Stayce Baptista
English 4990
Dr. Carroll
30 March 2004
An Analysis of an Enigma
As one of the defining elements of fiction, characters make stories come alive, possibly even more so in Fantasy literature because we are entering the realm of the subcreator. Tom Bombadil, arguably one of the most intriguing characters of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, exhibits the most awesome and mysterious nature. As the eldest and numerously named, Iarwain Ben-adar (oldest and fatherless), Forn (given by the dwarves), and Orald (given by the northern men), Tom has much knowledge to instill in the four hobbits as they set out on their adventure through Middle- Earth (FOTR 297). His wisdom sets him apart from the other elder’s of Middle-Earth, except perhaps the Ents. Tom’s character has another role; a role that Tolkien himself acknowledges: “And even in a mythical Age there must be some enigmas, as there always are. Tom Bombadil is one (intentionally)” (Carpenter 174). The One ring and Frodo’s journey to destroy it illustrate ultimately the basis The Lord of the Rings; however, without the introduction of Tom Bombadil, Frodo, Samwise, Meriadoc, and Peregrin would not have necessarily become aware of the many unexpected enigmas lurking in Middle-Earth.
Roland Barthes in S/Z postulates the five codes that incorporated within any text. In particular, the hermeneutic code is relevant to Tom Bombadil. In order to understand Tom, we need to come to terms with his role in the text as a universal statement (Introduction to Roland Barthes, Module on the Five Codes). Stated simply, “The hermeneutic code refers to any element in a story that is not explained and, therefore exists as an enigma for the reader, raising questions that demand explication” (Introduction to Roland Barthes). Tolkien ultimately placed the enigmatic Tom in The Lord of the Rings because he has already “invented him ‘independently’ wanted an ‘adventure’ on the way” (Carpenter 192). We can formulate questions about Tom that may not come to a resolve. For example, why does the One ring have no power over him, and does he know that Aragorn will be at the Inn of the Prancing Pony to lead the hobbits to Rivendell? This leads us to why he (Tom) would be excluded from the recent motion picture interpretations of the trilogy.
Contrary to what Peter Jackson, director of The Lord of the Rings motion picture trilogy said in an interview, Tom Bombadil does have relevance and does further the story of Frodo and his journey with the one ring (The Fellowship of the Ring, DVD). Tom speaks to the hobbits about bees, flowers, the ways of trees, creatures of the forest, evil, unfriendly, and cruel things, and most importantly “his words laid bare the hearts of trees and their thoughts, which were often dark and strange, and filled with hatred…destroyers and usurpers” (FOTR 147). Tom’s character ultimately may not be directly concerned with the plight of Frodo and the ring, but he will be affected by the outcome if the ring is not destroyed. Furthermore, Tom’s tales of the anger of the trees and the hunger in barrow wights signify an initial development of caution and fear in the hobbits.
This encounter with Tom Bombadil illustrates a preparation of sorts that lets the four hobbits know that there are unexpected and perilous dangers in their future that may be unrecognizable at first glance. The character of Tom, in other words, helps to provide a historical background for the old forest and its anger, but also, he symbolizes happiness, for lack of a better term. Because Tom is the eldest of all beings in Middle Earth, he personifies the voice of history that Tolkien needs to instill and unify regarding his created world, encapsulating that history into one character. Tom’s function mirrors that of Beorn in The Hobbit, a voice to warn of the peril of Mirkwood (Helms 22). Additionally, Tom represents a “‘Golux’, the one romance character who can ‘elude the moral antithesis of heroism and villainy,’” as created by Northrop Frye (Helms 87). A multitude of enigmatic representations and functions for such an important character to the trilogy, thus enthralling and propelling readers to a deeper level of analysis seems so significant. Again, why would such a character with so powerful of a literary standing be excluded from the motion picture if he provides such an impact in the trilogy? Could this be because he is too abstract to simply explain to the common person unfamiliar with the intricacies of literary analysis?
Most significantly, Tom does not fall into the normal guidelines that one would work through when exploring a character for analysis. Ultimately, he is beyond being described as a round character and having an indirect representation. As Tolkien states, Tom is an enigma, and thus, as readers we are supposed to question his being, the relative term - being. Tolkien writes that Tom’s function is simple; he illustrates “a measure of control” in contrast to the various dichotomies within the text, such as “moderated freedom with consent against compulsion that has long lost any object save mere power” (Carpenter 178-9). Goldberry may say it best: “The trees and the grasses and all things growing or living in the land belong each to themselves. Tom Bombadil is the Master… He has no fear” (FOTR 141). Tom, the master of his own being, does not fall prey to the dichotomies that torment the characters of Middle-Earth, or at least he will not as long as Middle-Earth remains beyond the control of the Dark Lord Sauron. This may be why he does not respond with shock at the sight of the ring when it was presented to him early on upon his first meeting Frodo.
