|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 17 2014, 4:26pm
Post #101 of 227
(6670 views)
Shortcut
|
Wonderful observation, and yes, quite creepy when you think of it.
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
noWizardme
Half-elven
Dec 17 2014, 5:12pm
Post #102 of 227
(6648 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, both good Tolkien-related reads!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Prof. Tom Shippey': "JRR Tolkien, Author of the Century” HarperCollins
Veriyln Flieger, "Green Suns and Faerie" Kent State University Press 2012
The Lord of the Rings and Philosophy: One Book to Rule Them All (Bassham & Bronson, Eds) is also good - series of essays using popular books as starting points for essays in philosophy. Other titles in the series (they have a Hobbit one, a Game of Thrones one etc.) might interest you too
And I also like "Master of Middle Earth: The Achievement of J.R.R. Tolkien by Paul H. Kocher" out of print, I think, but the Internet is very helpful for locating second-hand copies. (That one was a recommendation from Squire, and a fine recommendation too.)
~~~~~~
"nowimë I am in the West, Furincurunir to the Dwarves (or at least, to their best friend) and by other names in other lands. Mostly they just say 'Oh no it's him - look busy!' "
Or "Hold off! unhand me, grey-beard loon!"
This year LOTR turns 60. The following image is my LOTR 60th anniversary party footer! You can get yours here: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=762154#762154
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 17 2014, 6:16pm
Post #103 of 227
(6667 views)
Shortcut
|
I have Kocher's Master of Middle-Earth-- a relic from my father's discovery of Tolkien.
I can also recommend Robert Foster's A guide to Middle Earth-- an alphabetical listing of names, things, and places within Arda, with dates, etymological notes, and descriptions. Book references follows the Ballantine pagination. (Another bequeathment from my father)
Also, Lin Carter's Tolkien: A look behind The Lord of the Rings is another useful out of print commentary.
It's been a while since I read them, but they do both have unique insights gathered from personal interviews of Tolkien, those close to him, or family papers.
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
Brethil
Half-elven
Dec 17 2014, 10:04pm
Post #104 of 227
(6679 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Buying the whole philosophical package
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I agree that the ill-defined nature and power of the Ring is a great asset to the tale. It allows us to ponder its capabilities and define its terror for us personally. Our sense of dread is all the more real because is not based on any authoritative statement, but upon the reactions and expressed fears of Gandalf, Galadriel, Frodo, and others with whom we have come to identify and trust. In this way. it follows one of the rules of good story-telling -- show don't tell. It is not said to be the most dangerous weapon know to the Free People of the Second Age, but still we come to that conclusion by ourselves naturally. Thus we establish our own standard of terror, and in the process of discovery and the tortured angst we feel in the mystery, the truth of its deadly potency becomes all the more real to us and valuable-- we feel vindicated that this is a very mortal peril because we have made the inferential judgement ourselves. And who doesn't want to trust their own good judgement? 
Agreed with all above Rem, as to the subtle means of arriving at the intended philosophic conclusion; for that it is: rejecting the Ring is accepting the futility of using power against evil power (paraphrased form Letter #109, among others) in order to defeat it. JRRT writes so often about this idea and holds it so dear, and it pervades LOTR (and the Sil) but I do not recall it as an outright, didactic (or Eru save us, preachy) statement...until quite later, in the Council of Elrond, when we are halfway through the beginning of the first part of the tale and are perhaps primed by the author to accept that knowledge - in defiance of all human instinct, in which power (or Power) = victory.
Instead we have trust created and invested in the heroic cast of characters, and then the Ring is used as the foil...but it does feel very internal, and like one has found a truth on one's own! A bunny in the magician's hat, but it comes out as a real, breathing creature. And then Boromir's disbelief - especially with his initial air of arrogance and mulishness - completes the act.
|
|
|
Brethil
Half-elven
Dec 17 2014, 10:08pm
Post #105 of 227
(6645 views)
Shortcut
|
Reminds me of, "Put your trust in God, but keep your powder dry" //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Do not shy away from a fight, but do not run headlong into danger.
It sounds Shakespearean, but I cannot locate the source or exact quote. Help, maybe?
|
|
|
CuriousG
Half-elven
Dec 17 2014, 10:16pm
Post #106 of 227
(6674 views)
Shortcut
|
Bilbo may have become eccentric, but he also became a scholar and spent his retirement translating books of lore from Elvish into Westron, which was a contribution to mortal civilization. I can't imagine him doing that if he'd never left on his adventure. It opened his eyes to a bigger world than the Shire, and permanently so.
|
|
|
Bracegirdle
Valinor
Dec 17 2014, 10:35pm
Post #108 of 227
(6666 views)
Shortcut
|
Found on "The Phrase Finder"
The allusion is to gunpowder which soldiers had to keep dry in order to be ready to fight when required. This advice reputedly originated with Oliver Cromwell during his campaign in Ireland. In Ballads of Ireland, 1856, Edward Hayes wrote:
"There is a well-authenticated anecdote of Cromwell. On a certain occasion, when his troops were about crossing a river to attack the enemy, he concluded an address, couched in the usual fanatic terms in use among them, with these words - 'put your trust in God; but mind to keep your powder dry'."
“Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens.”
But, sneaking off in daylight takes much more cunning.
|
|
|
Brethil
Half-elven
Dec 17 2014, 10:52pm
Post #109 of 227
(6643 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes - and as much as (ack!) I dislike Cromwell, that's what I was thinking of!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Found on "The Phrase Finder" The allusion is to gunpowder which soldiers had to keep dry in order to be ready to fight when required. This advice reputedly originated with Oliver Cromwell during his campaign in Ireland. In Ballads of Ireland, 1856, Edward Hayes wrote: "There is a well-authenticated anecdote of Cromwell. On a certain occasion, when his troops were about crossing a river to attack the enemy, he concluded an address, couched in the usual fanatic terms in use among them, with these words - 'put your trust in God; but mind to keep your powder dry'."
Not sure if that is what Rem was thinking of...
|
|
|
cats16
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 2:27am
Post #110 of 227
(6652 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Oof, so much to catch up on! //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Join us every weekend in the Hobbit movie forum for this week's CHOW (Chapter of the Week) discussion!
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 5:20am
Post #111 of 227
(6632 views)
Shortcut
|
(are one word posts allowed here? )
|
|
|
cats16
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 5:22am
Post #112 of 227
(6636 views)
Shortcut
|
Reading this chapter on its own again tonight, I was also very irritated by Gandalf.
It seemed to me as if he did everything in his power to drag out the revelation--and Frodo's shock--of the danger posed by the Ring upon the hobbit. I noticed the Wizard, on multiple occasions, seemed to shy away from a direct linear telling of events he fully knew of (Gollum's story and the part he has played since the events of The Hobbit comes to mind here).
I think that part of this was done by Gandalf to perhaps excuse (or apologize for) some of his errors in judgement since Bilbo's finding of the Ring. By showing the difficulty he had 1) in gathering the full story of Gollum's possession of/involvement with the Ring, and 2. connecting this to Bilbo's ring, my thought is that Gandalf is desperately trying to prevent Frodo from panicking. It's as if he's doing everything he can to prevent Frodo from having an 'information overload' moment (similar to the reader receiving lots of exposition, mentioned in several posts already). He's not pleased with himself that it took several decades to put the pieces together. For one of the 'Wise,' I'm sure he's quite embarrassed about the whole affair.
And also, I got the impression that Gandalf is subtlety trying to paint the picture for Frodo that there is still time (again, DON'T panic). He says that Sauron's plans are 'ripening,' although he doesn't believe they have ripened yet. So, in essence the prospect of leaving the Shire does not seem so hopeless: danger shall find its way to Bag End eventually, and the Ring cannot stay there for long.
And I don't mean to ignore the rest of your post, a.s.: like everyone else here, I found your thoughts on Frodo's task very enlightening.
