OOTS is Missing Something

[Robert Paulson]

I've been reading through the Bone graphic novel, and I noticed that the Great Red Dragon mostly stays out of the burgeoning conflict between the people of the valley, the Bones, and the rat creatures/Lord of the Locusts. He reminds me of Tom Bombadil in this way. He's obviously very powerful, but he's not too troubled by what's happening around him. I don't think we've seen a character like this yet in OOTS. Maybe you could count the Gods, who seem to be pretty hands-off with the conflict, but they live outside the world the characters inhabit. I wonder if we will ever run across any epically powerful characters who just don't care to get involved?

[TheBlackArcher]

The Monster in the Dark fits that description.

Even though TECHNICALLY he is on the evil side, he seems more of a neutral epic character, blindly following Xykon and he might not even decide to attack OOTS in the end. He just wants to be happy.

[Shanty Man]

I agree, the monster in the darkness is that charecter. (I have nothing more to add.)

[FoE]

You've misunderstood the character of the Red Dragon. It's not that he didn't want to get involved; in fact, he was constantly jumping in to save Bone, Thorn and the others. But he was prevented from interfering too much because of the other dragons, who did not want to get involved in the war with the Lord of Locusts. He did care, but his hands were tied.

[Captain Six]

What about the oracle?

[[TS] Shadow]

Oh god, Tom Bombadil. He gives the halflings weapons. So what? They barely use weapons until the point when they get the fancy elf daggers. He does nothing, and is an insignifcant person in the crowd. If a person with power refuses to act, then they are no better than a redshirt NPC.

[Robert Paulson]

Oh god, Tom Bombadil. He gives the halflings weapons. So what? They barely use weapons until the point when they get the fancy elf daggers. He does nothing, and is an insignifcant person in the crowd. If a person with power refuses to act, then they are no better than a redshirt NPC.

It's not true that he does nothing. He is part of the landscape. You know, like the spice mines on Kessel (sp?) in Star Wars. You know they are there, and you know Solo used to smuggle spice from them, but you don't visit and the characters who are there don't get involved. It adds flavor to the story to flesh out the landscape, and that usually involves creating characters and places which are kind of tangential to the story. Bombadil doesn't really move the story forward, and he doesn't really participate, he's just there to add flavor.

The MitD, by comparison, is directly involved in Xykon's plans. He may not be terribly committed or motivated, but he is there for some purpose. Still, I would tend to agree that, unless something else happens, the MitD is closest to a Bombadil type character of everyone who isn't a god... in that he seems to be too powerful to get worked up about anything.

That said, I think Bombadil was really more tangential than the MitD, and he seemed to exist only to serve Tolkien's fancy.

[Flame of Anor]

Bombadil is about as tangential as the spice mines of Kessel...or should be. It was a good decision to leave him out of the movie.

[Robert Paulson]

You've misunderstood the character of the Red Dragon. It's not that he didn't want to get involved; in fact, he was constantly jumping in to save Bone, Thorn and the others. But he was prevented from interfering too much because of the other dragons, who did not want to get involved in the war with the Lord of Locusts. He did care, but his hands were tied.

I may have, since I'm only about a third of the way into the story. Regardless, the other dragons' refusal to get involved makes my point.

[FoE]

Look, finish the story before we get into this any further. The dragons have their reasons for not wanting to get involved in the conflict, but at the end they do play a major part in the story. And that's all I'm going to spoil for you.

[David Argall]

The OOTS are the heros of this story, not some uber-stud. No, we don't need anything of the sort. The dragon is useful in Bone because the hero is hopelessly not up to the task, and needs rescue at times [lots of times. How many books of the series consist of him running and/or hiding?] Our party may be outmatched, but they have a shot at it, and are marching forward, even if they are doing a lot of slipping back. So our superman just detracts from the drama.

[Robert Paulson]

Look, finish the story before we get into this any further. The dragons have their reasons for not wanting to get involved in the conflict, but at the end they do play a major part in the story. And that's all I'm going to spoil for you.

Fair enough. Bombadil still applies. :)

[Robert Paulson]

The OOTS are the heros of this story, not some uber-stud. No, we don't need anything of the sort. The dragon is useful in Bone because the hero is hopelessly not up to the task, and needs rescue at times [lots of times. How many books of the series consist of him running and/or hiding?] Our party may be outmatched, but they have a shot at it, and are marching forward, even if they are doing a lot of slipping back. So our superman just detracts from the drama.

