|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 7 2016, 9:00pm
Post #51 of 147
(720 views)
Shortcut
|
Are you just playing Devil's Advocate?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or are you seriously asking, and if so, why? Since, as I've mentioned, a movie often leads people to the original source, then obviously the answer is YES, I have said "that would be a great book!" Right now I'm reading "Washington's Spies," the book that the AMC series "Turn" is (loosely) based on. I just finished watching "The Night Manager," and plan to get the book (it's not available on Kindle); and I read "North and South" after watching the BBC production with Richard Armitage. But if I were writing a book based on a movie I'd seen, I can't imagine why I'd need to "cut a scene." The original article talked about having to turn 100,000 words into a 2 hr movie, so why wouldn't I be able to turn a 2 hr movie into a 100,000 word novel? And if it's filmed, then why would I imagine such a scene couldn't be written? But a written scene that can't, or would be difficult, to film? Let me go back to "The Hours." There's a passage in the book where Clarissa is glaring at her daughter's friend, who is glaring back, but no words are spoken. In the book you can read what they're thinking, but I can see that it would be very difficult to film such a scene and portray just exactly WHY they are so hostile to each other. Maybe not impossible, but very difficult.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
LSF
Gondor
Jun 7 2016, 9:05pm
Post #52 of 147
(715 views)
Shortcut
|
" And if it's filmed, then why would I imagine such a scene couldn't be written?" I'm not seeing how that would be a problem, because in order to have been filmed, some version of the scene was probably written, and it wouldn't be hard to describe what happened in the visual scene with text. And then you can also add to the scene with internal character thoughts that the movie can't explicitly show.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 9:12pm
Post #53 of 147
(712 views)
Shortcut
|
KDC wanted to be told more about the background story from the book.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This was the passage to which I responded:
Now, I don't recall a huge amount of background info in "The Hobbit," which was one of my criticisms of that book. Adding scenes like the Prologue, the Dol Goldur subplot and the Chance Meeting were IMO good decisions, because they provided that background info that I, at least, wanted to know. If you want a film that shows the background the book omitted, then how can you be satisfied when what the film provides doesn't actually fit? There are admittedly some tricky issues here. If by "the book" we mean only The Hobbit, then the film's White Council scheme in itself doesn't necessarily conflict (except to the degree that the Azog plot intermeshes with the Necromancer plot). But in that case, there should be no "chance meeting" scene, and KDC can never have wanted it, since in The Hobbit proper, that's not even vaguely suggested. And once you expand your desires to include that and other material derived from The Lord of the Rings appendices, the films' White Council-Necromancer storyline no longer fits. By the way, I should note that this desire that KDC presents is one that serious, professional literary and film commenters have expressed about other works. I remember my favorite film critic's (mostly negative) review of Martin Scorsese's 1993 adaption of Edith Wharton's The Age of Innocence. He noted that one point in which Scorsese and his co-scenarist, Jay Cocks, might have improved upon the original (which the critic valued highly) was by expanding the ending, and actually showing what he had long wondered about: what exactly was the aged main character's son saying in the apartment to the woman who long ago had been his lover? The book stays outside with the protagonist, and the critic was disappointed that the film did the same.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 7 2016, 9:18pm
Post #54 of 147
(710 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm one of those people that read "The Hobbit" 20 - 30 years before the movie came out. Oddly enough, I'd also read LoTR, and I remembered much more of "The Hobbit" than I remembered LoTR - possibly because it's a smaller, simpler story. Anyway, that example I gave was one of the reasons I was critical of the book, Gandalf just disappearing and reappearing. Whether "The Hobbit" movies tie into the LoTR books is another subject altogether. I'm not saying I like the additions because they fit in with the LoTR books (or movies, for that matter). I'm saying I liked it because it explained Gandalf better than the book did. And actually, it was the Appendices to LoTR that I read about the Chance Meeting, and other things. I don't recall any additional info in the Hobbit book. I re-read it a few years ago, after AUJ came out, and um, meh, it was okay I guess. Other criticisms would be the lack of character development, and as I've often said, the death of both nephews - something PJ didn't change. But we've had this discussion before.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
(This post was edited by Kilidoescartwheels on Jun 7 2016, 9:19pm)
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 9:20pm
Post #55 of 147
(710 views)
Shortcut
|
I read the "Star Wars" novelization.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thanks for both of your replies. What I'm getting at is that almost never is there a book adapted from a movie that takes the kinds of liberties with its source that movies regularly take with the books they adapt. Much of that is due to sheer commercial requirements: the studio doesn't want even want its authors to try to make the film novelization into a literary masterpiece (and generally doesn't give them enough time to do so anyway).
