The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Results from the Poll re: the name ' Laegolas' in the Fall of Gondolin

**lindil** · 10-24-2002, 06:54 PM

I agree w/ you Westerly Wizard. But the project is run on a set of principles [ 95% not 100% worked out] that at times we have to weigh them against each other.

I and 1 other member favored to differing degrees using the quenya name Laiqulasse or a variant to distance the Elf from Legolas as far as possible. As we felt that as you said a 'Legolas ' would not appear. However we have a character whose actions are not incompatible. With the story and nothing he does is as we could say 'cause for dismissal'. So we need a name and no one wanted to manufacture one out of thin air when JRRT at one point did have name [names actually] for the character.

Rog is a similar point to my mind and in order to decide I rather suspect we shall have to get 100% on our principles.

CRT felt Rog's name because as he says 'it was absolutely certain that my father would not have retained this name as a Lord of Gondolin' was completely incompatible with the tone we could say of a later Silm.

So to my mind we must have a principle that states 'does this feel/sound/look like a story that would have made it into a LotR or later Silmarillion.

If we do not address these problems directly and with a principle of their own we will end up with a text that may not literally contradict anything from the Lost Road Era or later [by which time all of the legendarium's 'primitivisms' if you will have all been expunged] but does not meet the exceedingly lofty standards of story or euphony that JRRT demanded of the stories.

Thus the archaic speech peculiar to Lost Tales but absent in it's quaint form from the late 30's on, the name Rog and the idea of hordes of Balrogs and Mechanical Dragons all are things that one or more of the project members see as incongruent.

We are however. admittedly on a slippery slope that could descend into complete subjectivity which also is to be avoided.

So basically W. Wizard some of us saw your point more problematic than others but no one felt Legolas was so bad to stage a 'filibuster' if you will over it and go back to the 'principles' drawing board. but I suspect that time can not be long delayed.

I do hope you can take some visual comfort in 'Laegolas' and the fact that he is an altogether different Elf.

And as has been pointed out, we have 2 galdors [maybe] and 2 Rumil's [positively] and there may be other examples.
Tar elenion in particular has researched this.

Eruhen - and you wanted to close this thread ?
[img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: lindil ]

10-24-2002, 06:54 PM	#39
lindil Seeker of the Straight Path Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: a hidden fastness in Big Valley nor cal Posts: 1,681	I agree w/ you Westerly Wizard. But the project is run on a set of principles [ 95% not 100% worked out] that at times we have to weigh them against each other. I and 1 other member favored to differing degrees using the quenya name Laiqulasse or a variant to distance the Elf from Legolas as far as possible. As we felt that as you said a 'Legolas ' would not appear. However we have a character whose actions are not incompatible. With the story and nothing he does is as we could say 'cause for dismissal'. So we need a name and no one wanted to manufacture one out of thin air when JRRT at one point did have name [names actually] for the character. Rog is a similar point to my mind and in order to decide I rather suspect we shall have to get 100% on our principles. CRT felt Rog's name because as he says 'it was absolutely certain that my father would not have retained this name as a Lord of Gondolin' was completely incompatible with the tone we could say of a later Silm. So to my mind we must have a principle that states 'does this feel/sound/look like a story that would have made it into a LotR or later Silmarillion. If we do not address these problems directly and with a principle of their own we will end up with a text that may not literally contradict anything from the Lost Road Era or later [by which time all of the legendarium's 'primitivisms' if you will have all been expunged] but does not meet the exceedingly lofty standards of story or euphony that JRRT demanded of the stories. Thus the archaic speech peculiar to Lost Tales but absent in it's quaint form from the late 30's on, the name Rog and the idea of hordes of Balrogs and Mechanical Dragons all are things that one or more of the project members see as incongruent. We are however. admittedly on a slippery slope that could descend into complete subjectivity which also is to be avoided. So basically W. Wizard some of us saw your point more problematic than others but no one felt Legolas was so bad to stage a 'filibuster' if you will over it and go back to the 'principles' drawing board. but I suspect that time can not be long delayed. I do hope you can take some visual comfort in 'Laegolas' and the fact that he is an altogether different Elf. And as has been pointed out, we have 2 galdors [maybe] and 2 Rumil's [positively] and there may be other examples. Tar elenion in particular has researched this. Eruhen - and you wanted to close this thread ? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] [ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: lindil ] __________________ The dwindling Men of the West would often sit up late into the night exchanging lore & wisdom such as they still possessed that they should not fall back into the mean estate of those who never knew or indeed rebelled against the Light.