![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
![]() |
#5 | |
Curmudgeonly Wordwraith
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ensconced in curmudgeonly pursuits
Posts: 2,515
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
You can delve into the mythological tendencies of Tom and Goldberry, you can divine their origins from previous Tolkien text, and you can make assumptions about their parturition, place and purpose (or lack thereof) in Middle-earth; however, the inescapable conclusion is that Tolkien presented them as personifications of nature, and he preferred to keep them as such, eschewing any further definition beyond the timeworn "enigma" we repeat ad nauseam whenever the eternal argument arises (Balrog's wings, anyone?).
They are embodiments of wood and water, derived certainly from Tolkien's medieval predilections and the mythos arising from not only England, but Greek, Norse and Finnish studies; hence, in Goldberry's case, the korrigans, Peg Powlers, water-nymphs, selkies, kelpies, mermaids and naiads of folklore (and the "river-daughter" appellation accords with numerous citations in Greek myth). Harkening back to Bêthberry's reference to Wiki... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldberry One gets a veritable cornucopia (or fish net, as it were) of various explanations from dozens of scholars, each hitting on specific aspects of Goldberry's manifestation. All are true, or half-true, or reasonable assumptions. But in the end, I am inevitably drawn back to a letter from 1937 where Tolkien explained that Tom (and by extension, Goldberry) was meant to represent: Quote:
__________________
And your little sister's immaculate virginity wings away on the bony shoulders of a young horse named George who stole surreptitiously into her geography revision. Last edited by Morthoron; 08-27-2023 at 07:09 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |