Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: > >> Sorry Alberto, but I still can't see much use for Tom Bombadil. Of the 3 or >> 4 times I've read LOTR, I've skimmed that section at best every reading >> after that first time. > >I rather like old Tom. I admit it's hard to see just how he fits into >things, > But he does. It's interesting, because I couldn't see it until I tried to "prove" it, along with some other identities that were obviously absurd.
>but it's interesting that to him the Ring is an almost-meaningless >trinket which holds no power over him--has no effect on him at all, >really. > Which is one hint about his nature :-) >And then, at the end, Gandalf says something about it being time >to pay old Tom Bombadil a visit. He seems to symbolize that the division >of life into good and evil is artificial somehow, and temporary. > Ah, but this is *not* what he represents. He's obviously one of the "good guys". Alberto Monteiro
