Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bęthberry
Authenticity can be determined or guided by consistency with the text, the work itself. After all, medieval scholars like Tolkien often worked with texts with unknown authors, and so they did their work based on textual and linquistic considerations, not on who the author was.
You know, Lal, there was a time when the Downs had a very strong sense of courtesy and decorum regarding how to conduct our discussions. We would query and refute the ideas but we would not resort to attacking our "opponents" by claiming they situated themselves in scatological places. Cleverly contrived ad hominem attacks, even with wit, are still attacks on the person rather than the ideas. They demean the entire discussion.
|
Maybe Downers should not dish out such tasty dishes of vitriol and then complain when their dinner guests serve up bile on the return visit? When I have a fight, if my opponent chooses a brace of pistols I will not be satisfied with accepting a mere wet handkerchief for myself. One is not the only shrew around these parts.
Oh yes, the thread....Tolkien working on the text of Beowulf with its unknown author is a whole different kettle of fish than one of us thinking about Tolkien - who was, errr,
Tolkien! Or maybe Lewis wrote LotR, in a kinda 20th century Shakespeare/Marlowe type twist? That way madness lies.....
