! (it was in 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit').
There are lot of things i learned from this channel which i previously unlnown. Brilliant doc series. Love your channel and your videos. We always appreciate your hard work and dedication towards these videos.
I think Tom was just a literary device of Tolkien just for his personal amusement, and to sort of 'embody' the natural world. I think if Tolkien had been pressed to 'justify' Tom, or if I was really, I'd suggest that he's just a kind of spirit that sprung out naturally as a by-product of the creation of Arda.
I think mostly that too. It was a whim and it solves a little issue with the story too. In the absence of Tom Bombadil the hobbits have to either deal with old man willow and the barrow wights on their own which seems unlikely. And if this is skipped then how do we kill the leader of the nine? I think Tolkien wrote him in and was happy to leave it as an enigma, maybe wondering if some sort of creative moment would allow him to fill in the back story later but not worrying if he didn't.
@@cerberus6654 No!!! That is no reason to drop him in the movies! A book is inevitably a collection of literary devices. The ring is literary device to create the story for example. Bombadil was dropped in the movies because of the movie length and the complexity he adds. While those interested in the story and background love enigmas like this movie makers seem to hate no closure. The exception to this is the brilliant ending of Inception. The movie is left with a couple of holes but is simplified overall. I suppose the swords from Galadriel, as used in the movies, ought to work on entities in either of the realms but even so, Tom Bombadil is an essential part of the story because it is an insight to the author and an embodiment or personification of Middle Earth.
@@damianpeterkelly1234 I think Tom was omitted (like so much... far too much) to make a more straightforward film experience focused far more on swordplay than on lore and the world Tolkien actually created, much to the loss of fans who may not have realised what was in the books (having only seen the films) or, to the fans who hoped to see everything from the books give the same amazing treatment as the other elements were. You are def correct that anything an author chooses to present to readers is by definition a literary device, though I think with Tom he can only be understood as such, where other elements can be more deeply contextualised against other elements in the universe through lore/events. I did see the point you were making about not dropping Tom on those grounds alone.
@@damianpeterkelly1234 I don't disagree! Movies are, of course, way more constrained by time than a novel but - between you and me, I found that Peter Jackson eliminated some pretty important elements. I could not believe that he substituted Arwen for Glorfindel - especially as in the books there's nothing to suggest that Arwen was hard-riding and hard-fighting He also inserted a lot of kind of not-really-funny little comedic moments that came out of nowhere and, to me, served no purpose. Like Eowyn's revolting stew. And yet, in the books, the presence of Tom Bombadil does add dimension. I also missed the barrow wight, but that's neither here nor there.
Theory 5 gets my vote, Tom simply is…. I think he does serve a roll as caretaker of Middle Earth, and as time has gone by, has set himself smaller boundaries. He is an observer, and a watcher, and a historian of all.
i first watched the first movie I think before reading the books, that's why I was super surprised by Tom Bombadil showing up. and all while reading I had such a bad feeling about it that I ran through the pages as quickly as possible as if I expected something sinister to happen to them. he gave me such an uneasy feeling. and it makes sense to me today because he wasn't supposed to fit into the rest of the story as he was completely detached from its fate.
I personally believe Tom is a manifestation of Middle earth itself, the soul of the world as it were. The world can resist Sauron but he ultimately conquers it like a plague, though the land is always the final thing he conquers and twists. At the same time the world has seen multiple wars and dark lords and weathered it all, so it's manifestation would be no more concerned with Sauron or the ring as any other event in a worlds lifetime
I like to think he is a nomad like how Human souls are described in middle earth. Enjoying Eru’s creations to its most minute detail jumping from one world to another. He’s just a guy chilling and that’s what I love about him.
Tom represents the Third Melody that Eru made to oppose Melkor in the Music. He is not in contrast with anything, his singing cannot be silenced and he is simply a good, loving person just as he is.
I was playing LOTRO with a friend of mine who’s never read the books, and when Bombadil walked in and destroyed all the Barrow wights by singing my friend just goes “wait what is this guy?” and I was just like “I don’t man no one knows”
I have read The Lord of the Rings at least once a year for over 50 years. Tom Bombadil is a beloved character. Like many others I was disappointed that he was left out of the film trilogy. For all these years I have accepted that Tom Bombadil "is". Reading/engaging in a fantasy world is "a great leap of faith". I am happy that Tom Bombadil is and will continue to be a fascinating, engaging character. Like the hobbits, he is not pretentious. He is happy to lead his existence close to the earth and nature. That is enough.
Considering Tolkien's Catholic background, Tom could be a type of Melchizedek from the Bible. (Genesis 14:18-20). Hebrews 7:3 says that Melchizedek was “without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever.” His sudden appearance and disappearance in the book of Genesis is somewhat mysterious. Just throwing it out there.
