Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bethberry
I can appreciate the legendary precursors, but in Tolkien's text I don't see the fearfulness, perhaps because this house, the House of Bombadil, is a sanctuary. The Hobbits are delayed by a "washing day", an ordinary rain , rather than a fearful storm with lightning and thunder and violent winds. What sort dangerous empowered feminine nature would say, "Heed no nightly noises"? The dangerous female figures of legend and myth come at night to disturb sleep, not to banish fear.
|
Well, the fact that she's protective to the hobbits, doesn't mean she's not dangerous - in fact, I'd propose it means she
is dangerous - to enemies. Dangerous doesn't mean 'evil' - later on Gandalf will point out to Gimli that he (Gimli) is pretty dangerous himself! I don't think Tom is the only one who could protect the hobbits from harm. I suspect Goldberry could do a pretty effective job on her own, if it came to it.
As far as the 'ordinary rain' of her 'washing day' goes, I don't think we can conclude from that that she couldn't do much more. A nature 'goddess' would be able to control her power. She did what was necessary - any more would have been simply showing off, & potentially destructive, rather than protective.
Oh, back to the Adventures of Tom Bombadil, does anyone find any significance in the fact that Tom's first 'opponent' is Goldberry (=water), his second is OMW (=plants), his third is the family of badgers (=animals), his last is the Barrow Wight (= supernatural being). Its almost like an 'initiation' sequence.
Lastly, for now, why the name 'Goldberry' - isn't that too much of a plant name for a water-lady? Am I pushing etymology too far to speculate its from 'gold-bearer', which could be a kenning, referring to the river water carrying the fallen autumn leaves, or even the reflected glints of sunlight on its surface. (Please tell me if that's a really stupid suggestion!)