|
If I only had a Bombadil... © Michael Martinez
Page 4
Nov 10, 2000
A third reason for why the sword-giving pasage is very important is that it gives us our first glimpse of Aragorn. Well, our second, really. Gandalf has already mentioned Aragorn -- named him fully -- in "The Shadow of the Past". But that discussion is long forgotten by now, and Frodo doesn't remember the name of Aragorn. Nor do most readers, it seems. And Bombadil and Aragorn seem to know each other quite well, but Bombadil doesn't reveal Aragorn's identity. He only prepares the Hobbits to meet him. I believe that Bombadil's vision of Aragorn's family line implants a certain sense of trustworthiness in the Hobbits. Maybe it only takes root in Frodo, but that is sufficient.
Bombadil in fact plants other seeds in Frodo. For example, the second night the Hobbits stay in Bombadil's house, Frodo dreams of "sweet singing running in his mind: a song that seemed to come like a pale light behind a grey curtain, and growing stronger to turn the veil all to glass and silver, until at least it was rolled back, and a far green country opened before him under a swift sunrise."
Frodo's dream concerns Valinor, and his eventual passage over Sea. Frodo suddenly wakes up and there Tom is, outside the window, whistling. On the first night in Bombadil's house Frodo dreams of Gandalf, trapped in Isengard; Pippin dreams of the Old Willow; and Merry dreams of water spreading all round Bombadil's house. Merry's dream seems to be a foreshadowing of the Black Breath. Pippin's dream might just as easily be a foreshadowing of his and Merry's eventual encounter with the Ents. Frodo's dream is simply a prophetic revelation of events which have befallen his friend and counsellor. It's a warning, perhaps, to all three that grave danger lies ahead of them.
When Bombadil tells the Hobbits they will need swords if they travel east or south, they don't seem to understand that he is foretelling their journey for them. They are deaf and dumb to all his wisdom, and really pay little heed to it, though his words seem to enrapture them. Bombadil in fact has a deceptively reassuring effect on the Hobbits. They feel safe with him, but he doesn't necessarily feel they will be safe if they remain with him. He is no master of the Nazgul, whom he knows come from Mordor. And he is no master of the One Ring, which cannot master him, either. But he cannot stand between Frodo and his destiny, nor forestall the inevitable.
Go To Page:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
In response to message posted by lawnboy101:
Hear! Hear! I whole-heartedly agree. Jackson's intent was to make a great film from a gre ...
|
I must first admit to being a latecomer to middle-earth. I must then confess to having seen "fellowship" (both the original and the extended)at least 20 times. I viewed "towers" twice in theatre. I've ...
|
In response to message posted by BandwagonNewbie:
One can only speculate, but Tolkien seems to have felt that Bombadil was so committed ...
-- posted by Michael_Martinez
|
Do we have enough information to rule out the possibility that the Ring, in the long run, would have corrupted Bombadil had it stayed with him? ...
-- posted by BandwagonNewbie
|
There are only 3 films to cover six books, which is how Tolkien broke it down. The entire first book (getting Frodo to Rivendell)is (to my mind)an extended introduction to the hobbits and a metaphor/f ...
|
Join the latest discussions
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to
Michael Martinez's
J.R.R. Tolkien topic, please visit the Discussions page.
|