Hmm, I'm mulling over some thoughts on this and trying to relate them to some ideas of Sartre's. I don't dare to postulate any direct relation between he and Tolkien, but there's something to be said (in my mind) about it. Perhaps I see a similarity in their conceptions of morality? Sartre's coming from the unbelief in a Creator, while characters in Middle-earth live in a world with a deep physical connection to the 'gods.' In both visions of reality, 'faith' is certainly not a determining force on human morality or one's relation to the universe. 'Things' simply are, and one's relation to those things--whether it is a magic Ring, a book, a place, or anything else--is a sometimes overwhelming sensation (nausea, for Sartre) at our connection to these things through experience in our lives. To me this is most evident after Frodo returns to the Shire.
Ah, rambling already! I haven't fully thought this over (especially Sartre's ideas of an indifferent world and relating that to Frodo), but would welcome any thoughts.
Join us every weekend in the Hobbit movie forum for this week's CHOW (Chapter of the Week) discussion!
(This post was edited by cats16 on Dec 18 2014, 5:25am)
|
|
|
Kim
Valinor
Dec 18 2014, 6:24am
Post #113 of 227
(6616 views)
Shortcut
|
|
IKR? There's only a million posts to read! :0 //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
#OneLastTime
|
|
|
Kim
Valinor
Dec 18 2014, 6:36am
Post #114 of 227
(6621 views)
Shortcut
|
I needed a really good laugh today!
#OneLastTime
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 8:18am
Post #115 of 227
(6631 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"No Took has ever beat a Brandybuck for inquisitiveness"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But that's not quite the same as being adventurous.
Also, Tolkien clearly differntiates the nomenclature of the two families. I'm not an expert, but apparently the Brandybucks have something Welsh in their names - Merry's father is Saradoc, similar to Caradoc, and even Merry himself could hint at Meurig_ap_Tewdrig with the 'gay' kali referred to in appendix F just a Tolkienean pun; while Pergrin and Paladin are both based on Latin words.
What does it mean? I'm not quite sure, nor whether there is a point in the Brandybucks being the first Thains, or their affinity with water and living beyod the 'border'. Is there anything Celtic about them?
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Dec 18 2014, 1:08pm
Post #116 of 227
(6614 views)
Shortcut
|
|
very interesting, although I can't comment on Sarte
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
'Things' simply are, and one's relation to those things--whether it is a magic Ring, a book, a place, or anything else--is a sometimes overwhelming sensation (nausea, for Sartre) at our connection to these things through experience in our lives. To me this is most evident after Frodo returns to the Shire.
Ah, rambling already! I haven't fully thought this over (especially Sartre's ideas of an indifferent world and relating that to Frodo), but would welcome any thoughts.
Not having read Sarte nor studied any such subject at any length, but now I'm interested. I am not sure what "things simply are" or your reference to an indifferent world means. I sense some reading in my future. 
I believe Tolkien is actually trying to tell us something about STORY, though, specifically the long story of human life on Earth. Not the particulars of the story, not any direct allegory of people or events, but rather how story works from inside, how it looks to the characters within it, how it can be viewed differently from the lens of the past vs. the lens of the present, and for WRITTEN stories, how it can be viewed differently by the people within and the reader without.
No characters, not real life characters nor characters on a written page, can actually tell beyond a shadow of a doubt what forces are at work in the story. That is interpretation--or call it faith, if one believes in a higher power at work in the world. But the events are the same, the power of the story is the same, the heartbreak and toil and sacrifice and laughter and love along the way are the same. The decisions made by the characters are the same. THE STORY is the same, however we interpret the forces at work.
Tolkien believed in Providence, both in his primary world of reality and in the secondary world he created. Both worlds were created by One God, who guides the unfolding story in unseen ways. That being true, it makes not one iota of difference to Frodo as he struggles to figure out what to do with the Ring and his (apparently, at this point) bumbling representative of The Wise (Gandalf). Frodo is making his own free choices, even if there is something to be said for his "being meant to" have the Ring, etc.
Why we can read this book a hundred times, these kinds of thoughts.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
Through any dark time, I always remember Frodo's claim on the side of Mt. Doom that he "can manage it" because he must.
Sometimes, I have to manage it, too, as do we all. We manage because we must.
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 1:40pm
Post #117 of 227
(6638 views)
Shortcut
|
|
As I've written before - it's been years...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What did you think of these disclosures?
Once again, I do not remember. But I probably lapped them up.
Did you find you were able to process all of this the first time?
I'm pretty sure I wasn't.
Why do you think Tolkien chose to include so much information in fell swoop?
I guess Tolkien simply didn't take a crash course for writers, and this is the way he wrote. IIRC, The Window on the West originally included much of the stuff that eventually went into the appendices. It's not that Tolkien restrained himself; he simply moved things to the proper place.
But the infodump is effective: it overwhelms us - as Frodo was overwhelmed, and made the decision Gandalf wanted him to make.
Was it at this point that he had figured out where he wanted the story to go?
Of course not. He rewrote the chapter whenever he figured out a bit more.
What did you think of Gandalf’s choice of travelling companion for Frodo, and Sam’s reaction to the news that they would be going away, possibly to see the Elves?
Of course it should be a lower-class servant. Get Pippin or Merry as a companion (or even Fatty Bolger), and they begin having ideas.
In the films, Sam is portrayed as a friend, nearly Frodo's equal. And he begins having ideas straightaway - which is bad.
Can you imagine if we’d had all of this information in the scene between Gandalf & Frodo in the movie version of FOTR?
Not as a conversation, no. But it might have been a flashback with Gandalf rather than Galadriel speaking the voiceover.
I know some of you can – for those of you who knew the book well before seeing the movies, were you expecting all of this info to come in one big chunk like this?
I didn't see the movie immeidately when it came out, and I'm pretty sure I knew the would be a prologue before actually watching.
What did you think when you first heard the FOTR prologue and saw this back story of Sauron and the One Ring as the first scene you saw?
I thought they did a pretty good job.
How about as the movies progressed and more of this history and the iconic lines were included?
I appreciated them.
Thank you, Kim, for this discussion!
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Dec 18 2014, 8:12pm
Post #118 of 227
(6628 views)
Shortcut
|
|
“The Shadow of the Past’ is one of the oldest parts of the tale. - JRRT
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Gandalf then tells the story of Gil-galad … and how Elendil’s son Isildur took the Ring … and the Ring fell in to the Anduin. He then tells of Smeagol/Gollum … And finally, that it was through Gollum that Sauron learned … the terms Hobbits, Baggins and Shire.
A. What did you think of these disclosures?
I enjoy reading this section for the grandeur and wit of the conception that is revealed here. But since Gandalf has already said the ring is the One Ring, etc., all of this is strictly speaking necessary to give such an unlikely story credibility. So I’m not surprised at the information itself – clearly some major events would be needed to get such a valuable artifact off the Dark Lord’s finger and into Gollum’s cave at the roots of the mountains.
This was a huge amount of information to fit in to one chapter.
B. Did you find you were able to process all of this the first time?
I don’t remember how or when I first “processed” it – certainly it wasn’t during my first time when, as I’ve said, I was really too young to make much of the book besides its sheer excitement. But as perilously close as all this comes to Darkstone’s classic put-down, …then the Good Heroes of the Shining Fork defeated the Naughty Guys of the Funny Smell blah-blah-blah…, Tolkien leavens it with Gandalf’s characteristic didactic style with its constant asides and self-commentary.
As for processing it, I think pre-teens and teenagers are particularly adept at memorizing large amounts of arcane or obscure lore once they find an interest they can call their own. The resulting popularity of a book like this among the younger set may be one of the reasons Tolkien’s stuff is regarded as too juvenile to pass for adult literature.