The professor was fairly adamant that his work was not allegorical. (and iirc, he actually wasn't much a fan of such) There's no doubt that his faith and experience of the great war was influential to his writing, but I highly highly doubt any actual intentional biblical allegory.
@@corrupt_reverend5123 I agree that there was certainly no deliberate allegory. That doesn't mean that part of how Tolkien conceived of Tom wasn't inspired by Melchizedek. As you say, his faith was definitely influential on his writing. Indeed, there are other things in LOTR with pretty clear biblical ties as well. For instance, when Elrond says, “This is the hour of the Shire-folk, when they arise from their quiet fields to shake the towers and counsels of the Great. Who among the wise could have foreseen it", It's difficult to imagine that Tolkien didn't have the passage in mind that says, "But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong". I mean, this is pretty much the plot/theme in a nutshell.
This thought occurred to me also. I would say Tom may have been an expression like Melchizedek, without a known progenitor. In Christian thought there are many theories of Melchizedek. Some go as far as articulating Melchizedek a theophany a pre-incarnate manifestation of Christ. I can understand the reasoning but it is not explicit in the Biblical text. The most reasonable explanation is Melchizedek is a type of Christ. The writers of Hebrews analogizes the priesthood of Melchizedek in contrast with the Aaronic rendering Jesus' priesthood superior to the Aaronic. This leaves the question what does Tom Bombadil typify in the LOTR narrative? I have yet to find out.
I always thought he was simply a manifestation of Arda, a spirit made self-manifest. The same way when some trees that are so old may become entish, Tom too learned to think on his own. Thus why he's fatherless and his own master. Also why he's no omnipotent or otherwise overly powerful. It also makes sense why his mate is also a [river] spirit.
His wife, Goldberry, is clearly a nature spirit ("daughter of the River"). Middle-Earth has many such, even the mountains and trees have spirit. I think Tom Bombadil is the master of nature spirits. Or the spirit of the Earth itself.
I figured it out after many, many hours of thought. Happy to elaborate. Narratively: He is simply a creature (as Elrond calls him) that was created with Arda at the beginning of time by Eru. He functions as a sort of avatar of the Earth itself, as the council says he could withstand evil insofar as the Earth could. Analogically: Bombadil and Goldberry are Adam and Eve before the Fall, as they were meant to be in the Garden. Metatextually: Bombadil is Melchizedek. I have written a brief on the 15 parallels between the obscure Biblical character Melchizedek and Bombadil. He isn't Melchizedek, but metatextually he is the same archetype.
Thank you for this. I have been a Tolkien geek since I first read the trilogy when I was 12--and have always loved Bombadil even after I recognized that he is kind of out place in the epic. Having read Tolkien's notebooks (published by his son as "The History of Middle-Earth"), I concluded that the master (i.e,. J.R.R. himself) included Bombadil (a character he had created before the story of the ring had fully emerged from the depths of his unconscious) when he didn't really where he was going with his Hobbit sequel. Bombadil belongs to the world of fairy tale and folklore, more a character to put in "The Hobbit" than in LotR. As the story of the ring emerged, however, he wanted to keep Bombadil even though the story doesn't "need" him (hence Peter Jackson's decision to dispense with him in the filmed trilogy). He just liked the character. And with a thought paralleling Ravenclaw Prefect2020 (I am also Ravenclaw), he is very much the master's alter ego. Up until a friend recommended your video, I hadn't much thought of how Bombadil fit into Tolkien's cosmology (and this from someone who has read--or listened to--The Silmarillion multiple times). Tom Bombadil just is. So I'm with you. I loved how you introduced Theory 5--for a moment all we saw on the screen was "Tom Bombadil/is..." Tom Bombadil is. I'm with you on Theory 5. Tom Bombadil is Tom Bombadil. That said, up until now, I gad thought more of Tom Bombadil's origins in fairy tale and folklore (than his role in Tolkien's cosmology). He is a character akin to the Green Man--and other well-meaning mysterious forest dwellers who themselves have no known origin. They just are. And Tom Bombadil is. Very well done presentation. Thorough and thoughtful. And delightful. Yes, most delightful. Tom would approve. He's that kind of merry fellow.
I've always seen him as a spirit of nature, kind of like like Goldberry but immensely powerful and a big part of the reason Middle Earth needed to be saved from Sauron in the first place. Maybe he IS the spirit of nature as resulting from the Music. He's always been one of my favourite characters and without him, the movies lose the balance the books bring. I guess that makes him a plot device, but to me, he was the gateway to the many nature-based paths my spirituality had taken me throughout my life.
My theory is that Tom Bombadil is time itself. In that, he's the Metronome of the Universe, the rhythm and beat. The "Music" created the universe. Time must be kept, not in the sense of a clock, but in the sense of the music. It's why he's so powerful, yet limited in the scope of that power. It's why he was first to be there, and would be last to go at the end. He's not a note in the song, or a player of the tune. But he is there, always there, from the beginning to the end. before the music plays, and long after it ends. Without him nothing would make sense, but you never actually see or feel his presence. The ring can't effect him, because he's beyond the power of the ring. But without the "music" he is nothing as well. It's very ethereal, but that's always been my theory. Time must be kept, and it's embodiment is Tom Bombadil. Even in the silence between verses, there is Tom. Weather you hear it, feel it, or know it. Tom is there. He is just Tom, he is the Time.
I noticed in the hobbit movie a watched a while ago, that a few times when pretty much any important characters had a conversation, there was a sort of face or figure visible in the rocks or trees besides them. I think this is Tom and he was present at the meetings in which they forgot to invite him.
I believe Tolkien dedicated a large amount of his life into weaving a world of wonder with a cohesive archetype of "the hero's journey" that would necessitate a resolution to his epic and I think, just maybe, that Tom Bombadil was a literary technique akin to "faith" where the reader has no choice but to use their own imagination to consider the limitless possibilities of Tom Bombadil. I think it's purposeful that he is happy, welcoming, and aloof without any sense of maleficence. Almost as if he knew his story must end but the wonder that his world created for the reader would live on in their imagination. In other words, Tom Bombadil is what our imagination allows him to be, as premeditated by Tolkien.
Under liked comment I think it’s quite remarkable that Tom exists as he does in this story for as long as he does( literally the entire time Arda exists ) without making too big a fuss in it. Without anyone in the story interacting with him much “on screen”. He’s immensely powerful, wise and clearly on the side of good and yet we know preciously little about him. He just seems to go around doing as he pleases and setting things back to how they are supposed to be effortlessly. It seems like if he wanted he could just walk up to Sauron, whack him on the nose and tell him he should be crafting something and the whole story would end and yet _he just is_ is all we got to go by lol. What a truly unique character.
I think Tom was Tolkien's way of injecting himself into his own story. (edit: Or atleast used Tom as a medium to speak directly to the other characters.)
@Matthew Dorry Perhaps Tom wasn't _literally_ Tolkien's chosen avatar, but rather somewhat of an archetype of a playful "author" who is older than time (before the books were written) and knows all.
@Matthew Dorry It does make sense, and I figured you would raise those contentions (although I didn't expect such force). But all-in-all, well said. Thanks for the insight.
My theory has been that Tom is simply the physical embodiment of story and legend. He loves telling stories. He only seems to appear when he can facilitate a good story (when no one else could save the hobbits in the old forest). Why would Tom forget the ring and discard it if it he took it with him? Because it would suddenly be an excellent plot point taken off the board. He'd need to get it back in play eventually. He is the eldest. Story and legend describes what happened even before the eldest being came into existence. Tom is physically capable of solving the problems of our story with ease, but who would want to hear the tale of a man of unlimited power winning with ease. A little hobbit saving the day while the armies if man band together against darkness is far more compelling. Maybe you could force him to do it, but why would you.
I went through this sort of analysis a number of years ago. There is a category of beings in Middle Earth that are best described as nature spirits. I think Tom was a high ranking nature spirit as was Goldberry. They are a separate race, apart from the Ainur, and the peoples of Arda. Tom seems like a "father nature" sort of character. Tolkien explained that Tom Bombadil was the name of a doll that his kids had. He also described him as simply being an enigma. Because of the mystery surrounding his origin, I find Tom to be the most interesting character in the legendarium. I also like the fact that he has no apparent attraction to power. He's uncorruptible.
The enigma of Melchizedek is an apt comparison. However, the writer of Hebrews does all but spell out for us that He was pre-incarnate Jesus, while leaving little room for debate. Tolkein's Bombadil leaves a lot more room for speculation. But for the entirety of the time before the New Testament, the mystery surrounding the two would have been very similar.
5:45. Wow! That image takes me back. Growing up in NYC, I would ask for a Tolkien calendar as one of my XMas presents. These particular calendars were done by the Brothers Hildebrandt, and that was always one of my favourite images out of all the calendars I got. That image is entitled, Goldberry. Their work was amazing! I still have them.
My theory is that Tolkien wrote Tom before he decided the tone of the book. After settling on a different tone he retconned him during the council of elrond.
Tolkien developed a world before he was sure he even wanted to write a book. The tone differs with the geographical location. He is at place in the Shire. One of the themes the books explore is the disturbing prospect that the Shadow of Mordor could reach even a place like the Shire. The plight of the hobbits is punctuated by periods of sanctuary. Rivendell is another such sanctuary. If anything, it is Peter Jackson who didn't get the gradually darkening tone right.
@@baigandinel7956 i think peter jackson nailed the gradually darkening tone from the hobbits perspective, especially the deeper frodo and sam got into mordor, with thier brief memories and moments of reminicing on the quiet life of the shire to show the stark contrast. but to each their own i guess
