The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Findegil · 03-02-2009, 07:01 AM

NA-EX-25.02, Na-EX-25.06 to Na-EX-25.12 und Na-EX-27.04 to NA-EX-27.06 (the material from the Lay added in the first part of the Narn): So what we discuss about are 4 passages from the Lay. The first is the treatment of Húrin before the talk with Morgoth. The second is the journey to Doriath and the song of Lúthien, the third is the guided entrance to Doriath with the rest at Belegs lodge and the fourth is the praising of Turins powers in the warfare at the marches.
The list is just to make clear for all what we are talking about. It also shows that the aesthetic argument was only a faint support argument and not the reason to add these parts. In each part information are given that are not in the text of the Narn. Some of course are only minor details. But especially the first two seem more substantial to me.

I must say that I was not around when the principals of editing the early Tuor were discussed. So I did not recognise that principal at all. But it is a sound one and it worked very well in the Tour text. And I remember that such an argument was brought up before.
What I was think about when I added this parts of the poem was the last sentence of our general principles: “A corallary is that we may not disregard any text or note, old idea or projected change, by JRRT unless it is invalidated by one of the above principles, explicitly or implicitly; that is, we must have a REASON for rejecting something.”
This does of course open a wide field of argumentation, since it contradicts in part the meaning of principles 2 made clear by the statement at the beginning of principal 3:
“2. Secondary priority is given to the latest ideas found among Tolkien's unpublished texts and letters, except where they:
a. violate the published canon without specifically correcting an error or
b. are proposed changes that do not clearly indicate the exact details that must be changed and how they are to be changed.
3. If no sources that fall under number 2 can be used to form the actual narrative of a section, …”

Respectfully
Findegil

03-02-2009, 07:01 AM	#35
Findegil King's Writer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,694	NA-EX-25.02, Na-EX-25.06 to Na-EX-25.12 und Na-EX-27.04 to NA-EX-27.06 (the material from the Lay added in the first part of the Narn): So what we discuss about are 4 passages from the Lay. The first is the treatment of Húrin before the talk with Morgoth. The second is the journey to Doriath and the song of Lúthien, the third is the guided entrance to Doriath with the rest at Belegs lodge and the fourth is the praising of Turins powers in the warfare at the marches. The list is just to make clear for all what we are talking about. It also shows that the aesthetic argument was only a faint support argument and not the reason to add these parts. In each part information are given that are not in the text of the Narn. Some of course are only minor details. But especially the first two seem more substantial to me. I must say that I was not around when the principals of editing the early Tuor were discussed. So I did not recognise that principal at all. But it is a sound one and it worked very well in the Tour text. And I remember that such an argument was brought up before. What I was think about when I added this parts of the poem was the last sentence of our general principles: “A corallary is that we may not disregard any text or note, old idea or projected change, by JRRT unless it is invalidated by one of the above principles, explicitly or implicitly; that is, we must have a REASON for rejecting something.” This does of course open a wide field of argumentation, since it contradicts in part the meaning of principles 2 made clear by the statement at the beginning of principal 3: “2. Secondary priority is given to the latest ideas found among Tolkien's unpublished texts and letters, except where they: a. violate the published canon without specifically correcting an error or b. are proposed changes that do not clearly indicate the exact details that must be changed and how they are to be changed. 3. If no sources that fall under number 2 can be used to form the actual narrative of a section, …” Respectfully Findegil