<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Seeker of the Straight Path
Posts: 647</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: A project ~~~~Revising the Fall of Gondolin
Jallanite posted:Changes to my previous posting of names
I
house of the Swan to House of Hador (a dubious
change),
L: seems reasonable, the alternative is to introduce a previously unmentioned motif for the pre-eminent family of warriors of the edain. I would w/out further evidence go w/Hador instead of swan even though it is an 'indirect' substitution if you will. I suppose elimination of the reference altogether is another possibility.
Jallanite posted: What we can be certain of is that Voronwë was the form Tolkien decided in 1951 to use in the tale, that he kept to it afterwards, and it should be maintained unless
extremely good cause can be found to change it. So leave it as Voronwë throughout.
Lindil:Sounds good, as a theoritcal aside - perhaps some 1/2 sindar and some full sindar disagreed w/ Thingol and thought his stance was capricious and foolish, and thus ignored [especially in Gondolin/Noldorin co.] Thingols ban on Quenya. This seems even more plausible in those of the Sindar who would be willing to leave Nevrast and remove to Gondolin acknowledging fealty and undoubtedly swearing oath's of secrecy to Turgon. Sounds like a good suite 101 article for MM actually<img src=smile.gif ALT="
"> .
Jallanite posted: Changes to be Made in "Of Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin"
Letter k in the phrase Anar kaluva tielyanna! and the
name Elemmakil to be changed to c following JRRT's
decision, after the writing of this manuscript but before
actual publication of LR, to always use c in Elvish in
Latin latter transcriptions of Elvish words and names
(except it would seem for names of the Valar (Melkor,
Tulkas, Kementári).
sounds good in theory. But I think [and this will come up later]exceptions to the rule might be acceptable .
Jallanite posted: Echoriath to Echoriad per The War of the Jewels (HoME 10), "The Wanderings of Húrin".
lindil: probably time to decide what to do re: sending queries to Elfling- my thoughts on i are this. Obviously they are a rel. large functioning group and we will prob. get v.good answers. the catch aws I seeit is that some of these folks, esp. the editors of Vinyat tengwar - must be on familiar terms w/ CRT and we are inviting official notice of our project at an extremely early stage at which a cease and desist order or negative reaction from CRT is more likely than if we send a finished FoG [not too mention a finished Silm.
Any other thoghts on this? I don't think the project will suffer appreciably from finishing FoG at the least before sending notice to elfling, for a full review of both our new text and a docket of our changes and conversations re: them.
In short I say hold off. If a majority favors sending a list of Q's off now or soon, then as with all group choices , I am happy to go w/ it. [more on the group choices thing in a bit.]
Jallanite posted: We could restore the phrase "dwelt once even on
Thangorodrim" and the word "now" and leave vague
when and why Thorondor changed his dwelling.
That is currently my preference on the principle that if
you don't have to remove it, then keep it.
Lindil:I agree w/ the principle and the choice in specific , I read this passage the other day and pondered the same things. His dwelling on top of a non-volcanic thangoridrim would make sense if the eagles main role was spying on Morgoth.
Jallanite posted:... none of his published
writings oppose a settlement on Balar during Turgon's
failed attempt to build seaworthy ships. That is all that
Voronwë's account mentions. He says nothing that even
suggests that the settlement was more than temporary.
The reference should be kept unchanged.
Lindil: yea
Jallanite posted: I would personally like to add from the primtive "Fall ofGondolin" a phrase which I italicize to one of the
sentences in "Of Tuor and His Coming to Gondolin" as
follows:
Quote:
Then he took up his rugged harp of wood
and the sinews of bears which he bore ever
with him, being skilled in playing upon its
strings, ...
L:I liked that also, I might lean towards eliminating 'rugged' as it was most likely made by and or under the tutelage of the Sindarin Elves, and ruggedness is not the first quality that comes to mind.
Jallanite posted:There may be other such phrases from the primitive
account which contradict no later details and that it
would be a shame to lose.
Lindil: this brings up an interesting dilemna I faced in the Darkening of valinor wher I added the LT version of parts of the Procession of the Noldor and Vanyar to the X account. Reads reasonably well and certainly does not contradict, but we have just made a change to JRRT's final conception in cases where he had produced relativly full treatments. I personally faviorite it a fair # of instances but in principle I have to acknowledge it is a little shaky. we will have to come to an agreement on this and several other similar points.
