The Trickster in LotR - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Evisse the Blue · 02-06-2005, 12:35 AM

Indeed the similarities with Tom Bombadil are striking. The parts that do not fit may be because we know this character too little, or they haven't had a chance to manifest themselves in the given situations.
Even the part about him not having control over impulses being a subject of his passions (notice that it says 'at times'). And impulses and passions don't necessarily have an evil connotation, so I can see Tom Bombadil behaving impulsively.

The only problem I see is that Tom appears too little in the story so that he could be perfectly equivalent to the Trickster character. Tricksters usually play a predominant role, and their actions lead to major events. While Bombadil just prefers to be out of the way and is unconcerned with 'greater matters' such as the Ring.
So I agree with Garen on this one:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garen LiLorian

In the context of LotR as a myth, Gollum has a pretty good hold on a trickster archtype.

In any case, it's strange how this very interesting quote could lead to comparing two so different characters such as Gollum and Tom Bombadil!

davem · 02-06-2005, 04:04 AM

I think, as others have said, there are a few characters who manifest the Trickster archetype in LotR. In fact, if we take into account the early drafts, Bingo plays the role to an extent in his encounter with Farmer Maggot, wearing the Ring & drinking a mug of beer, & running off with the farmer's hat!

If we look at The Hobbit we see Gandalf playing the same kind of role when he turns up at the start & tricks Bilbo into joining the Quest of Erebor.

Its almost as if the Archetype 'overshadows' various characters at various times, rather than any one of them being The Trickster throughout. I wonder if its not misleading to look for a single character personifying any archetype in Tolkien's world. Chrysophylax plays something of the same role in Giles, as does Alf in Smith.

Perhaps the Archetype in its 'pure' form was too powerful & dangerous (as well as uncouth) a figure for Tolkien to be entirely comfortable with giving him his head. Bombadil very nearly got away from him, after all, & had to be carefully restricted to his own little land to stop him running riot. Tolkien was very careful in his use of the 'purer' mythological & psychological Archetypes - for instance, its very significant that in a mythology which makes such strong use of 'Northern' myth he carefully avoids the use of ravens. They pop up only in a minor way in the Hobbit, & this is probably because of all the incredibly dark connotations they have in Norse & Celtic myth.

I suppose Tolkien was walking a fine line in his own mind between recreating what had been lost, & producing what to him would have seemed something dangerously atavistic. The Archetypes had to be presented in a 'civilised' form, they had to be 'dealable' with for a modern audience, & principally they had to conform to his Christian worldview. The Trickster has no place in orthodox Christianity.....

02-06-2005, 04:04 AM	#2
davem Illustrious Ulair Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties Posts: 4,240	I think, as others have said, there are a few characters who manifest the Trickster archetype in LotR. In fact, if we take into account the early drafts, Bingo plays the role to an extent in his encounter with Farmer Maggot, wearing the Ring & drinking a mug of beer, & running off with the farmer's hat! If we look at The Hobbit we see Gandalf playing the same kind of role when he turns up at the start & tricks Bilbo into joining the Quest of Erebor. Its almost as if the Archetype 'overshadows' various characters at various times, rather than any one of them being The Trickster throughout. I wonder if its not misleading to look for a single character personifying any archetype in Tolkien's world. Chrysophylax plays something of the same role in Giles, as does Alf in Smith. Perhaps the Archetype in its 'pure' form was too powerful & dangerous (as well as uncouth) a figure for Tolkien to be entirely comfortable with giving him his head. Bombadil very nearly got away from him, after all, & had to be carefully restricted to his own little land to stop him running riot. Tolkien was very careful in his use of the 'purer' mythological & psychological Archetypes - for instance, its very significant that in a mythology which makes such strong use of 'Northern' myth he carefully avoids the use of ravens. They pop up only in a minor way in the Hobbit, & this is probably because of all the incredibly dark connotations they have in Norse & Celtic myth. I suppose Tolkien was walking a fine line in his own mind between recreating what had been lost, & producing what to him would have seemed something dangerously atavistic. The Archetypes had to be presented in a 'civilised' form, they had to be 'dealable' with for a modern audience, & principally they had to conform to his Christian worldview. The Trickster has no place in orthodox Christianity..... __________________ “Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects."