It doesn't conclusively prove that Tom is the reader, it just puts forward the theory. And it's a decent theory in some ways, but one that fails to come close to convincing me. Consider this post the 'conclusive' counter-argument. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
Quotes such as 'unless such power is in the Earth itself' point away from this reader-Bombadil theory, and are not discussed in the essay. That's a start. The main thing, though, that causes my disbelief in this particular train of thought is that Tom is not anything like your average man -- neither is Goldberry an average woman, being rather a kind of demi-god, beautiful and high -- and I do not believe that Tolkien would have used such a character to paralell the character of the reader. Tom is an eccentric man, with powers that we do not posess. His home is a refuge, as the essay says; but how this helps the argument I am unable to fathom. The reader does not give refuge to the characters in the book, but follows the characters themselves. In the scene of the Hobbits' staying in the house of Bombadil, we follow Frodo and the other more than Bombadil, who gives aid to some grateful Hobbits un his care. Bombadil sort of appears out of nowhere and then goes away again, and shows himself to be a powerful and awesome figure in the short time that we see him. Goldberry inspires the same feeling, that she is a high and powerful figure rather than a normal one.
The fact that Bombadil and Goldberry are both living an ancient life together that goes on completely independent of the existence of the Hobbits, who merely stumble accross it, also speaks against the theory of that essay, Olorin, as a reader travels with the main characters and is absorbed in them.
Basically, had Tolkien chosen to put a sort of embodiment of his readers into the LotR, he would have chosen totally different characters with which to do so. The position of the characters of Tom and Goldberry enable this theory to be written about, i.e. enigmas of little apparent importance in the bigger picture, but a study of the characters themselves seems to disprove it.
|