The One ring holds no power over Tom Bombadil, which is shocking and curious to the reader, as it is to Frodo. Moreover, Frodo hands Tom the ring and is “astonished” as the ring grows large enough to fit Tom’s hand (FOTR 150). This lack of power the ring hold over Tom signifies he desires not individual power nor to assert power over others. He does not possess any form of greed as demonstrated by removing the treasure found with the wights, and placing it in a mound in the sun for all to enjoy. Although, he did remove one brooch for Goldberry, he kept nothing for himself (FOTR 165). Shelob, introduced in The Two Towers, is perhaps as old as Tom. She is greedy and indulges on the flesh of any who come into her lair. Sam even wishes that Tom were there in her cave, perhaps out of despair or because Tom freed them before from dark places (TT 371). It is not likely that she would possess the ring for herself, as she never took it from Gollum during any of his visits.
Tom will not step out of his self contained and self-created boundaries. As Gandalf says:
“[T]he ring has no power over him. He is his own master. But he cannot alter the ring itself, nor break its powers over other. And now he is withdrawn into a little land, within bounds that he has set though none can see them, waiting perhaps for a change of days, and he will not step beyond them. (FOTR 298)
One could speculate because beyond the boundaries of the old forest he would lose his sense of being, and thus be corrupted. Such speculation, though, would displease Tolkien greatly, but the character that Tolkien has created begs for examination. He will not concern himself with the actions of others, as Gandalf notes at the council of Elrond because he will not leave his forest. Tom will also not take the ring seriously because he has forgone material possessions. Although, Goldberry, whom he pulled from the river, seems to be owned by him, however, their relationship appears mutual, for Goldberry is waiting.
Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin recognize Tom as other. They question who he is and his purpose. The hobbits experience unsettling dreams while under the protection of Tom and his mysterious home. Frodo dreams of Gandalf being taken away by a large eagle from Weather top, although Frodo does not realize at the time it is Gandalf (FOTR 144). Later in the same dream, Black Riders appear leaving Frodo worried to leave Tom’s safety (FOTR 144). Pippin dreams of being inside the willow again and is hearing horrible laughing, perhaps a premonition of his time to come with the fowl orcs (FOTR 144). Merry dreams of drowning in a bog (FOTR 144). The safe atmosphere of Tom’s house is marred by the dreams, but those dreams are necessary and reminiscent of what is to come.
In order to analyze Fantasy literature, one must come to terms with what it represents as a universal whole. Tom Bombadil illustrates a prominent character in The Lord of the Rings that allows the reader come to terms with the notion that not all components of life are meant to make sense. Tom portrays the other. He is an elder, of what race or kind we are never told. To understand him we must identify with the other and embrace it, as well as understand the literature that portrays it.
The literature of the Other is other. It is different. It does something different. It does it, moreover, not in spite of the fact that the other in question does not exist, but because it does not exist. (Dickinson 47)
Furthermore, Tom illustrates the stark opposite to the elder creature Shelob. Tom represents a middle ground, a strive for peace if you will. Shelob is dark and dangerous, and can be manipulated; her lust and hunger for flesh formulate greed. Tom, on the other hand, is beyond reason and want. Paul H. Kocher demonstrates, Tom Bombadil as one of the cosmic creations of Tolkien and a literary device:
Literarily, he [Tolkien] wants to keep an atmosphere of wonder at the mysterious hand which is guiding events, but he must not let this theme become so strong or definite as to persuade his readers that the hobbits are certain to reach Rivendell safely. (Master of Middle-Earth 39)
Tom demonstrates an existence that remains simple, to please Goldberry, and sing and stroll in his woods. Frodo and his companions are perhaps working to get back to their world of simplicity represented by the shire but have to confront the other before doing so. Unfortunately, for Tom, his world too will end if Middle-Earth is lost to Sauron. Interestingly, when all is over and Middle-Earth saved, except for the shire, Gandalf leaves as the hobbit turn toward Bombadil’s woods to have a long overdue conversation (ROTK 298). One cannot help but speculate the subject of that conversation, but alas, the enigmatic force of Tom is at work again, and Tolkien still leaves us wondering.
Works Cited
Carpenter, Humphrey, ed. The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1981.
Dickinson, Peter. "Fantasy: The Need for Realism." Children's Literature
In Education 17.1 (1986), 47.
“From Book to Script.” The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring Extended Version.
DVD. Dir. Peter Jackson. Based on the Book by J.R.R. Tolkien. With Elijah Wood and
Ian Mcklellen. New Line Cinema, 2001.
Helms, Randel. Tolkien’s World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974.
Introduction to Roland Barthes, Module on the Five Codes. 27 Mar 2004
http://www.sla.purdue.edu/academic/engl/theory/narratology/modules/
barthescodes.html
Kocher, Paul H. Master of Middle-Earth: The Fiction of J.R.R. Tolkien. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1972.
Tolkien, J.R.R. The Lord of the Rings, Part One: The Fellowship of the Ring.
New York: Ballantine, 1993
---. The Lord of the Rings, Part Two: The Two Towers. New York: Ballantine, 1993
---. The Lord of the Rings, Part Three: The Return of the King. New York: Ballantine,
1993.
|
