<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Newly Deceased
Posts: 0</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: Literary devices
><img src=grin.gif ALT=">D"> isagree that we shouldn't add to the Silm.<<
Dude, I think ya misunderstood. Adding back in the finished sections like WOH is prolly fine. Extending it or anything else to create and include new dialogue so as to incorporate any sketched material is the naughtybad. Myself; I personally think a great use and added dimension to Numenor could be obtained from the use of ELENDIL AND HERENDIL IN NUMENOR from LOST ROAD with little to no editing (except 'Gnome' and stuff like that). Does it make it proper that this should go into the story? Depends. I agree on the delicate fashion part you state; and even posted the same thoughts myself. Can the trees be saved? Yup. Can it be done while keeping the story true to intent to Tolkien? Yup. Can even the lamps be saved? Yup. Does everything that was discarded have to remain discarded? Depends. It was discarded for a reason, adding it back would have to also have reason; other than 'Tolkien wrote it so it should go back in'. If the reason for the omission can be identified, and corrected within author's intent, then it could be argued that re-inclusion is warranted. THE HISTORY OF THE AKALLABETH is a good example of this. Christopher identifies and admits that for the SILMARILLION he accidentially used what he thought was the last version of Numenor's fall. He then gives insight to these missing pieces. Could those be added? Youbetcha. (Although I personally liked it written using Numenorean verbage, but that's a PERSONAL choice). This is not the same as going back over the text and editorially correcting passages to ENSURE the stipulation of Balrog wings or no Balrog wings (one example) or other PERSONAL choices (this is re-writing not editing). The only PERSONAL choices I would recommend are those from Tolkien himself.
</p>