Ruin of Doriath - Attack on Menegroth - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Aiwendil · 01-12-2005, 10:59 AM

RD-SL-20: If there is any doubt, then you are right, it's safer to drop it.

RD-SL-19: I think that Findegil is right; my reservation about the news of Mim's death was an overreaction.

Findegil · 01-13-2005, 02:25 AM

Then this section is done and we can start with last section of chapter.
I will start that with some further changes that came lately to my attention.

Respectfully
Findegil

emrys · 10-30-2007, 09:03 AM

I know that the discussion about this topic finished a long time ago, but I've started to post here because I am myself trying to reconstruct the structure of a "new" fall of Doriath.

So far I've managed to collect the narrative from the old tale and I'm processing it with the following operations:

- Update of Names
- Division in Chapters
- Deletion of Major Inconsistencies
- Integration with some parts of the Q30

I would be very glad to see your complete version before trying to post some comments on that topic.

If that cannot be done...I'll try to discuss them without comparing our versions (if that doesn't represent a problem for you)

Thanks,

Emrys

Findegil · 10-30-2007, 03:27 PM

Hi Emrys,

have you read your Private Message? If not please do so. Seeing your interest my offer does include FoD from now on.

We are of course interested to compare your ideas with our work and it would be much easier for us if you could make the comparision.

Respectfully
Findegil

emrys · 11-07-2007, 04:56 AM

Probably you have already discussed all this matters for long, but, since I've started to make my own RoD before the discovery of your forum, I'll try to express my comments on this matter here.

Having partly read your version I'll start with some general comment on it.

I don't know if this is in line with the philosophy of this project but I would have tried to preserve as much Tolkien text as possible so some questions:

1) Why Eliminating Ufedhin while reteaning the treacherous elves? To me the deletion of this character from the Quenta is just a matter of compression I would have retained him.

2) Why using parts of Sil77 Fall of Doriath since it does not contain any original tolkien text?

As we know, Tolkien tried to replace the original tale of the Fall of Doriath many times but never found a solution to the problem that the girdle of Melian can't be passed by enemies. Nonetheless this tale represent the only complete text and it doesn't contraddict the latest scripts of Tolkien (TY) in any way with the exception of some minor changes (name changes, replacement of Huan with Melian, replacement of Orcs and Belegost Dwarves with Nogrod Dwarves).
The rest of the story thus can be taken with almost no exception and with minor integrations from other texts.

This is my general point of view.

Maybe if you like in the following days I'll try to post puntual comments...

- Emrys -

Aiwendil · 11-07-2007, 05:05 PM

Regarding your first point: perhaps you have misunderstood something. In our version, both Ufedhin and the treacherous Elves are out. As far as I'm concerned there are two main reasons for this:

1. The absence of this element in all subsequent writings (most notably the Quenta).

2. The fact that in TY Tolkien seems to see the penetration of the Girdle by the Dwarves as an unsolved problem - and that the solution he eventually projected (that Thingol is induced to go to war beyond the borders and is there slain) was entirely different from the earlier version.

Now, one could argue that the first point is due to compression (though the absence of such a notable makes that view quite disputable). But it seems to me that in any case, the second point is still forcing.

About your second point: I believe (I may be recalling incorrectly) that we ended up using very little text from the '77 Silmarillion in our version. In any case, the major plot elements invented by Christopher Tolkien for that version were all rejected.

If you'd like to address some of the specific instances where we use the '77 (and perhaps suggest alternatives), your thoughts would of course be welcome.

emrys · 11-08-2007, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aiwendil

The fact that in TY Tolkien seems to see the penetration of the Girdle by the Dwarves as an unsolved problem - and that the solution he eventually projected (that Thingol is induced to go to war beyond the borders and is there slain) was entirely different from the earlier version.

I understan your point of view here, but I don't think your solution to be so different from the original one in the lost tale.

Let me try to summerize

Lost Tales

Thingol (counseled by Ufedhin) summon the dwarves
Thingol quarrel with the dwarves
The Dwarves go to war
(and aided by Treacerous elves) kill Thingol in the woods
The Dwarves aided by the same elves invade Doriath
Melian (older version) escape to Beren

Your Version

Thingol Summons the dwarves
Thingol quarrel with the dwarves
The dwarves go to war
the find thingol in the woods and kill him
Melian became mad and the girdle is removed

Now this two version to me seem to be very close (correct me if I'm wrong) but in the new version:
Ufedhin is removed (Tolkien don't mention him but I think that by removing him a very nice fragment will be lost)
The Treacherous elves are removed (but the fact that Tolkien didn't like this solution doesn't mean that he would have finally abandoned it)
Melian go away before all the realm his lost (which is not what I expect her to do)

That said I would have taken in the final story both Ufedhin and the treacherous elves for these main reasons:

1) I read the original story after the necessary modifications (Update of Names, Remove of Huan and Dwarves of Belegost, etc?) and I found that it doesn't contraddict Tolkien final thoughts in many parts and also it is a very nice story

2) Retaining that version imply very few modifications on the original tolkien text.