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 7 2016, 9:32pm
Post #56 of 147
(702 views)
Shortcut
|
I said that scene set up the MOVIE, and the way it's filmed, it has no effect on the Dol Goldur subplot one way or another - in the movie, at least. Again, I'm failing to see a problem here. I think perhaps that you and I are not starting with the same point of reference. You are obviously more familiar with the book than I am. In my experience, almost every time I read the book shortly before seeing the movie (as opposed to 20 - 30 years), I was disappointed in the movie. Usually it's because of what they have to leave out, although there have been one or two where I didn't think the book and movie had anything in common besides the title - yeah, hated those. The only exception I can think of is Stephen King's "Carrie," which I thought was a ridiculous book, but the movie made more sense to me anyway. Anyway, perhaps the reason I'm not seeing the problems you are seeing is because of the fact that I don't really remember the books that well; my point of reference is strictly the Hobbit movies and therefore this additional information fits just fine to me.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jun 7 2016, 9:35pm
Post #57 of 147
(699 views)
Shortcut
|
What I'm getting at is that almost never is there a book adapted from a movie that takes the kinds of liberties with its source that movies regularly take with the books they adapt. Much of that is due to sheer commercial requirements: the studio doesn't want even want its authors to try to make the film novelization into a literary masterpiece (and generally doesn't give them enough time to do so anyway). The main source of differences in a film novelization is due to the book being based on an earlier draft of the script or of things being dropped from the film. Sometimes the very ending ends up different. And sometimes the writer of the book-version adds material not in the screenplay that is allowed to remain, like the background material on Ra's al Ghul that Denny O'Neil included in his novelization of Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins. Denny was probably allowed to get away with this because he created the character of Ra's al Ghul in the first place. And, possibly, the editor and/or studio just didn't care enough to tell him to cut it. But it certainly made the novel an interesting read!
"He who lies artistically, treads closer to the truth than ever he knows." -- Favorite proverb of the wizard Ningauble of the Seven Eyes, the "Gossiper of the Gods"
(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Jun 7 2016, 9:38pm)
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 10:11pm
Post #58 of 147
(690 views)
Shortcut
|
You mention three books that you have read or intend to read because you've seen their cinematic (or television) adaptations. But have you seen an original film or TV series and wished that it were turned into a book?
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jun 7 2016, 10:34pm
Post #59 of 147
(692 views)
Shortcut
|
A lot of peoples' expectations seem to have been based on what they wanted, not anything actually coming from the filmmakers. From the beginning of the process, I thought they made it fairly obvious that: 1. The Hobbit was not going to function as a stand-alone film. It was always going to be viewed and treated as a prequel to LOTR. I'm quite certain that the studio would have insisted on it and marketed it that way regardless of what PJ or GDT actually wanted. But both of them also made it clear that it was going to tie into the LOTR films. 2. If they ever intended to stick solely to the events of the Hobbit text, they abandoned that idea early on. From way back in the production, we knew that they were going to add material and create at least one additional storyline (Gandalf's side of the story, including the White Council and Dol Guldur). And once they abandoned the "bridge film" and went for a two-part Hobbit film during GDT's time, this was a totally done deal. 3. Legolas was going to be in it. Again, the studio would have insisted. He was the big heartthrob from LOTR. There's no way they were going to pass up having him involved as much as they could in TH. So yes, I did expect The Hobbit to be LOTR-lite. I never saw any likelihood of it being anything else. I think maybe some were hoping so hard for their own interpretation that they weren't really paying attention to the signs along the way and adjusting their expectations to meet reality. I can understand not liking what we got, I'm just bemused by how many seem surprised by it. It didn't exactly sneak up on us.
Silverlode Roads go ever ever on Under cloud and under star Yet feet that wandering have gone Turn at last to home afar. Eyes that fire and sword have seen And horror in the halls of stone Look at last on meadows green And trees and hills they long have known.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 10:46pm
Post #60 of 147
(680 views)
Shortcut
|
Have you ever seen the 1960 documentary "Frames of Reference"?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Again, I'm failing to see a problem here. I think perhaps that you and I are not starting with the same point of reference. You are obviously more familiar with the book than I am. In my experience, almost every time I read the book shortly before seeing the movie (as opposed to 20 - 30 years), I was disappointed in the movie. You're right, there was some confusion on my part. I thought you were saying that you looked to the film to fill in blanks from the book, in which case, it seemed to me, the film would be lying to you, because the backstory Jackson & Co. provide contradicts what Tolkien says. (There was an article in either Beyond Bree or Mythprint or Amon Hen in 2011 that attempted to provide readers with a quick guide to the history of Durin's folk so that they would better be able to understand Thorin's situation when they watched the then-forthcoming films. As I said in a subsequent review of that article, the effort was wasted, because the films opted to change that backstory.) But now I see that's not what you meant. I too read The Hobbit more than 30 years before seeing Jackson's films--but I'd re-read it many times in the intervening years. Like Smith of Wootton Major, it is, in my opinion, a minor masterpiece. Naturally the more we think of the original, the more we expect from the adaptation. I have not always been hugely disappointed in that regard. I read Kazuo Ishiguro's The Remains of the Day just before the Merchant-Ivory film version came out. The book is better, indeed great, but the movie if by no means its equal is still quite satisfying. The same team's film of Howards End is even better, and in some ways is a match for its source. But the general trend you mention is probably the truth: if a book is of sufficient interest to adapt into film, then it's probably already better than average, while the resulting adaptation comes with no such guarantee. Add to that the fact that the things that make a book good may not be reproducible on film, and disappointment is the usual order of the day. Anyway, to return to my subject line, this work from the University of Toronto is a pretty clever use of film to explain some physics concepts. "All motion is relative, but we tend to think of one thing as being fixed and the other thing as being moving."
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 10:59pm
Post #61 of 147
(683 views)
Shortcut
|
Yep, squire was referring to "The Hobbit" films as "fan fiction" as far back as 2008.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And unlike me, he generally approved of Jackson's LOTR movies. This isn't even the first post in which he made the argument that what the filmmakers proposed to do with The Hobbit was "unnecessary, inappropriate, or harmful to the principle that Tolkien's actual stories are the best basis for a movie, rather than his imaginary world populated by another writer's story." And of course, worries that any future Hobbit movies would be too much like The Lord of the Rings date back on these forums to at least 2004, if not before.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 11:01pm
Post #62 of 147
(675 views)
Shortcut
|
Try to write the most famous scene in "Psycho" as if it were in a novel.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Can you do so in a way that's as effective as the images and sounds of the film? I think it highly unlikely. Novels may be able to do more than films, but they can't do everything.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
LSF
Gondor
Jun 7 2016, 11:17pm
Post #64 of 147
(667 views)
Shortcut
|
but if you're talking about the stabbing in the shower scene, I think a good writer can describe the visuals well enough to convey the emotion and such of it. Of course it's not going to be able to replicate the sound effects/music in book form, but I can think of a way to convey that sound into described emotion as well. But I will agree that some things are just conveyed better visually than through text. Just as the opposite is true.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 11:28pm
Post #65 of 147
(664 views)
Shortcut
|
There's a good 45-minute film hiding in Jackson's 474-minute trilogy.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or 532 minutes, if you're counting the extended editions, which I haven't seen. But I will concede that about ten percent of the Hobbit movies, mostly in the first installment, include material that is notably superior to the likes of Transformers or even The Mummy. It's the remaining ninety percent I have major problems with. Thanks for clarifying the source of your dinner-scene description in the previous post. The way you described the scene implied there was no dialogue for an extended period of time, which is why I suggested that it sounded much more cinematic than novelistic. And it brought some wonderful films to mind, in which food and facial expressions coincide to wonderful effect. If you have three minutes, and you don't mind having the ending of a great movie spoiled, watch this clip from the Japanese film Late Spring (1949). In some ways this finale is very Tolkienian. And that includes the fact that this sequence is, as you describe British period-pieces, "tight in locations". In book form, The Lord of the Rings especially, in my view, has a lot of set-pieces in small settings. Most of the second chapter, for instance, is a discussion between Gandalf and Frodo in a sitting room, and I daresay something similar could be observed of at least one-third of the book's chapters. Certainly there is more to the book than that, an expansiveness as you describe, but the intimacy of LOTR gets less appreciation than it should. We really ought to have a good discussion on these forums in which we consider specific passages from The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings (and maybe some other books for comparison) and how they might have been differently filmed than they were. It's hard to say how good or bad the choices of Boyens, Walsh, and Jackson were without knowing what else they might have done.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 7 2016, 11:47pm
Post #66 of 147
(657 views)
Shortcut
|
If you haven't seen it, particularly in context, then I can understand why you might think it would be possible to get the same effect on the page, but it can't be done. Just as there are aspects of written fiction that not only cannot be conveyed as well in film, but cannot be conveyed at all. I remember a critic reviewing Sally Potter's film version of Virginia Woolf's novel Orlando (it seems appropropriate to mention Woolf in a discussion where The Hours, in which she is a character, has been cited a couple times)--which starred Tilda Swinton, by the way. The critic quoted some passage from the book and imagined Potter saying to herself, "How am I going to film that?" (She didn't, is the answer.) I don't remember what sentences specifically he offered, but here's one I found easily: "'Marmaduke Bonthrop Shelmerdine!' she cried, standing by the oak tree. The beautiful, glittering name fell out of the sky like a steel-blue feather. She watched it fall, turning and twisting like a slow-falling arrow that cleaves the deep air beautifully." How would you film that?
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 8 2016, 12:23am
Post #67 of 147
(653 views)
Shortcut
|
The documentary "Frames of Reference"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
No, I haven't seen it. I actually was saying that the Hobbit movies filled in some of the gaps in the Hobbit book, but again, I don't remember LoTR too well (when I saw the movie, I didn't even remember Aragorn!), so I'm not holding up the Hobbit book to the LoTR book and cross-referencing. You remind me of Otaku-Sempei, who is so knowledgeable about the entire Tolkien literature of Middle-earth. I've never read anything else by Tolkien; I'm definitely more of a movie fan. So again, I don't have the same point of reference that you have. I keep thinking I'm going to re-read LoTR sometime this year; well, we'll see. What I meant about reading the book was, as you said, the more you care about the book (or are invested in it), the more likely any adaptation will disappoint, simply because they can't cover EVERYTHING, and will inevitably make some changes to the storyline for brevity. Another example is the Tom Clancy books. The Jack Ryan of "The Hunt for Red October" was actually a composite of two or three characters in the book, and some of Clancy's sub-plots were eliminated to keep the focus on the Red October sub. I mean, I like Clancy well enough, but he often gets carried away with stuff!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 8 2016, 12:24am
Post #68 of 147
(650 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, I nominate you to start that!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"We really ought to have a good discussion on these forums in which we consider specific passages from The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings (and maybe some other books for comparison) and how they might have been differently filmed than they were. It's hard to say how good or bad the choices of Boyens, Walsh, and Jackson were without knowing what else they might have done." Could be loads of fun!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 8 2016, 12:31am
Post #69 of 147
(649 views)
Shortcut
|
You mention three books that you have read or intend to read because you've seen their cinematic (or television) adaptations. But have you seen an original film or TV series and wished that it were turned into a book? I don't really track things like that. I don't know what movies are original screenplays, but it seems like almost everything that I watch is some kind of adaptation. My husband likes the original "Star Trek" series, but I'm not sure he'd read any books based on that. Then again, he doesn't read much, unless it's a computer book. I might read some of them, in order to avoid Shatner's overacting!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 8 2016, 12:36am
Post #70 of 147
(642 views)
Shortcut
|
Maybe Shatner should read a computer manual as an audio book. //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jun 8 2016, 12:38am
Post #71 of 147
(653 views)
Shortcut
|
Boy, can I start something or can I start something???