C. Why do you think Tolkien chose to include so much information in fell swoop?
It’s been nine years building in Gandalf’s head, and now the fate of the world is sitting in front of him wondering what’s for dinner – he’s ready to explode. In a more story-conscious view, Tolkien himself had been working on this story for quite a while and clearly felt he had to get it all down as soon as possible, since the next “event” in the plot is that, unbelievably and scarily, Gandalf goes missing again. Without Gandalf to add further information and drive further adventures until Book II, the entire rest of Book I (how many chapters?) will depend on the reader’s understanding of Frodo’s and the Black Rider’s respective motivations.
It may not be the best-crafted structure for the beginning of an epic, and as some have said, Book I is a bit of a hurdle for a lot of readers who expect better care from their author than JRRT gives them in this case.
D. Was it at this point that he had figured out where he wanted the story to go?
As others have pointed out, the final version of this chapter was only revised for the last time when the entire rest of the book had been written. It would take more inspection of HoME VI than I think anyone wants to give it, to decipher how the various stages of this chapter were written in relation to the various degrees of completion of the rest of it. Tolkien did tell us much later that the perceived resemblance of the overall plot to the course of the Second World War was deceptive, because
The crucial chapter, “The Shadow of the Past’, is one of the oldest parts of the tale. It was written long before the foreshadow of 1939 had yet become a threat of inevitable disaster, and from that point the story would have developed along essentially the same lines, if that disaster had been averted. Its sources are things long before in mind, or in some cases already written, and little or nothing in it was modified by the war that began in 1939 or its sequels. – JRRT, Foreword, LotR 2nd edition.
I think the qualified nature of his “the story would have developed along essentially the same lines” (my italics) is the key. Details did change, and we see this even more at the Council of Elrond where a great deal of this is repeated with additional information about Aragorn (barely mentioned here) and Gondor. But Tolkien’s claim that the key to the “New Hobbit” is the Ring and its threat of corrupting anyone who tries to use it for good is clear. Do we need to know Gollum’s background or the details of his being hunted, or his dialogue with Smeagol? No, actually!
And another iconic exchange:
Frodo: “What a pity that Bilbo did not stab that vile creature, when he had a chance!”
Gandalf: “Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand.” And later “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life.
D1. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
You quote the exchange, but don’t direct a specific question to it. Nevertheless I can’t resist mentioning that this is the inspiration for what I think is the single cleverest take-off in all of Bored of the Rings:
Goddam, who couldn't swim, reached out his hand to Dildo and begged him to pull him out, and as he did, Dildo noticed an interesting-looking ring on his finger and pulled it off. He would have finished Goddam off then and there, but pity stayed his hand. It's a pity I've run out of bullets, he thought, as he went back up the tunnel, pursued by Goddam's cries of rage. – Harvard Lampoon. (1969). Bored of the Rings. “Prologue: Of the Finding of the Ring”. That still has the power to make me chuckle at any time, in any place.
It’s at this point Gandalf realizes that Sam has been outside gardening and listening to the conversation.
E1. What did you think of Gandalf’s choice of travelling companion for Frodo?
I never questioned it. Sancho Panza is the honorable ancestor of many a master-servant questing team.
E2. …and Sam’s reaction to the news that they would be going away, possibly to see the Elves?
We’ve already seen that Sam is a sentimental bag of mush regarding the Elves, in the opening scene at the Green Dragon with Ted. Interestingly, Sam plays a very minor role in much of the following chapters’ adventures. On reading HoME (eventually) I found that was because many of those chapters were already written before Sam was added to Frodo’s team.
And then this came up last time I was in on a RR discussion of this book: at Crickhollow, when the “conspiracy” is uncovered, Sam is said to have collected a lot of information until he was finally caught by Gandalf. The passage implies that Sam spied on Frodo and Gandalf for something like several months at least. Someone reviewed the timeline, and we realized he couldn’t have, because this episode is the first time Gandalf has been in the Shire for many years. This is evidently Sam’s first and last spying adventure, not just his last as that chapter implies.
This chapter is a really interesting example of the challenge of book to movie adaptations.
F. Can you imagine if we’d had all of this information in the scene between Gandalf & Frodo in the movie version of FOTR?
No.