Next time If you think the discussion to be useful I'll try to post puntual comments starting from WoH...

A question: I have made a text without your standard codifications (because I started before discovering this site); can I quote some rows of text without this coding or do you prefer I enter this references in the text before posting?

Thanks for your reply

Emrys

10-30-2007, 03:27 PM	#4
Findegil King's Writer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,721	Hi Emrys, have you read your Private Message? If not please do so. Seeing your interest my offer does include FoD from now on. We are of course interested to compare your ideas with our work and it would be much easier for us if you could make the comparision. Respectfully Findegil Last edited by Findegil; 11-07-2007 at 11:58 AM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-12-2005, 10:59 AM	#1
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	RD-SL-20: If there is any doubt, then you are right, it's safer to drop it. RD-SL-19: I think that Findegil is right; my reservation about the news of Mim's death was an overreaction.

01-13-2005, 02:25 AM	#2
Findegil King's Writer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 1,721	Then this section is done and we can start with last section of chapter. I will start that with some further changes that came lately to my attention. Respectfully Findegil

10-30-2007, 09:03 AM	#3
emrys Pile O'Bones Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 12	I know that the discussion about this topic finished a long time ago, but I've started to post here because I am myself trying to reconstruct the structure of a "new" fall of Doriath. So far I've managed to collect the narrative from the old tale and I'm processing it with the following operations: - Update of Names - Division in Chapters - Deletion of Major Inconsistencies - Integration with some parts of the Q30 I would be very glad to see your complete version before trying to post some comments on that topic. If that cannot be done...I'll try to discuss them without comparing our versions (if that doesn't represent a problem for you) Thanks, Emrys

11-07-2007, 04:56 AM	#5
emrys Pile O'Bones Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 12	Probably you have already discussed all this matters for long, but, since I've started to make my own RoD before the discovery of your forum, I'll try to express my comments on this matter here. Having partly read your version I'll start with some general comment on it. I don't know if this is in line with the philosophy of this project but I would have tried to preserve as much Tolkien text as possible so some questions: 1) Why Eliminating Ufedhin while reteaning the treacherous elves? To me the deletion of this character from the Quenta is just a matter of compression I would have retained him. 2) Why using parts of Sil77 Fall of Doriath since it does not contain any original tolkien text? As we know, Tolkien tried to replace the original tale of the Fall of Doriath many times but never found a solution to the problem that the girdle of Melian can't be passed by enemies. Nonetheless this tale represent the only complete text and it doesn't contraddict the latest scripts of Tolkien (TY) in any way with the exception of some minor changes (name changes, replacement of Huan with Melian, replacement of Orcs and Belegost Dwarves with Nogrod Dwarves). The rest of the story thus can be taken with almost no exception and with minor integrations from other texts. This is my general point of view. Maybe if you like in the following days I'll try to post puntual comments... - Emrys -

11-07-2007, 05:05 PM	#6
Aiwendil Late Istar Join Date: Mar 2001 Posts: 2,224	Regarding your first point: perhaps you have misunderstood something. In our version, both Ufedhin and the treacherous Elves are out. As far as I'm concerned there are two main reasons for this: 1. The absence of this element in all subsequent writings (most notably the Quenta). 2. The fact that in TY Tolkien seems to see the penetration of the Girdle by the Dwarves as an unsolved problem - and that the solution he eventually projected (that Thingol is induced to go to war beyond the borders and is there slain) was entirely different from the earlier version. Now, one could argue that the first point is due to compression (though the absence of such a notable makes that view quite disputable). But it seems to me that in any case, the second point is still forcing. About your second point: I believe (I may be recalling incorrectly) that we ended up using very little text from the '77 Silmarillion in our version. In any case, the major plot elements invented by Christopher Tolkien for that version were all rejected. If you'd like to address some of the specific instances where we use the '77 (and perhaps suggest alternatives), your thoughts would of course be welcome.