* * Revised Fall of Gondolin pt.5 -- >end [the remaining sections] * *

[Findegil]

Also, I'm wary about the use of "how" here. I'm not sure that the construction "reminds me how" or "I recall how" is suitable for this style; I think it would properly be "I recall that . . ." Perhaps I'm over-analyzing, though.

I can go with that as well, but as you said before the line is maybe not good enough.

I have thought again on line 2 and your argument that, "whatever word we substitute for "was" (aside from the clumsy "am"), we will be inventing some action. I tried to think of the most innocuous action I could invent, and it was sitting. Of course he could have been walking - which throws the whole thing into doubt; are we justified in inventing the detail that he was sitting, or that he was walking, however minor it may be?"
If we don't want invent some action, we have to take an action he is performing anyway. So what is about:

I {was} [sing] fingering my harp-strings, for a wind {had} [has] crept unseen

But also, there is the question of whether we are justified by our principles in making the kinds of revisions needed.

You have a point here. Since we can fairly well see what kind of changes we need for the revision we can consider this now. All the changes are covered (if they are covered at all) by principal 6 a), b) or e). All these paragraphs state, that the changes have to be "minimal". The question is therewith: can we consider our changes as "minimal"? They are clearly the minimalist changes that led to a useable text. But is that enough? They are hard at the boundary. But for nearly all I would say they are bearable. Only the transition from the present in Nan-tathren to the sea I consider too much in the version were we do it in line 5.

We should also consider the possibility of dropping the poem. Certainly, we ought to do so if none of the proposed revisions is satisfactory to everyone.

Agreed. Even if we find some solution that is to our liking, can our version stand in a direct comparison with the original? The more I think about this, the more I like the idea of the original poem given in the Appendix with some commentary.

Respectfully
Findegil