|
|
 Tom
Bombadil vs. Peter Jackson
While Tom Bombadil is a heavily
featured character in J.R.R. Tolkien's novel, he doesn't appear—even by reference—in Peter Jackson's movies. So why bring
him up at all? Isn't that the internet equivalent of being an
annoying party guest?
Analysis by Greg Wright
|
THE FELLOWSHIP
OF THE RING
MONTHLY FEATURE: SEPTEMBER 2002
Tom
Bombadil vs. Peter Jackson
This
page was created on September 18, 2002
This page was last updated on
May 31, 2005
|
|
Tom Bombadil vs. Peter Jackson
|
|
In
April, 2004, this web page was annotated to address errors in
the text. Click on highlighted text to review errata.
|
 Who
Is Tom Bombadil?
One of the most annoying things in the world is having to endure
the self-important party chatter of some arcane-knowledge enthusiast,
carrying on in a manner which clearly communicates disdain for those
happening to be ignorant of the subject. This month's The Lord of the Rings feature,
unfortunately, may convey much of that same feeling for the general
movie-going public. For while Tom Bombadil is a heavily featured,
even pivotal, character in J.R.R. Tolkien's novel, he doesn't appear—even by reference—in Peter Jackson's movies. So why bring
him up at all? Isn't it the internet equivalent of that annoying
party guest?
|
 Well,
very probably, yes. Hopefully, however, the recent monthly The Lord of the Rings
features have helped to demonstrate how Peter Jackson's choices—the minor and major tweaks he has introduced to Tolkien's story
line and characters—help us understand what's going on in his
films: what his unique purposes are in presenting The Lord of the Rings. In the same
way, an analysis of the things Jackson has wholly removed can hopefully
yield insight into what elements of Tolkien's vision are "dispensable";
and, perhaps, why he feels that way. It is arguable, I think, that
the character of Tom Bombadil represents the most significant such
omission to be found (not found?) in the first installment of Jackson's
film trilogy.
|
One of the more chilling episodes in Jackson's movie
is the crossing of the Brandywine on the Bucklebury Ferry. In the
novel, Frodo and his Hobbit friends then pass through the Old Forest
on the borders of Buckland, well before arriving at Bree. After
a short series of misadventures, the group is rescued and hosted
by Tom Bombadil, a curious mannish creature who not only dwells
in the Forest, but seems to be its master. His bride is Goldberry,
"daughter of the River," and their whole existence seems tied up
with the Forest and its environs. While visiting with Bombadil—
who seems well informed about the various comings and goings related
to Frodo's quest—Frodo is surprised to learn that the Ring has
no power at all over old Tom; further, Bombadil seems to be wholly
disinterested in the thing. After the Hobbits continue on the journey,
Bombadil is again required to rescue them, this time from Barrow-wights
(evil spirits of dead Men, dwelling in old burial mounds) before
they finally get on the road to Bree.
|
 Later,
in Rivendell, Elrond says of Bombadil, "Iarwain Ben-adar we called
him, oldest and fatherless. But many another name he has since been
given by other folk: Forn by the Dwarves, Orald by the Northern
Men, and other names beside. He is a strange creature..." Gandalf
shares, "The Ring has no power over him. He is his own master. But
he cannot alter the Ring himself, nor break its power over others...
And if he were given the Ring, he would soon forget it, or most
likely throw it away. Such things have no hold on his mind." Elsewhere
on Hollywood Jesus, I have covered what I believe to be the salient
details of Bombadil's character within the scope of The Lord of the Rings. To wit:
Tom says one of his purposes is to "teach the right road, and keep
your feet from wandering." In biblical prophecy, this is a spiritual
function: "...your ears will hear a voice behind you, saying, This
is the way; walk in it." (Is. 30:21) Of his identity, his mate Goldberry
merely states, "He is." This directly mirrors God's description
of himself to Moses in Exodus 3: "Tell them 'I Am' sent you." Narrative
problems aside, it is therefore difficult to deal with the character
of Bombadil. How do you portray a purely spiritual being on film,
especially a film that focuses so much on action?
|
|
|
The
Eternal Thing
In one of his letters, Tolkien said, "I don't think Tom
needs philosophizing about, and is not improved by it." And, indeed,
since the character is so enigmatic, probably 95% or better of the
novel's readers invest little or no energy in formulating some definitive
conclusion about the "meaning" of Tom Bombadil; and it seems to have
absolutely no effect on their enjoyment of either the book or the
character. Still, it is probably fair to say that Bombadil represents
the Eternal. That is to say: within the context of Middle-earth, ages
may come and ages may go; Rings may be forged and entire populations
may be annihilated in the struggle to control them, but Tom Bombadil
will always Be, and will always be disinterested in those relatively
insignificant details (that is to say, insignificant in the grand
scheme of things). For Tolkien, such a presence in any story would
be important, but especially in one of such seeming darkness as that
of the War of the Ring. |
|
|
The Link to Tolkien's England
Also significant is the fact that Bombadil is the only character
appearing in The Lord of the Rings whose entire literary genesis predates the writing
of the novel. As story development proceeded, Tolkien discovered
a great many characters whose histories eventually became incorporated
into his larger mythology; but only Bombadil entered drafts of the
story wholly realized. Why? As Tolkien made plain in another of his
letters, Bombadil represents the "spirit of the (vanishing) Oxford
and Berkshire countryside." The stories published as The Adventures
of Tom Bombadil bring Tom's history at least through Medieval times,
if not the period of Tolkien's youth.
|
|
|
So What Was Jackson Thinking?
Being a New Zealander, it's unlikely that Jackson has
much affinity for the Oxford countryside of Tolkien's youth, despite
the great pains his production designer took to replicate those
environs for the movie's depiction of The Shire. It was aesthetics
Jackson was after, not a physical characterization of the spiritual
sense of the land. Perhaps, for him, the Hobbits themselves suffice.
It's harder to excuse elimination of The Eternal from Tolkien's
vision, though. Granted, narrative problems almost dictate that
the entire Old-Forest / Barrow-Downs sequence be trimmed from the
script; but can't the Spiritual Imperative, which Bombadil represents,
be replaced by something?
Perhaps it will in the coming movies; perhaps not. It would indeed
be a shame if the darkness of Jackson's vision could not be enlightened
by the knowledge that, somewhere in his cinematic Middle-earth,
there's a jolly fellow in large yellow boots who has the fullest
confidence in the world that all things really do work together
for good. |
| LOTR Coverage Index here
E-mail Greg Wright here
|
OFFICIAL
SITE
The Lord of the Rings © 1999-2004 New Line Cinema. All Rights Reserved.
|
| |
|
|
