April 16, 2002

The First, Myth, etc.
Ser B.

I have now read the "who was first" string of arguements, but a thought crossed my mind. Tolkien spend most of his life trying to categorize creatures into his creation. He tried really hard to put the Balrogs into a creation history because he believed that evil could only corrupt not destroy. What then, were Balrogs? Corrupted Maiar right? This is why Gandalf was matched pretty well with the balrog of Moria.

That said, it is quite possible that there just is not a sufficient explanation for Bombadil's true nature/time of arrival in Middle Earth. More likely, Tolkien died before sufficiently categorizing Bombadil. Because Bombadil was another story entirely, it would make sense that he didn't quite fit in. Also, Tolkien did not really know how epic the book was going to be until the Inn at Bree. Thus, his fairy tale had not moved to epic myth quite yet.

In the end, it appears there is no answer for Bombadil-- but that conclusion, I argue, is better. Lord of the Rings is an epic myth. Myths gain mystery,intrigue,awe, and wonder when not quite everything is known. When a few strings are left untied, then people want to know more... and thus we argue about it. But as long as things aren't certain- we keep our wonder.

I dont believe its a cop-out to say there is no answer for Bombadil, but a defensible argument. It is far more interesting to be in a strange awe of Bombadil rather than trying very hard to categorize him. That way, the sense of the myth is retained and the World of Middle Earth stays uncorrupted by our classification proceedures and stays very magical in the end.