Quote:
|
I think that under either of our principles there are still valid arguments on both sides. I don't think that either necessarily means that we must drop "Rog" or "Legolas", nor does it mean that we must keep them. However, they do give us a better context within which those arguments can be made, and a better criterion for establishing the validity of either argument.
|
Full agreement - especially with the new proposals giving a better context from which to base decisions.
Quote:
|
I like your idea of merging our principles, and I like your proposed amalgamation.
|
I found your revision to be an improvement; the only question I have is what decides the 'greater' or 'lesser precedence' of a text?
According to our above principles, we have the basic texts - Q30, QS 38,77/01, the grey annals and LQ1 and 2, etc. and we supplement them [in a fashion that does not conradict the published works or create other difficulties].
The idea of lesser and greater, if we are to use it I think needs to spelled out specifically to not create any [further] confusion.
Also, there is the point of dealing with parallel texts such as the Annals of Aman and the LQ2 which were composed at roughly the same time, and often present variants of the same story. These are I think, issues, that need perhaps some clearer guiding principle, even though they are not [seemingly] thorny issues our current principles are designed to address.
And finally another point brewing in my mind for awhile is the suitability or not of adding to texts such as the finished LQ2 form earlier sources.
An example of this is the Darkening of valinor draft I did earlier, where I added a nice bit of detail of a similar valinorean festival to that of the one preceding the attack on the Trees.
To add from a later text to LQ2, such as will be the case with the Shibboleth material sems clear enough, but it seems less clear to justify bringing in old details, even if non-contradictory.
For instance, in HoMEXI, there are several long excurses on the language of the Noldor and Sindar in beleriand. In LQ1 they are very long and Elaborate, by the time we reach LQ2 they have ben simplified and condensed. So even though we may have non-contradictory detail in LQ1 do we dare add it back in when JRRT clearly did not?
It seems prudent not to. And in a slightly different situation, if we do not do it for variants close in time, how can we justify it for reching back to HoME for filling out an already expanded LQ2?
There are no questions about the suitability of this in the case of the FoG, because the last revision [ other than notes] was done only 10 or so years ofter the BoLT version, but this is not the case for much of the LQ2 or also for instance the Narn or Beren and Luthien material.
Other than clarifying the above points I think we finally[!] have a go.
I apologize for holding on to these last points till now, but I have not clearly formulated them and seen their interrelationship with our current #7 discussions till now.
[ January 27, 2003: Message edited by: lindil ]