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'd like to thank everyone who has replied and offered their opinion on this subject, and I particularly appreciate the respectful questioning and disagreements! Part of the reason I shared this article is, I'm currently taking a short class in Digital Storytelling. In fact, I should be working on my next homework assignment right now, LOL! Our class makes 1 - 3 minute monologues, accompanied by photos and sound, which (obviously) tells a story. And it does put a different spin on things. I could write all kinds of stuff, but there's both a time limit to consider, AND choosing photos to illustrate the points, which also has an effect on the story. It is definitely giving me a greater appreciation for the artistic vision that goes into directing a movie. Well, gotta get to work on that assignment - thanks again, everybody!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jun 8 2016, 12:59am
Post #72 of 147
(646 views)
Shortcut
|
Yep, squire was referring to "The Hobbit" films as "fan fiction" as far back as 2008. To be fair, Squire was posting about the proposed 'bridge' film there and not the adaptation of The Hobbit, per se.
"He who lies artistically, treads closer to the truth than ever he knows." -- Favorite proverb of the wizard Ningauble of the Seven Eyes, the "Gossiper of the Gods"
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jun 8 2016, 1:02am
Post #73 of 147
(642 views)
Shortcut
|
Try to write the most famous scene in "Psycho" as if it were in a novel. Can you do so in a way that's as effective as the images and sounds of the film? I think it highly unlikely. Novels may be able to do more than films, but they can't do everything. You realize that Psycho was a novel by Robert Block before Hitchcock adapted it into a film. Unfortunately I do not have my copy of the book handy to compare.
"He who lies artistically, treads closer to the truth than ever he knows." -- Favorite proverb of the wizard Ningauble of the Seven Eyes, the "Gossiper of the Gods"
(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Jun 8 2016, 1:04am)
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jun 8 2016, 1:05am
Post #74 of 147
(645 views)
Shortcut
|
Arguably the ideas for the "bridge film" that squire anticipated to be "fan fiction" were not abandoned with that film but instead were incorporated into The Hobbit trilogy in the supporting plots that derive, sort of, from the LOTR appendices. The whole Azog-pursuit aspect is surely as much fan fiction as anything that would have been in the bridge movie.
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Discuss Tolkien's life and works in the Reading Room! +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jun 8 2016, 1:55am
Post #75 of 147
(633 views)
Shortcut
|
Yes, wishful thinking and personal desire warring against reality aren't confined to one side of the debate. There are those who wish that Tolkien had finished his abandoned Hobbit rewrite - possibly they are unconsciously assuming that it would have fallen in line with their own imagination and preferences. I've always suspected that an awful lot of people, including many of those who are devoted to the books, would have been just as shocked and dismayed by Tolkien's personal vision of the story, could his imagination have been projected on a screen for us to watch, as many were with PJ's vision. The Professor's imagination likely would have differed from many of ours just as much as ours differ from each other. And yes, I bet there would still be those ready to argue about it.
Silverlode Roads go ever ever on Under cloud and under star Yet feet that wandering have gone Turn at last to home afar. Eyes that fire and sword have seen And horror in the halls of stone Look at last on meadows green And trees and hills they long have known.
|
|
|
|
|