Bilbo´s treachery - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Ivriniel · 12-08-2015, 03:09 PM

@ Leaf Hi there Leaf

Nice to meet you! I've not 'met' one of your posts yet, so I thought I'd start with this hello, but I'll come back (to this post) to back edit, after the 'hello', in a day or so.

(I loved your post. It's deliciously inventive (in its analysis of my content) and I'm delighted to see your comments).

Kind Regards

Iv-goniel

@ Mithadan - what an awesome summation. I've updated the Summary Post (to put some new stuff in).

@ Reader.

Pondering textual analysis. in meantime

1. Text from the perspective of the historical drafter with focus upon:

a. Some ideas about Tolkien's original draft notes of LotR (see Letters and those for which he has written LotR to conform to Hobbit pre-sequel 'ring-to-Ring' - 1937 version).
b. The significance of that. The professor must have had some ideas, himself, about how to 'multiply infer/interpret' new or bridging ideas from the very one and the same text - himself. This I think goes to the 'Evil Animus' point, made, upstream. I'll --add--here the dormant or hidden Animus of the Ring - after some 3000 years and while Sauron/Necromancer was == weaker.

2. A focus upon the Hobbit-V2 and the Allen and Unwin LotR we all know in the 21st Century on the Shelves (which was where I entered this conversation, many moons ago, and then added in a 'mini research project' where I unearthed stuff I could add in, in 1.)

a. The 'Ring'* in the Hobbit. Despite it being a children's story, in its inception, nonetheless, with its edits in the now Un-ungolianted (or de-Ungolianted, or just UN-golianted) (i.e. revised Chapter V) of the delightful 1966 Edition and so on. (i.e. the chapter that corrected the Tome has been, no doubt, a controversy of various kinds in history. I'm sure Tolkien had a headache at times. Imagine his wrath? exhaustions? when he typed up early materials for LotR, to conform to Hobbit 1, and then hears back from editors 'na, na, na, John. You need to fix the Hobbit and re-work LotR'. I've cited Letters and such, in a post that found this stuff**.

Perhaps I've misinterpreted? I'm not a trained Tolkien Scholar, so I'm happy to be corrected. Does anyone know more on this topic?

*noting that in lower case - as a ring, in the book, observes the 'duality' of this textual item, all the way through to the 21st century.
** left blank

Back later (to this post) Kind Regards

12-08-2015, 03:09 PM	#11
Ivriniel Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 430	@ Leaf Hi there Leaf Nice to meet you! I've not 'met' one of your posts yet, so I thought I'd start with this hello, but I'll come back (to this post) to back edit, after the 'hello', in a day or so. (I loved your post. It's deliciously inventive (in its analysis of my content) and I'm delighted to see your comments). Kind Regards Iv-goniel @ Mithadan - what an awesome summation. I've updated the Summary Post (to put some new stuff in). @ Reader. Pondering textual analysis. in meantime 1. Text from the perspective of the historical drafter with focus upon: a. Some ideas about Tolkien's original draft notes of LotR (see Letters and those for which he has written LotR to conform to Hobbit pre-sequel 'ring-to-Ring' - 1937 version). b. The significance of that. The professor must have had some ideas, himself, about how to 'multiply infer/interpret' new or bridging ideas from the very one and the same text - himself. This I think goes to the 'Evil Animus' point, made, upstream. I'll --add--here the dormant or hidden Animus of the Ring - after some 3000 years and while Sauron/Necromancer was == weaker. 2. A focus upon the Hobbit-V2 and the Allen and Unwin LotR we all know in the 21st Century on the Shelves (which was where I entered this conversation, many moons ago, and then added in a 'mini research project' where I unearthed stuff I could add in, in 1.) a. The 'Ring'* in the Hobbit. Despite it being a children's story, in its inception, nonetheless, with its edits in the now Un-ungolianted (or de-Ungolianted, or just UN-golianted) (i.e. revised Chapter V) of the delightful 1966 Edition and so on. (i.e. the chapter that corrected the Tome has been, no doubt, a controversy of various kinds in history. I'm sure Tolkien had a headache at times. Imagine his wrath? exhaustions? when he typed up early materials for LotR, to conform to Hobbit 1, and then hears back from editors 'na, na, na, John. You need to fix the Hobbit and re-work LotR'. I've cited Letters and such, in a post that found this stuff*. Perhaps I've misinterpreted? I'm not a trained Tolkien Scholar, so I'm happy to be corrected. Does anyone know more on this topic? noting that in lower case - as a ring, in the book, observes the 'duality' of this textual item, all the way through to the 21st century. ** left blank Back later (to this post) Kind Regards Last edited by Ivriniel; 12-08-2015 at 03:53 PM.