Re: Rog and Legolas's name your points are all valid , but I think an equally strong case can be made [and which CRT certainly agreed w/. that JRRT simply would have found both untenable, in the case of Rog we would be introducing a name which clearly is out of keeping w/ th entire aethetic edifice of Elven language. and w/ legolas , well... I find it impossible for him to be the son of thranduil even if it is not explicitly stated so. As for use of the re-use of name, again we have it in Galdor and w/ Edain esp. Gondorians recycling hero's names, , but if we keep Legolas , esp.L. greenleaf we have as I mentioned earlier a a pretty deep implicit conflict. Thranduil was a doriathrin refugee either 1st or 2ng generation and we know from UT that he was not pleased w/ noldor taking up in Lorien, we can deduce some anti-noldorin sentiments [just as he was prejudiced against the Dwarves ] in general from this whichmakes it unlikely that he would name his sonw. a combination Leg.Gr. exactly the same as used by a 'prince' of Gondolin [we can i think assume that the tale would be widely known in all sindarin circles, prob w/ a neg. attitude since some of the godolithrim were sindar, who may have had a reputation as mentioned above for usiong Quenya despite Thingol's ban.] So.... I find Legolas difficult aesthetically and historically. I would prefere Quenya , an innovation i know but one that solves what i perceive as a problem w/ the least fuss, and it has precedent w/ Voronwe. A group vote will def. be needed. And i will briefly point out that prob. none of us will see this chapter[s] exactly as we might like , the cost of a group effort is compromise and I am sure the final product will more than overcome any reservations any of us as individulas may have.OPlus - what we do here will most likely be I hope a calling card for a greatercouncil , wherein FoG will possibly be gone over again.
Jallanite posted:. But to take this tack means it is impossible to
include anything.
lindil: I don't quite think it is black and white as I mentioned above , we will have to decide as a group whether aesthetics is a factor.
Jallanite posted: So, keep Rog, both name and deeds. The readers to this
composite Silmarillion know they are reading a
composite work. At least let it be as full as it can be with
as many details as can possibly be kept.
Christopher Tolkien again and again in HoME speaks of
his regrets in making too many changes in The
Silmarillion text for reasons of style or consistency. To
remove the one mention of Rog from the short summary
of The Fall of Gondolin was unimportant. To remove him,
the first to ever slay a Balrog, from the full Fall of
Gondolin is a major excision. I suppose he could simply
be named as the Lord of the Hammer.
Lindil : l' of the Hammer ,while a noble attempt at a compromise is w/ out looking at the passages , prob a weak solution as you point out.
Re; the pro Rog points you made I think they are cogent arguments and in principle I agree , until I imagine seeing the word Rog in the Silm .<img src=smile.gif ALT="
"> If a majority goes for it, i can stand by this though.
Jallanite posted:
But without evidence, we don't actually know that JRRT
would have changed that name.
lindil:No, but we can see that none of the 'crude' [to use the first word that comes to mind] elvish words survive from LT era into the post LotR phase. - this is of course subjective, but I think most will agree that JRRT at each change, both his improvments in the euphony of the languages, and the beauty of the story telling. Voronwe is more beautiful than Bronweg.Tolkien was extremely sensitive to such matters and i think we would be immulating a likely wish by coming up w/ a Rog alternative. As for the slaying of the Balrog's - we have already agreed that we have too many B'rog deaths .
If we have only seven:
Moria
ecthelion's
Glorfindil's
I believe the plural is used in the war of wrath, but I just realized a point in your favor- as maia they would be capable of re-embodyment, after a period of yearts [maybe too long to be of use in the war of Wrath].
Jallanite posted: Again, should not the rule be when in doubt keep it?
Otherwise almost everything will be jettisoned.
Lindil: I think we need to have a 'principles of revision' thread, and proceed to work on the Silm according to that , re-examing the issues as needed.
Unfortunately I have run out of time to adress the other points, hope to finish tonight, and ask the wight to create a private forum for the posting of texts.
Iwant to say though that even though there are clearly preferences that each of us has, I have never seen such focused and consistent posting here on the project , especially from such a diverse group. i am encouraged greatly!
Lindil is oft found on posting on
the Silmarillion Project at the Barrowdowns and working onthe 2nd Elven/Christian discussion board<a href="http://pub72.ezboard.com/bosanwe" >Osanwe</a>, and Gilthalion's
http://pub41.ezboard.com/btarostineruhirTar Ost-in-Eruhir</A>. and Finrod prophecieth to Andreth
" Therefore Eru,if He will not relinquish His work to Melkor... must come in to conquer him. </p>