That's not really my point. Lots of fantasy worlds have epic characters who don't really have a purpose in the story, or who don't want to get involved. There are not really any of those here.

Maybe the flumphs qualify? Not really epic though.

I would have said the Drizzt Do'Urden ripoff character, but he was hilariously removed from the world by soul sucking lawyers.

[[TS] Shadow]

Not really, sir. If Bombabdil was just a piece of scenery, I could forgive a chapter devoted to him. Not several: it's just a waste of time and annoys me.

[Euron]

So, OOTS is a bad story because there isn't a Deus Ex Machina waiting in the wings just in case something goes awry?

Your argument sucks.

[Robert Paulson]

So, OOTS is a bad story because there isn't a Deus Ex Machina waiting in the wings just in case something goes awry?

Your argument sucks.

Your attitude sucks. I never said it was a bad story.

[Linkavitch]

The Monster in the Dark fits that description.

Even though TECHNICALLY he is on the evil side, he seems more of a neutral epic character, blindly following Xykon and he might not even decide to attack OOTS in the end. He just wants to be happy.

I agree. Though OotS does need someone involved in the story more, and is near infinitely powerful. Like if they were in a life-threatening situation, and Thor or someone saved them, and they asked why Thor couldn't just blow up Xykon. And then Thor would explain why.

[Rutskarn]

Not really, sir. If Bombabdil was just a piece of scenery, I could forgive a chapter devoted to him. Not several: it's just a waste of time and annoys me.

Didn't he heal several of the badly injured hobbits who were attacked by the barrow-wight?

[[TS] Shadow]

I don't remember: I gave up on the books, to be perfectly honest. The fact is that he shouldn't have taken up so much time if he did nothing.

As to OotS, I agree that if they rely on du es machina too much, the story will fall apart.

[FoE]

Fair enough. Bombadil still applies. :)

No, no, NO. Listen to me: you don't know what the hell you are talking about. You have not read the books. If you did, you know what role the dragons play in the story.

And back to your original point, Oots is not "missing" anything. You make it sound like Rich was supposed to be filling in boxes on a goddamned checklist entitled "STOCK FANTASY CHARACTERS."

"OK ... we've got the naive young hero, check ... we've got the Dark Lord who does nothing until the heroes show up on his doorstep, check ... we've got the sidekick character, check ... OH NO! We forgot the Gandalf analogue! We can't have a story without a Gandalf analogue! WE JUST CAN'T!!"

The story stands on its own. There's no 'need' to insert any type of a character into a story where they're not going to fit, just so we don't violate someone's idea of what a fantasy story should be, ie. another clone of Lord of the Rings.

And as for your Tom Bombadil example, that character is despised by a great portion of the LOTR fandom for being a useless twit that serves no real purpose in the story. They got rid of him in the movies for a reason.

'Nuff said.

[Euron]

No, no, NO. Listen to me: you don't know what the hell you are talking about. You have not read the books. If you did, you know what role the dragons play in the story.

And back to your original point, Oots is not "missing" anything. You make it sound like Rich was supposed to be filling in boxes on a goddamned checklist entitled "STOCK FANTASY CHARACTERS."

"OK ... we've got the naive young hero, check ... we've got the Dark Lord who does nothing until the heroes show up on his doorstep, check ... we've got the sidekick character, check ... OH NO! We forgot the Gandalf analogue! We can't have a story without a Gandalf analogue! WE JUST CAN'T!!"

The story stands on its own. There's no 'need' to insert any type of a character into a story where they're not going to fit, just so we don't violate someone's idea of what a fantasy story should be, ie. another clone of Lord of the Rings.

And as for your Tom Bombadil example, that character is despised by a great portion of the LOTR fandom for being a useless twit that serves no real purpose in the story. They got rid of him in the movies for a reason.

'Nuff said.

THANK YOU! You said it far better than I ever could have. I couldn't agree more.

[Liwen]

Maybe I'll hurt the hearts of many Tolkien fans around here, but the whole Bombardil side story was a huge mistake. Having this uber powerfull character around flushed out a lot of good drama and gave the impression that the hobbits were weak, dependable and incapable of doing anything by themselves. Everytime a hobbit faces a challenge in these books, he is saved by Bombardil, Ents, Aragon, Gandalf, etc. The only truly admirable hobbit was Sam. He repelled a giant demonic spider and manage to carry Frodo up mount Doom.

