the indeterminate Bob

Professor Olsen's fervent conviction about Bob's ultimate stature prompted me to go back to the text. So, I have collected the references to the Ostler Bob to see if they really do shed light on the man/hobbit question:

"Where's Bob"?

Butterbur needs his ostler...this offers no indications about his height or nature

"Tell Bob there are five ponies that have to be stabled"

Again, this doesn't tell us much

"Bob ought to learn his cat the fiddle"

Nor does this; like the fox, the cat tells us little.

"I'll rout out Bob and send him around as soon as may be"

more work for an ostler

"Bob came back with the report that no horse or pony was to be got for love or money in the neighborhood - except one"

again, no more information on the nature of Bob

"'A poor old-half-starved creature it is' said Bob"

Finally, a word from Bob, but again, there's no description whatsoever. I was remembering that Bob had only been referred to second-hand in the text, but this is not the case. We here for him just this once

"They had to work harder in Bree, but Bob treated them well"

here's further evidence that Bob is kind but that's all we learn.

"they said farewell to Nob and Bob"

So, the hobbits and the staff of the Pony have bonded, which is no surprise considering the events of the previous night but their farewell greeting tells us nothing about Bob's 'standing' with them as they also say farewell to Butterbur, who is one of the big folk

"a parting present from Bob and Nob"

Again, we see some of the kindly nature of Bob and Nob as good souls who have some affection for the traveling hobbits; this is consistent with what we've seen above, but not particularly revealing

"Tell Bob! Ah, but I'm forgetting, Bob's gone"

and finally at the end of the book...again, we hear about Bob but his nature is not revealed.

So, from this I have to say that, based on the text, I see nothing that 'outs' Bob as either big or little. I have to say that Corey's conviction is clear, but is not particularly well supported by the text...you could still argue either way. At this point, we'll never know any more of Bob the Ostler. The Red Book doesn't say, nor does that King's scribe (who, most likely, didn't know either).

I suspect that this was deliberate on Professor Tolkien's part, as a teaser, but (perhaps) more importantly, it says something profound and unique about the nature of Bree itself. Where else in Middle Earth do the races live so much in accord that we can't (obviously) tell if the character in question is a man or a hobbit*?

*Perhaps the closest match would be how the dwarves of the Lonely Mountain are neighbors with the Men of Dale but we never return there after the Battle of the Five Armies, and we only get Gloin's description).
 
Thanks for this analysis.

I think the strongest suggestions come from the fact that Nob and Bob are grouped separately from Barliman, that the parting present from Bob and Nob is a pocketful of apples, and that their names rhyme.

The separate grouping isn't conclusive, as they are staff and Barliman is the proprietor.
The gift of apples is appropriate for Hobbits, but also for horses, so also inconclusive.
The rhyming names aren't conclusive either, but perhaps the combination of all of these are what allow those with a will to believe that Bob is a Hobbit.
 
I agree that the text is inconclusive. Personally, I've always viewed Bob as a Man because of the passage talking about Bree's peculiar (but excellent) arrangement of Big Folk and Little Folk both being necessary parts of the Bree-folk. The main non-scummy Bree-folk we meet are Barliman Butterbur, Nob, and Bob. If Nob and Bob are both Hobbits, then the situation runs the risk of portraying Men as being the bosses with Hobbits being the workers, in a rather strict hierarchy (not that this is demanded; only that it would be the situation of the only Bree-folk we get to know). If, on the other hand, Bob is a Man, then the races don't really correspond to class, which I find a much more satisfying reading, given the earlier passage.

I understand that this is based on me simply liking one reading more than the other, and that others doubtless have their own reasons for finding the "Bob is a Hobbit" reading more satisfying. We'll simply have to agree to disagree on that point.

But woe to those who claim that Bob is a Burra-Eagle-Hobbit...
 
During the latest class I developed what I think is a mutually dissatifactory answer:
Bob's dark secret is that he is a Mobbit; His father was a Hobbit and his mother was Human. This makes him taller than most Hobbits (helpful as an ostler) and helps his understanding of Hobbit and Human cultures. He keeps his finely furred feet hidden in his boots.

Prove me wrong :p
 
Just so long as he is not a Muppet, I remain content whichever way! ;) In any case, Lewis Carroll is alive and well in your brain!
 
Back
Top