G. I know some of you can – for those of you who knew the book well before seeing the movies, were you expecting all of this info to come in one big chunk like this?
No. Frankly, as I looked forward to the films before they were released, I spent no time imagining the technical problems of how they might be adapted from the books. Why speculate? Of course, after the releases, we all had a field day criticizing or praising various aspects of the adaptation.
H. What did you think when you first heard the FOTR prologue and saw this back story of Sauron and the One Ring as the first scene you saw?
I remember being very excited by the opening of the New Line film of FotR. I didn’t make the slightest connection with which chapter of the book it was taken from.
I. How about as the movies progressed and more of this history and the iconic lines were included?
I was impressed whenever the screenwriters broke down and included lines that even approximated Tolkien’s own prose or dialogue.
I was fascinated by the recreation of Smeagol’s finding of the Ring at the beginning of the second movie. I’m still not sure whether it had to be there at all, but it was at least an imaginative choice.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd & 4th TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion and NOW the 1st BotR Discussion too! and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
 = Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:10pm
Post #119 of 227
(6633 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I agree. I think that this point illustrates one of the difficulties with Tolkien.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This whole idea of a self-discovered truth, makes me think of those who ask why Gandalf did not just wear the Ring, Kill Sauron, then throw it into Orodruin.
(Replace any powerful figure as the Ring-wielder and you can cover any case of it's use.)
I mean no disrespect, but these people have missed the entire point of the tale. In many cases, I find in most cases that they have not had to opportunity to form their own conclusions because they have heard a very abbreviated and simplified version of events from someone else. Here is one of the weaknesses (if we can call it that) of Tolkien. Much of his style relies upon the slow build-up to the revelation of a grand idea. Each step taken on the path of adventure has been outlined and planned to provide the necessary information to make an informed judgement. Without having all the relevant facts, they cannot make a good judgement. To them, the Ring is simply a tool-- to be used and discarded at will. This is why I refer most people with Tolkien questions to the books. I could spend hours explaining the 'why's' and 'wherefore's', but let them take in the story and they will come to their own conclusions. I'm not saying that everyone of them will love or understand the works, but they will be afforded the opportunity to make a choice based on experience, rather than hearsay. Tolkien rarely makes broad generalisations without sufficient grounding in previous fact. This is why I tell so many people:
You have to read the books!!
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:14pm
Post #120 of 227
(6611 views)
Shortcut
|
It carried the sentiment of not being scared of doing something just because it carried inherent danger, but don't go looking for danger.
Didn't Celeborn/Galadriel or Faramir advise the Fellowship/Sam and Frodo, 'Run into danger, but not too straight.' or, 'You head into peril, but do not do so swiftly.'? I first thought it was Polonius to Laertes, but now Galadriel, Celeborn, and Faramir come to mind.....
Hmmmm.......
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:16pm
Post #121 of 227
(6625 views)
Shortcut
|
BTW, any reason to dislike Cromwell in particular? I'm just being nosy, so just tell me to mind my own business if you want to.
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
(This post was edited by Rembrethil on Dec 18 2014, 9:16pm)
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:16pm
Post #122 of 227
(6608 views)
Shortcut
|
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
(This post was edited by Rembrethil on Dec 18 2014, 9:17pm)
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:18pm
Post #123 of 227
(6634 views)
Shortcut
|
|
'Two wrongs don't make a right'
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or something like that... I think that is the general idea.
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
Rembrethil
Tol Eressea
Dec 18 2014, 9:21pm
Post #124 of 227
(6607 views)
Shortcut
|
|
We'd need a new name for that dark saga...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
How about 'A Dirge of Death and Despair'. It even alliterates! Take that G.R.R. Martin! We know you changed you name to have three initials just like Tolkien!
Call me Rem, and remember, not all who ramble are lost...Uh...where was I?
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Dec 18 2014, 9:28pm
Post #125 of 227
(6624 views)
Shortcut
|
|
But three rights make a left. /
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
******************************************
"It was a bright cold day in April, and the mantle clock was striking thirteen."
|
|
|
|
|