Bilbo wasn't all that bad either.

Back on topic. No, OotS doesn't need a Bombardil like character. People would likely wonder what's the point of wasting like 10-20 strip on a character that isn't going to do anything and is essentially borring because he restrain his awesomeness.

[Optimystik]

Didn't he heal several of the badly injured hobbits who were attacked by the barrow-wight?

An act which didn't influence the story in any way at all. He didn't give them any useful items like lembas or the Phial, they didn't learn anything practical about themselves, their world or their quest from him, and he was content to stay in his wood while Sauron enslaved the world. He might as well have been a healing fountain with an anti-wight raygun installed in the base.

[*Templar*]

OOTS doesn't need a Sarda the Sage.

[Kish]

I remember reading somewhere that Tolkien himself regretted putting Tom Bombadil in, in restrospect.

I don't remember where I read this, though.

[The Extinguisher]

Not really, sir. If Bombabdil was just a piece of scenery, I could forgive a chapter devoted to him. Not several: it's just a waste of time and annoys me.

Complaining about Tolkien wasting several chapters for essentially pieces of scenery is like complaining about silent pictures having no sound.

It's pointless, really.

[Grail]

Toliken wrote his stories to flesh out a real world and to create a true mythos. He didn't do it to make internet geeks happy. To this extent Bombadil, Goldberry and Old Man Willow are all important parts of the whole.

Leaving them out of the movies was a good idea, but then the movies aren't Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, they are Peter Jackson imitates Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. They are good movies, they are not good representations of the book..... and they had Orlando "I'm made of cardboard and cannot act to save myself" Bloom.

[Golden-Esque]

You've misunderstood the character of the Red Dragon. It's not that he didn't want to get involved; in fact, he was constantly jumping in to save Bone, Thorn and the others. But he was prevented from interfering too much because of the other dragons, who did not want to get involved in the war with the Lord of Locusts. He did care, but his hands were tied.

If said character existed, wouldn't it stand that he or she would do nothing because his or her hands would be tied? In essence, such a character could very well exist in Order of the Stick, but more likely then not we wouldn't see them.

**Oops, Read Up After Posting. OP has not read far into the comic. Therefore, SPOILER ALERT!!!! * *





And if you take this interpretation, Roy Greenhilt fits this bill perfectly at the moment. He wants to help Haley, Cecila, Durkon, Elan, Belkar, and Vaarsuvias reunite and win so they can revive him, but since he cannot speak with any other character (other then the Oracle) and cannot manipulate the Material Plane, his hands are metaphorically tied.

[JonestheSpy]

Well, I agree that OotS isn't missing anything, whether archetypal characters or anything else. And the Monster in the Dark does kind of remind me of Tom Bombadil, in a twisted sort of way.

That being said, I have to agree with Grail that folks are really kind of missing the point in their readings of Tolkien. It seems like a lot of people are viewing the books as if they were a DnD campaign and not novels - characters being judged only by how much butt they kick or what they give to the PC's to help them out.

Tolkien's world is far more complex. Asking "If Bombabil is so powerful, why doesn't he go kick more bad guy ass?" completely misses the point of the character - it's not that he has so much power, but that no one has power over him.He can drive away an evil spirit, but there's really nothing he could do against an army. He's an ancient elemental being, tied to his homeland.

Also in the larger meta-narrative, the encounter with Bombadil is part of the underlying rhythm of the story. The hobbits move from danger to refuge, deadly threat to unexpected ally, in an ever increasing sine wave, the tension and stakes being raised each time. From dodging the terrifying-but-unknown Black Riders between safe spots in the Shire, through the Old Forest to Bombadil, from the Barrow-Downs to Bree, fleeing the now-scarier multiple Nazgul to Rivendell, through the depths of Khazad-Dum and the horrors within to the unearthly wonder of Lothlorien.

Oh, and anyone who thinks that the hobbits don't accomplish anything on their own really need to go back and read the books again.

[Flame of Anor]

BY THE WAY

what OotS is really missing is robots. Giant robots with crushing titanium claws and laser eyes, sent from the future to punish us in the past.