Quote:
Originally Posted by Tar-Jêx
The literary purpose of enigmas is to intrigue the reader, to make them wonder. You don't necessarily have to theorize, but if you're intrigued, and like the mystery, that's what's important.
|
Do you believe that the
reader must come up with what Galadriel55 calls “crazy theories”, and it doesn’t matter if they are crazy. I totally disagree,
Quote:
|
If you just left Bombadil as a mystery, and didn't approach him with intrigue, then you are missing the point. If you leave Bombadil as a mystery AND are intrigued, that was what I believe was intended with the absence of explanation.
|
I don’t see that ignoring the mystery of Tom Bombadil is missing the point. I believe Tolkien also purposely ignored it. The point of Tom to me is what Tom is and does in
The Lord of The Rings.
That you have a quasi-religious faith that Tom Bombadil can be explained is your own quasi-religious faith, not mine. Similarly I have no quasi-religious faith that Huckleberry Finn’s mother will ever be explained or that there any
point in imagining details. Perhaps she was whore. Or perhaps she and ‘Pap’ were two young lovers or a man and wife deeply in love, and then she died of scarlet fever.
I don’t have to invent theories for a literary work which does not explain them. You want to invent theories, do so yourself instead of merely preaching.