![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I do see your point, but all the same, I would propose a difference. If the uncertain nature of the text and its construction as an analytical text by an in-universe author making speculative comments, would it not be more appropriate to include in Volume 3?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
My main point, Fin, is that this text reads as speculative, whereas all the other chapters in the First Age, Second Age, and Third Age narrative read as given fact. As you say, this is not unusual for Tolkien, who likes to sprinkle in some uncertainty to his narratives (see Istari and Elessar). However, my main point of discussion I suppose is the placement of this chapter. If the speculative nature of it is essential (as I think you have argued it is) then I am not opposed to this, but perhaps it would fir better in a section devoted to such speculative and scholarly work, like Volume 3. If you really disagree with that, then I might be persuaded to leave your draft as it is and in the same placement, but I would like to discuss first this possibility. Sorry if any of this has seemed contentious or bitter, I did not intend for that to be the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
I didn't take your arguments contentious or bitter. And I agree that the chapter would fit in volume 3, but I still feel that we should keep it here. My reason for this is not that I think it would fit here better in style (in that I agree that volume 3 would be better for it), but that we need the information given here for a full picture of the history of the second age.
If we postpone this to volume 3 Glorfindel would be virtually non existant in the Second Age. And I see not other way inside our rulls to include him. Respectfully Findegil |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
I do see this difficulty, and I am inclined to include it here for the same reasons, but the issue is the nature of the document. As it is an analytical text, by its nature it belongs in Volume 3, but due to its content, it would be better to include it here in Volume 2. It's quite a pickle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 249
![]() |
I dont remember if I had said this before, but have you considered to included in the Second age narrative but as a foot note? That way is how I managed. Ifit works with the project rules.
Greetings |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
The complete chapter as a footnote? And where do we place it? Do we have a mentioning of Glorfindel where we could make the reference?
I have some doubts. And as fare as I remember, such footnotes were avoided in the history of the project. Respectfully Findegil |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 249
![]() |
The text of Glorfindel is not so great to be bad as a footnote. If is edited to be reduced as a coherent text of his late history can (or could) be introduced as a footnote of an inserted sentence in the main text telling that Glorfindel came...
Is a pity that I cannot have at hand my books and my text to be more precise. But I remember I had many doubts about manage Grolfindel matter and it was for me the best solution. Because I agree with Arcuscalion that is not a text for the narrative. And as a note inother part of the project (read my general notes or your volume 3) for me also doesnt work (in this particular case). Greetings |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|