No apologies needed, and the debate as always is truly cordial, and we knew this was coming for a long time anyway, the Rog and stylistic revision debate has been looming almost since we began FoG.
I am thinking that for clarity's sake I would revise the the principle leaving the Euphony/Aesthetics aspect aside and rephrase it as "
Principle #7 JRRT almost certainly would have changed/deleted it."
This allows us to narrow the scope and minimize the possibility of later 'principle #7 abuse.'
However as I made mention earlier, any aspect of the work that falls into a grey area as the Dragons and #of balrog's previously still requires a vote.
So without going back and editing my previous posts, so as to leave Aiwendil's reply fully relelvant; I am emending my proposal for a principle #7.
On Rog and Laegolas Aiwendil:
Quote:
I have to disagree here as well. This exemplifies the problem of letting aesthetics play a role in deciding on canonical issues; you think that "Rog" is nails on a chalkboard. I think it's rather euphonically pleasing and perfectly suitable. How do we decide between us? The problem with letting aesthetics play a role is that it provides no higher authority to which to appeal when a point is disputed.
|
The higher Authority would be as it has been with balrogs, Dragons and Laegolas -the concilliar vote of the group.
CJRT most certainly created his Silmarillion along parallel [ but narrower] lines to our own project and I am merely re-iterating his POV re: Rog. It is not solely my own opinion, but primarily that of the person who arguably knows the legendarium better than anyone. And is if nothing else shown himself to be suprememly sensitive to the flavor of his father's writings so much so that no one would have guessed what was his or his fathers had we not been told in UT/HoME. So as re: Rog, he, I think needs to continue in our work to be the rare exception that he was for CJRT. Whether that means elimination or textual modification to work around his name and keep his charachter [Man of the Wold recently PM's me with a possible way out of the dilemna which allows us to keep the character and not the name [with out changing it either].
Anyway, I would just as soon have a solid principle for such an action as a sideline debate that utilises other principles in an oblique fashion* [or disregards them altogether], which to a degree happened with the Laegolas vote*.
I was really amiss in pushing for this principle [which ever way the vote would have gone] earlier as I think Laegolas should have been modified according to it rather than an update in language, because JRRT would "almost certainly have changed it". We would have had no Legolas of any kind in Gondolin once he was appropriated for the LotR. Anyway a revisting of Laegolas if needed can happen later, but it illustrates I think the need to address these types of issus head on instead of through the medium of other principles.
We will inevitably be faced with hard choices, and I think we must trust to the integrity of the group process [ and we have proven ourselves to be a reasonable and conservative [ Tolkien-textwise only]group dedicated to recovering and consilidating as much of the vast treasure of the Writings of M-E as we can.
I will repreat my earlier statement of " We should not let a desire for editorial minimalism mar the beauty of the later writings. "
I want also to reiterate the formal proposal for 2 versions of our work, the first being the rough draft for the second.
- a simple of splicing of relevant texts with no clean up.
- a polished literary version of the above wherein the stylistic discrepancies of [primarily] BoLT and Q30 material are editorially harmonized in a manner similar to CJRT's work in the QS77.
I would hope this is a satisfactory solution for Aiwendil and I's rather stark differing goals for the final work.
He seems [using inferences from earlier posts] wishes our effort to be it seems as a source text for individual Silmarillions.
This is of course fine, but I see no reason why the stylistic work done by a small team and then voted on by the group [ at least those who have an interest on a group stylistically crafted version] should not be a part of the aim [ indeed THE Aim] of the group from the get - go.
We have done a rather remarkable thing with the FoG so far and it has come out a far better work than anyone of us [ with the possible exception of jallanite I think] could have done alone. I see know reason to think that the same would hold true for a final literary replacement [ or updating if you wish] of the 77/01 Silmarillion.
In short summary we are [ I think] debating 2 points here:
1] do we want A]a polished Silm/TftE
and a rough draft leaving the various sources varying style plain for all[?] to see. Or B] do we
only want the latter, an unpolished source text for other's to do with as they will.
I am obviously in favor of approach A]doing both.
point 2] the original [unratified] Principle #7 or the new modified PRinciple #7. Both of which admittedly will have a great if not decisive impact [ I would imagine] on the question of Rog.
Of course this will come down [ at this particular project/group at least] to a vote as to how we wish to proceed.
I imagine some of the other members may want to pose questions now as Aiwendil and I seem to have our main points out for all to see.
So I hope know for some comments and or Q's from the rest of the team [ and the lurking public].
Now I get to apologize for the long [ but to my mind very much needed and delayed]post.
What think ye?
[ December 31, 2002: Message edited by: lindil ]