View Single Post
Old 08-26-2003, 06:04 AM   #30
Findegil
King's Writer
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,694
Findegil is a guest of Tom Bombadil.
Sting

Aiwendil, when ever I am considering your argument without working on the text it self, I could follow your argumentation. But when I go back to the text and try to read it as it is, I see some storng contardictions.

Let make a short recapitulation of what has been done so far:
In search for arguments against the mechanical monsters jallanite devieded the monsters in three types. That provided the possibility to interpret the type 2 bronze and cooper monsters as animal-dragons and the type 3 pure fire monsters also as animal-fire-dragons. Type 3 monster were later changed by my intervention back to streams of fire. Type 1 iron dragons were than changed at first to cold dragons and later by my intervention became mechanical monsters.

In the original text the division of the monsters are made but they are not so sharp as we have made them in all our proposals. They are all named similar and 'created in one rush'. That brings type 1 and type 2 monster much nearer together than my proposal could bear. When we really want to stick to the text completly, the proposal had to be:
Type 1 monsters: mechanical monsters made of iron
Type 2 monsters: mechanical monsters made of bronze and copper
Type 3 monsters: streams of fire often to be confused with animal-fire-dragons

In my view, we will run in a problem with type 2 monsters hear. All the description of the type 2 monsters is so near to animal-fire-dragons that I think it is unbeliveable that Morgoth would have spent time and effort for such creations since he had a host of animal-fire-dragons to use in the battle.

In view of my proposal, and since Aiwendil's argument is valide, I could let go "beasts of iron" or such phrase for the type 1 monsters pass, as long as the types of monsters are clearly recognisable and seperated far enough garmatically (not named "serpants of iron and such of copper" or similar).

I have rereade the fight within the city and I can only disagree with Aiwendil. The text as is stands is in my view not so clear about the nature of the monsters as Aiwendil said it. And further there are even passages that will distrube the categories we have established:
Quote:
High up could they descry the form of the king, but about the base a serpent of iron spouting flame lashed and rowed with his tail, and Balrogs were round him.
Here we have a iron dragon (?type 1), that is spoting flame (?type 2) and is driven by Balrogs (???type 3).

I am in the moment at a loss what to do. I would like to hear some more oppinions from other minds.

Respectfully
Findegil
Findegil is offline   Reply With Quote