![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
Thank you for your diligence gandalf!
1) This is fine for me. 2) I like this better as well. Agreed. 3) Yes, Fin did a wonderful job. 4) Agreed 5) Is this canon? That Gandalf did not know it was Thrain? I felt that it said he did somewhere. 6) Agreed 7) I like this placing much better. 8) no 8? lol 9) Agreed, nice transition. I would not make that sentence its own paragraph tho, and I would call that addition TS-FR-00.5 and keep the other as is. 10) I like this better, Agreed. 11) Nice find! Agreed. 12) Good catch! Agreed. 13) Thank you! |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Wight
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 121
![]() |
5) I believe it's canon. In both the Quest of Erebor and the Making of Appendix A, it states he did not know who Thrain was. I will be on the look-out to see if I find this contradicted somewhere.
8) I have a minor in math but apparently cannot count. 11) I was wondering why you guys removed the last bit about the ringbearer, and I think I know why: it's basically a spoiler the way we have it structured. This text was intended to be a "looking back" conversation between Gandalf and the hobbits and Gimli after the War of the Ring. I think it's probably best to remove the last bits about the Ringbearer, but keep the part about Sauron and Smaug helping one another: Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
5) I guess this is one of those times that an assumption becomes so ingrained in our heads we think it's canon! I agree to the change, pending any discovery of contradictory canon info.
11) Ah I missed that. I think it is the right choice to remove it, as Fin had done, so I agree to this change. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | ||
|
King's Writer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,721
![]() |
1) & 2) Agreed.
3) Nice that both of you like it. 4) Agreed. 5) Yes, it clearly is cannon that Gandalf did not know from whom he got the key and the map. 6) It is true that the dwarves were employed as road menders, but here the perspective is different: If we would make this change we would state that the Hobbits employed the dwarves as road menders. Do we konw that for sure? I don’t think so. 7) & 8) Agreed. 9) Okay, I see that I did not reach what I wanted. I think this will make my goal clearer: Quote:
11) A good addition. And I think we should keep more of it. What about this: Quote:
13) It is so good for the quality of our text to have reader who gives feed back. Respectfully Findegil |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
Fin:
9) Agreed 11) agreed |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Wight
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 121
![]() |
6) Yes, you're right, we're not completely sure that dwarves were employed as road-menders specifically on the East Road. So let's keep "it would also appear that".
11) Agreed. 13) I agree with keeping more of it, but I am unsure about one part. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Quentingolmo
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 525
![]() |
That sort of very limited spoiler is, I think, fine. It reveals very little about the nature of the further narrative, so I think it is ok to leave it. We have similar vague call-forwards in previous chapters.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|