Timeline for In Tolkien's opinion, does Tom Bombadil (and the concept of pacifism) actually hold any power?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2016 at 19:35 | comment | added | jamesqf | @Ber: Yet the greater part of LOTR is about war, and often about the necessity of war. E.g. the Ents, Theoden's passivity under Wormtongue's influence, the Scouring of the Shire... Contrast that with WWI, where I get the sense that the High Command's real objective (on both sides) was to kill off as many of their own troops as possible. | |
| Sep 25, 2016 at 7:40 | comment | added | Ber | @jamesqf admittedly that was a broad-brush statement but I feel Tolkien's experiences of war were largely negative. He began writing his myths while recovering from shell shock. Tolkien romanticized personal struggle, the doomed struggle popular in Norse myth. It's notable that he popularized the idea that this sort of thing was perceived as doomed by Norse missionaries (cfd. Beowulf author) who saw the warlike but pagan Norse heroes as fundamentally doomed, like noble savages. | |
| Sep 19, 2016 at 18:48 | comment | added | jamesqf | @Ber: Re "All soldiers hate war...", not true, from my own experience, and the writings of a number of soldiers. With particular reference to Tolkien and and his experience in WWI, we might ask whether his objection was to war itself, or to the utter mismanagement of it by the British (and German) High Command. | |
| Sep 18, 2016 at 8:31 | comment | added | Ber | I find it notable that most of the people who cited LOTR (and the movies) as explaining why "most of us must fight" do not themselves fight, nor share Tolkien's particular strong religious beliefs. It's more of a "why other people must fight" thing. All soldiers hate war and thoughtful soldiers generally come back asking who sent them to kill, who they actually killed, and why. | |
| Sep 17, 2016 at 5:27 | comment | added | user11521 | @Wildcard I was actually just paraphrasing my understanding of what josh was saying, but since it wasn't originally my idea I didn't want to attribute it to myself. | |
| Sep 17, 2016 at 1:27 | comment | added | Wildcard | @Michael, is that a quote from somewhere or just a (well written) paraphrase? | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 23:58 | comment | added | Sandy Chapman | I think this quote shows Tolkien to be a pragmatist. I think he appreciates the ideal of pacifism however pragmatically it's ineffectual in preserving itself without power. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 17:22 | comment | added | user11521 | @josh "It's okay that there are a few pacifists out there representing the ideal, but most of us must fight so that ideal might survive." | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 16:56 | comment | added | josh | It seems to me that the most important part of the quote in regards to the question is: "It is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there is a war. But the view of Rivendell seems to be that it is an excellent thing to have represented, but that there are in fact things with which it cannot cope; and upon which its existence nonetheless depends." He doesn't despise pacifism but see's it as an ideal. But as with most ideals the real world won't allow it. That we should strive for pacifism but in the face of evil we must fight. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 14:37 | comment | added | Periata Breatta | @JasonBaker - Tolkien intentionally left the question of who or what Bombadil is unanswered. In all his writings, he was careful to always cast any opinion that might have given some insight into the answer to that question as being sourced by one (or, as in this case, many) of his characters, because he didn't want to make a statement that could be seen as definitive one way or the other. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 13:44 | comment | added | Cronax | I'm not sure this answer is correct, in spite of it's quotation of the Letter. It seems to me more like giving someone with a medieval lifestyle a smartphone. To us, it's something we covet , but to the medieval man, it's just a flat thing. He knows neither internet, nor electricity and the 'problem' the device solves is not a problem he has. It simply has no effect on how he lives his life and what he values. So it is with the one Ring, as Tom knows no concept of power the ring has no hold over him and is inherently worthless to him. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 7:05 | comment | added | Adwaenyth | To put this into some context think about Tolkiens background. He was a soldier himself during WWI and fought on the front lines during the Battle of the Somme where hundreds of thousands died. He also had just witnessed WWII before writing most of his books. One sided pacifism would in both wars have led to certain demise of Britain and thus might explain his view on things. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 0:01 | comment | added | Herbzical | It is great reading the full quote that mine was sampled from, but all it has done is solidified in my mind that Tolkien did not exactly treasure pacifists, which he himself labels Bombadil. It could well be the "feeling" he refers to (and asks us not to analyse- very sorry :p ) is one of disagreeing with pacifism- the feeling that flows through the rest of his stories. The function, showing the Ring is useless (whether by its choice or otherwise) in the hands of a pacifist. He finishes off by pointing out that should Bombadil's pacifistic way have been upheld, Bombadil would have perished. | |
| Sep 15, 2016 at 22:46 | history | edited | Molag Bal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2016 at 22:38 | comment | added | Jason Baker | I find it notable that he takes pains to remark that Bombadil's ineffectiveness is "the view of Rivendell." | |
| Sep 15, 2016 at 22:27 | history | answered | Rand al'Thor♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |