E-Text: Prologue Part 1
Wilbur07
like it to be (watch for the groaners!), but nevertheless, here it is. Be kind
and gentle with me! And also, any takers for parts 2 - 4? Some fresh insight
might be in order here . . .
PROLOGUE
1. Concerning Hobbits /Habits.
This book deals with Hobbits. From its pages we may readily see how a Hobbit
might have a habit of wearing an all-powerful and evil magic Ring (oops! that
was a spoiler wasn't it?). Further information on Hobbits will be found in the
earlier chapters of the Big Red Book of Westmarch that has already been
published under the title of _The Hobbit_. These chapters were composed by
Bilbo himself, the first Hobbit to become famous for showing his birthday suit
and salami at one of his own birthday parties. They tell of an adventure into
the East and his return: an adventure which later involved all the Hobbits in
the events of the Age that are here related.
Since the incredible success of those early chapters of the Big Red Book, many
of you wish to purchase more stories about the incredible adventures of this
remarkable people, and so here they are. For such readers, some appropriate
landfill as it were is provided on these pages because we need to justify the
hefty price of this paperback.
Hobbits are short and unnoticeable for the most part, but they've been around
forever. They breed, well, like Hobbits, which is to say, they are numberous
and plenty. Their favorite haunt is a freshly-used kitchen, where they hang
out for hours playing pinochle and smoking menthol cigarettes. They do not and
never did understand machines more complicated than a cotton gin or a ball-peen
hammer, though they know how to use a kluge for some reason. Even in the old
days they were shy of the Big Folk, Bilbo being the exception, because Bilbo
was a big man himself. They are quick of hearing and sharp-eyed, and though
they overeat and get fat easily, they can scale a backyard fence or slip into a
blind alley with the best of them. The way they use trap doors, sleight of
hand, misdirection, and cheap parlor tricks it may seem to some that Hobbits
are magical, but Hobbits have never studied any real magic of any kind. They
make great gangster characters because of their plusses to stealth and
ruthlessness.
For they are a little people, smaller than Dwarfs, less thick of limb, but
wider. They seldom reach 3 feet, but they have gotten shorter over the years,
and in ancient times they were taller and more well endowed. According to the
Big Red Book, Bandobras Took (Bullroarer), son of Isengrim the Second, was 3
foot 2 and hung like a horse. He was surpassed in all Hobbit records only by
two famous characters of old, but old Morrie and young Pipsqueak's story is
told hereafter.
It is plain that Hobbits are relatives of ours, meaning, the Big Folk. Yes,
somehow we obtained the Big Red Book, or a copy of it from somewhere, but that
story is lost in the mists of time, it being the 7th Age right now and all.
Anyway, they look like us, walk like us, talk like us, speak like us, only
they're shorter and have hair on their feet (and the Shire hobbitesses have
taken to shaving their feet as well). We might almost call them aboriginals,
but we don't. Anyway, they're far closer to us than to the Elves (because they
have frequent, exquisite, man-like sex), or to the Dwarves (whose women hardly
dare to shave their beards!). Nobody has kept any records at all of the
beginnings of Hobbits, their origins were lost in the mists of time. Yet it is
clear that Hobbits had been around for a long time before anyone had bothered
to notice that they were there. And the world being after all full of strange
creatures beyond count, these little people seemed of very little consequence.
But in the days of Bilbo, and of Freudo his heir, they suddenly became, by no
wish of their own, both redundant and noticeable, and troubled the counsels of
the Wise and Large.
Those days, the 3rd Age, and remember, it's the 7th Age now -- those days are
long past. And the shape of the world is much the same; after all, 7 Ages of
sentient beings on Middle-Earth are nothing compared to geologic ages (what? 7
* 3000 = 21,000 years, or barely an ice age). The regions in which the Hobbits
dwelt are most obviously North-west of the Old World, east of the Atlantic
Ocean. In other words, Merry Olde England/Briton/United Kingdom. The Hobbits
own records began only after the settlement of the Shire, and their most
ancient legends hardly dealt with vaster or weightier topics than who invented
Golf.
It is clear from these legends that Hobbits moved in from the East and over
the Misty Mountains. There were 3 kinds of Hobbits, called "breeds" (of which
Prembone the Oversexed is a different one). These breeds were the hardy
Harharfoots, the Stools, and the old Yallohides. The Harfoots were browner of
skin, smaller and shorter, beardless and bootless, had small hands, lived on
hillsides, and generally were held as the most inferior of the breeds. The
Stools were broader, especially in the thighs and buttocks; their hands were
larger, and they preferred to live by rivers and marshes and were fastidious
about their ruffage. The Yallohides were yellower in skin tone and also
thinner of hair, but that might be due to a preponderance of jaundice.
Correspondingly, they were also taller and thinner than the others and loved to
camp in forests and woodlands.
Parallels between breeds of hobbits and the heirarchical order of being can
here be made. Harharfoots liked living in tunnels and holes, in the hills and
were most inclined to be friendly with Dwarves. Stools lingered by rivers,
were less shy of Men. They also kept hounds as Men were wont to do -- indeed,
if there were dogs to be found then almost certainly one could find a Stool!
Yallohides were a "northerly" branch of hobbit, whatever that means, and were
more friendly to the sexless Elves. They hunted, sang songs, were bold, more
adventurous, and in most ways were superior to the other branches of
hobbit-kin. Even in Bilbo's time the strong Yallohidish strain could still be
noted among the greater families, such as the Tooks and the Masters of
Beltbuckle.
In their trek West, some hobbits settled in the lands between the Shire and
their old place out East, and in Bilbo's time one of the more important
settlements remaining was a town called Bree, 40 miles east of the Shire and a
little north and west of Cammembear. It was in those days of settlement that
the Hobbits learned how to read and write from the Dunedain, or kings of men
from Numenor. Those Atlanteans in turn learned their letters from the chaste
and immortal folk of Valinor. But Westron, or Common speech, was the least
complicated and had the least number of 50-cent words so the Hobbits spoke that
language ever after and forswore their old languages and forgot that the Men of
Rohan spoke those old languages too.
Also at the time of the settlements, the Hobbits began their own accounting of
the tale of years, a Shire Reckoning as they had it. It was year 1066 of the
3rd Age when the Yallohide brothers, Marxo and Blanco, set out from Bree and
Cammembear and crossed the River Rubicon with a great mass of Hobbits. When
Blanco later lost his wits and took to begging and chanting in the streets
(ever after hanging out at seaports) the exodus was led solely by the eldest
brother, and the movement thereafter became Marxist. At once the Western
hobbits fell in love with their new lands, and remained there, and passed once
more out of the history of Men and Elves.
At no time had the hobbits been warlike, and they had never physically fought
amongst themselves. Nevertheless, ease and peace had left this people
curiously notorious. They were difficult to kill, had lots of hitpoints, good
saving throws, good morale ratings, and had excellent leader units -- and would
be highly rated as Squad Leader platoons if one were to suppose that they
fought in World War II and if one played dice wargames. They were so
unwearyingly fond of inanely small and petty things that they inevitably flamed
each other over the slightest cause in arguments seen on the paper bulletin
boards posted at the 3 farthing stone. These things astonished those who
looked no further than their bellies and well-fed faces.
All Hobbits originally dwelt in holes in the ground. But as demand for holes
grew and the finite supply diminished, and the king's policy of laissez faire
caused a huge widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, most Hobbits
now lived in pre-fab buildings and semi-detached apartments. Some rich old
farts like Bilbo thought holes in the ground to be kitschy and constructed
great smials with round doors and such. Many many poor Hobbits, like Gaffer
Gamgee, suffered to live in shanty-town holes side by side with the
overly-ornate homes of the Bagginses, Tooks, and Brandybucks.
The Elves, having all the time in the world to do stuff and no sexual drive to
motivate them, somehow taught Hobbits the art of building in exchange for a few
peeping Tom priviledges. The Hobbits, however, were afraid of heights and so
built only one-story buildings. Even more intense was the Hobbits' fear of
water, so they stayed away from boats and rivers and lost the advantages of
free trade that waterways gave them.
Hobbits were clannish at all times, and reckoned up their relationships with
great care. They drew long and elaborate family trees with innumerable
branches. In dealing with hobbits, it is important to observe Cosa Nostra, to
remember who is related to whom, and in what degree. It would be impossible in
this book to set out a family-tree that included even the more important
Consiglieri of the more important families at the time which these tales tell
of [Editor's Note: "I found a dangling preposiiiiiition! Professor of English
Language indeed!"]. The genealogical trees at the end of the Big Red Book of
Westmarch are a small book in themselves, and never should have been written
for fear of their use in court against the great families. All but the Hobbits
would have found them exceedingly incriminating. Hobbits delighted in such
things though, if they were indeed accurate. Childish and dull they were; they
liked to have books filled with things that they already knew, set out squarely
fair with no mistakes.
2. Concerning Weed
Hobbits kept their weed in small dime-bag sized . . .[to be completed shortly]
Mark Constantino
Jim
<sniiiiip>
>2. Concerning Weed
>
>Hobbits kept their weed in small dime-bag sized . . .[to be completed
shortly]
>
>Mark Constantino
Concerning Pipe-Weed
There is another thing about the Hobbits of old that must be mentioned, an
astonishing habit : they imbibed or inhaled, through pipes, bongs and
hookahs the smoke of the burning matter of a herb, or its resinous material,
which they called pipe-weed or bud, a variety probably of Canabis Sativa. A
very hazy section of memory is associated with the origins of this habbit
[ED: How about a parody of _The Habbit_]. All that can be worked out about
it in latter days is that it was the old gangster ancestors of Morrie, that
started trafficking and racketerring of the herb in the shire, and his
family still has a monopoly on the weed and controls its pushers. This is
said to be the foundation of the gangsters wealth.
'This,' says Morrie, 'is the one mainstay of The Shires criminal
underworld. There are some that say that Tobold Pipesucker of Bongbottom
introduced the plant to The Shire, and first started smoking it, and that my
forefathers saw the potential mass market soon after which Tobold was
sinking to the bottom of Bywater with a large rock tied to his feet. The
best bud still grows on that stolen plantation, especially my favourites
Bongbottom Bud, Stoned Toby and Southern Lights
'My forefathers worked out that Toby must have come by the plant on his
sneaky contraband runs to Bree. A branch of the family therefore went to
live in Bree and setup a Cartel there. They are the only Shire Hobbits I
know of to move back East from the shire, and they changed thier name to
Underhill to cloud the connection. Wisely so because occasionally travelling
rangers bring Pipe-Weed to Bree from outside, undercutting our prices, and
have to be given a quick permanent lesson for doing this, and using the name
Underhill stopped Ranger reprisals on the shire. Nevertheless the Rangers
became suspicous of the Shire, often hanging around the borders spying on
the movements of herb. Dwarves and Wizards appear to smoke the herb too, but
they are so stingy and never share thier weed around, so we do not have run
ins with them.
'I have discovered through my own research that the weed is not native
here, but came northward from Pelargir the smugglers port of legendary
status, no doubt brought there by the Men of Westernesse. Indeed it is an
ambition of mine to visit the land of Gondor on a smoking pilgrimage, as
apparently it grows larger and more potent there, even in the wild (it of
course requires careful cultivation in the north). I have heard that the
Gondorians do not even smoke it! This really is a mass market with no supply
problems where I can really make a fortune pushing the herb, if only I can
make the right connections....
'So the plant took its time to get here, but all conceded that we first
had the idea of smoking it, even those rude Wizards, one of which took it up
long ago, and in a wizards true "anything you can do I can do better" fasion
became a master smoker. He even helps himself at our plantations, but what
can you do? It doesnt pay to argue with Wizards'
Kristina Duncan
Jim <james...@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8goiu3$ii6$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> <sniiiiip>
>
>
>
> >2. Concerning Weed
> >
> >Hobbits kept their weed in small dime-bag sized . . .[to be completed
> shortly]
> >
> >Mark Constantino
>
>
Steuard Jensen
> Concerning Pipe-Weed
[snip]
Ok, so this is a bit after the fact, but I thought I'd mention that
I've adopted this segment into the Etext "canon". If Mark Constantino
wants to jump back in with more of the Prologue, he's welcome, but if
not, I'll open it up to volunteers. (Give me a couple of days...) :)
Steuard Jensen
Prembone
> And the shape of the world is much the same; after all, 7 Ages
> of sentient beings on Middle-Earth are nothing compared to
> geologic ages (what? 7 * 3000 = 21,000 years, or barely an ice
> age).
;-)
> There were 3 kinds of Hobbits, called "breeds" (of which
> Prembone the Oversexed is a different one).
Wait. How did I end up in this story???
But since apparently, according to Wilbur, Prembone the
Oversexed does appear in this tale, I will here repeat my
childhood fantasy of being the tag-along on the Quest who later
on talks Frodo out of leaving. ;-) I don't see that particular
function being relevant to the present tale, but perhaps I could
have a role in laying the groundwork for the Revolution?
And am I a "different breed" of Hobbit, or just a different
breed? ;-)
> The Elves, having all the time in the world to do stuff and no
> sexual drive to motivate them
I seem to recall that this was a pet thesis of yours. Pedigreed?
Prembone
--
God was my co-pilot, but our plane crashed in the mountains
and I had to eat him.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Wilbur07
>> Prembone the Oversexed is a different one).
>
>Wait. How did I end up in this story???
Prem, I was just alluding to the reaction you got after your infamous Chapter.
>And am I a "different breed" of Hobbit, or just a different
>breed? ;-)
Take it in the most positive light! You're just a person who walks to the beat
of a different drummer -- but perhaps a different breed of Hobbit sounds best!
>I seem to recall that this was a pet thesis of yours. Pedigreed?
Yes, well, this is a chance to slip my own biases and interpretations in, now
isn't it?
Mark Constantino
Wilbur07
>wants to jump back in with more of the Prologue, he's welcome, but if
>not, I'll open it up to volunteers.
I'll do parts 3 and 4 eventually, if no one beats me to it (hint, hint). I'm
not all that good at it, I realize, after re-reading some of the other people's
stuff and after reading the last two chapters in Book I. But at least
Atlanteans were mentioned again!
Mark Constantino
David Sulger
>>Concerning Pipe-Weed
>Ok, so this is a bit after the fact, but I
>thought I'd mention that I've adopted this
>segment into the Etext "canon".
I have no problem with it. Ever since you put that part about the
"Black Breath" into your chapter, I thought some references to (and
parodies of) the great debates would be a funny addition to the e-text.
This Prologue segment does an excellent job of parodying the confusion
of pipe-weed with marijuana.
--Dave
Prembone
wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
>>> There were 3 kinds of Hobbits, called "breeds" (of which
>>> Prembone the Oversexed is a different one).
>>
>>Wait. How did I end up in this story???
>
>Prem, I was just alluding to the reaction you got after your
infamous Chapter.
Oh, I know, and approve. ;-) (And that's all that really
matters, right?) I just never expected to end up enshrined in
The Text Itself. But since I'm there, somebody ought to write
me in, all right and proper, as Sam would say. I make a really
good subversive. Power to the People!
>>And am I a "different breed" of Hobbit, or just a different
>>breed? ;-)
>
>Take it in the most positive light!
Of course. ;-) I was just asking a typically useless pedantic
question.
> You're just a person who walks to the beat
>of a different drummer
"Here I stand, I can do no other."
> -- but perhaps a different breed of Hobbit sounds best!
The Hobbit named Prembone, who dwells in the little hermit-hut
behind the Forsaken Inn, and followed the company unawares to
Rivendell, where she quickly made her presence known by bedding
every willing male of every willing race in the place--which
proved to keep her busy, indeed?
>>I seem to recall that this was a pet thesis of yours.
Pedigreed?
>
>Yes, well, this is a chance to slip my own biases and
>interpretations in, now isn't it?
More power to you. ;-)
Prembone
..and this seems an apropos place to slip in something I once
scribbled in my journal in a fit of iconoclasm: "I hate the
Elves, I despise the Wizards, and Iluvatar and all the holy
Valar get the middle finger. Hobbits rule." Now I realize
you're a believer in a god, but hopefully yours, unlike
Iluvatar, does not play dice with the universe, or chess with
the people who inhabit it. ;-)
Prembone
wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
>I'm not all that good at it
Bullshit.
>But at least Atlanteans were mentioned again!
But what about PATRICK DUFFY???
Prembone
..did anyone guess that I recently saw that episode of South
Park for the umpteenth time?
wilb...@aol.com
Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <20000606004727...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
> wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
>
> >I'm not all that good at it
>
> Bullshit.
Thanks! That really makes my day!
>
> >But at least Atlanteans were mentioned again!
>
> But what about PATRICK DUFFY???
>
Oh was he mentioned (star of _The Man from Atlantis_) earlier? Dang!
I thought I'd started that reference thread. And anybody want to write
an annotated e-text, with explanations of all the references! That
actually sounds like a fun project!
> Prembone
>
> ..did anyone guess that I recently saw that episode of South
> Park for the umpteenth time?
>
> --
> God was my co-pilot, but our plane crashed in the mountains
> and I had to eat him.
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
wilb...@aol.com
Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> ..and this seems an apropos place to slip in something I once
> scribbled in my journal in a fit of iconoclasm: "I hate the
> Elves, I despise the Wizards, and Iluvatar and all the holy
> Valar get the middle finger. Hobbits rule." Now I realize
> you're a believer in a god, but hopefully yours, unlike
> Iluvatar, does not play dice with the universe, or chess with
> the people who inhabit it. ;-)
>
> --
<TootMyOwnHorn>
Actually, Prem, I said much the same thing on this newsgroup a long
time ago -- something like "Hobbits are the key . . . they make the
story worth reading despite all the monarchy and heirarchy". Or, if
Bilbo can write about Earendil in the House of Elrond . . .
</TootMyOwnHorn>
Prembone
>In article <0cc820d8...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>,
> Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <20000606004727...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
>> wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
>>
>> >I'm not all that good at it
>>
>> Bullshit.
>
>Thanks! That really makes my day!
Well, now that makes *my* day. ;-) Full speed ahead, and damn
the torpedoes!
>> >But at least Atlanteans were mentioned again!
>>
>> But what about PATRICK DUFFY???
>>
>
>Oh was he mentioned (star of _The Man from Atlantis_) earlier?
No, no, he wasn't. I was just free-associating, and hammering
on a rather lame leitmotif. I had recently seen the episode of
South Park with Scuzzlebutt, the creature with a stalk of celery
where his right hand should be and Patrick Duffy where his left
leg should be. So I got going on the "what about Patrick Duffy"
thing...oh, never mind.
Prembone
Torpedoes are only tilde if you think they are.
Flame of the West
> > I hate the Elves, I despise the Wizards, and Iluvatar and
> > all the holy Valar get the middle finger. Hobbits rule.
> Hobbits are the key . . . they make the
> story worth reading despite all the monarchy and heirarchy.
I think you're both missing something here. The Hobbits
represent us common folk, providing a narrative frame
through which the mighty deeds of old can be presented.
(Telling the tale from the POV of, say, Aragorn, wouldn't work,
because we can't identify with someone so extraordinary.)
Also, they provide a way for the humble to achieve great
things, one of JRRT's themes. But Hobbits alone, without
Men and Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Maiar, would be
dreadfully boring. As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
say to us.
--
-- FotW [Live from Michigan]
Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-Earth.
Masked Man
<beatrice...@earthlink.com> wrote:
|As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
|cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
|say to us.
Masked Man----->I wouldnt go that far. LotR with no hobbits or only
hobbits is still an interesting read, but not an enduring one, or a
celebratory one IMO.
--
Who was that masked man?
wilb...@aol.com
beatrice...@earthlink.com wrote:
> wilb...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > > I hate the Elves, I despise the Wizards, and Iluvatar and
> > > all the holy Valar get the middle finger. Hobbits rule.
>
> > Hobbits are the key . . . they make the
> > story worth reading despite all the monarchy and heirarchy.
>
> I think you're both missing something here. The Hobbits
> represent us common folk, providing a narrative frame
> through which the mighty deeds of old can be presented.
> (Telling the tale from the POV of, say, Aragorn, wouldn't work,
> because we can't identify with someone so extraordinary.)
Agreed.
> Also, they provide a way for the humble to achieve great
> things, one of JRRT's themes.
Actually, that's one of the New Testament's themes. What are the
beautitudes again? Blessed are the meek . . .
> But Hobbits alone, without
> Men and Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Maiar, would be
> dreadfully boring.
Sure, as would the lives of suburbans from Wheaton, Illinois (my
hometown). Then again, no! Plenty of works about mundane lives become
works of art! Why do you need the fantastic to make your story
interesting?
> As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
> cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
> say to us.
>
FotW is a cute dumb little critter with nothing substantial to do or
say to us. I don't mean this myself, just inserting FotW where hobbits
appear in his sentence. Doesn't this statement strike you as a bit
arrogant because it pigeonholes hobbits into a stereotype? Something
Denethor or Saruman or Wormtongue might have said -- "What is the House
of Eorl but a shack where the brats reek and play in the mud?" Hobbits
my man! Hobbits and Blessed are the meek is the key!
> --
>
> -- FotW [Live from Michigan]
>
> Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-Earth.
>
Mark Constantino (not known for sig lines)
Stanley Hubris
Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <20000606004304...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
> wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
> >>> There were 3 kinds of Hobbits, called "breeds" (of which
> >>> Prembone the Oversexed is a different one).
> >>
> >>Wait. How did I end up in this story???
> >
> >Prem, I was just alluding to the reaction you got after your
> infamous Chapter.
>
> Oh, I know, and approve. ;-) (And that's all that really
> matters, right?) I just never expected to end up enshrined in
> The Text Itself. But since I'm there, somebody ought to write
> me in, all right and proper, as Sam would say. I make a really
> good subversive. Power to the People!
Hmm. Of course. Wouldn't it be a great idea to start filling what looks
to be a promising parody with people from the newsgroup, boosting egos,
starting flamewars over who should or should not be included, and so
forth. If O.Sharp, Steuard Jensen and Öjevind Lång, who have contributed
so much to the inception and organisation of the e-text, are not
included, why on earth should anyone else be?
> ..and this seems an apropos place to slip in something I once
> scribbled in my journal in a fit of iconoclasm: "I hate the
> Elves, I despise the Wizards, and Iluvatar and all the holy
> Valar get the middle finger. Hobbits rule." Now I realize
> you're a believer in a god, but hopefully yours, unlike
> Iluvatar, does not play dice with the universe, or chess with
> the people who inhabit it. ;-)
I am an atheist with no axe to grind for any belief system, but it
would seem to me that Iluvatar is a story-teller with the universe as
his story. Furthermore, I can think of nothing in any of Tolkien's works
that suggests the determinism that you appear to be attributing to the
One.
And iconoclasm is all very well, but in smashing the religious artefact,
much fine and beautiful art may also be lost. I can appreciate the
art, and occasionally even the sentiment that inspired it. Knocking
something down and setting up nothing in its place is a reasonable
policy when faced with demiurgic forces of evil, but too often it
proves to be a soulless road.
--
In a puddle, every fish is a big fish.
wilb...@aol.com
Stanley Hubris <s_hu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <004fc8c6...@usw-ex0105-037.remarq.com>,
> Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> > In article <20000606004304...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
> > wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
> > >>> There were 3 kinds of Hobbits, called "breeds" (of which
> > >>> Prembone the Oversexed is a different one).
> > >>
> > >>Wait. How did I end up in this story???
> > >
> > >Prem, I was just alluding to the reaction you got after your
> > infamous Chapter.
> >
> > Oh, I know, and approve. ;-) (And that's all that really
> > matters, right?) I just never expected to end up enshrined in
> > The Text Itself. But since I'm there, somebody ought to write
> > me in, all right and proper, as Sam would say. I make a really
> > good subversive. Power to the People!
>
> Hmm. Of course. Wouldn't it be a great idea to start filling what
looks
> to be a promising parody with people from the newsgroup, boosting
egos,
> starting flamewars over who should or should not be included, and so
> forth.
Not my intention at all! Just wanted to make reference to the adverse
reaction to E-Text Chapter 8!
> If O.Sharp, Steuard Jensen and Öjevind Lång, who have contributed
> so much to the inception and organisation of the e-text, are not
> included, why on earth should anyone else be?
But they are included on the "inscribed by" line. Actually it might be
a good idea to exclude real life characters on the newsgroup -- who
knows what might be written about "Wilbur"!!!
<snip rant on Iluvatar>
no need to start another thread on religion!
I wasn't going to post this much on the ng, but this e-text thing drew
me back in, as well as seeing some old faces post more often than they
used to.
Prembone
>Hmm. Of course. Wouldn't it be a great idea to start filling
what looks
>to be a promising parody with people from the newsgroup,
boosting egos,
>starting flamewars over who should or should not be included,
and so
>forth. If O.Sharp, Steuard Jensen and Öjevind Lång, who have
contributed
>so much to the inception and organisation of the e-text, are not
>included, why on earth should anyone else be?
You are taking this all MUCH too seriously.
As I said, you are taking this all MUCH too seriously.
Prembone
Can I help it if I prefer Hobbits?
Prembone
>Not my intention at all! Just wanted to make reference to the
>adverse reaction to E-Text Chapter 8!
I think most people figured that out, Wilbur. Never fear. ;-)
What sad times are these, when r.a.b.t.s cannot joke amongst
themselves without someone lying in wait with a bucket of ice
water. Not even the growers and arrangers of shrubberies are
safe. Alas.
>But they are included on the "inscribed by" line.
Besides, I didn't see them complaining. At least one of them
thought it was funny. And as I'm the one who got put in, really
I'm the only one with a right to complain, and I already told you
I found it funny, not offensive.
><snip rant on Iluvatar>
>
>no need to start another thread on religion!
Which wasn't *my* intent, anyway. I just thought my journal
snippet, written in a fey mood, fit in nicely with your views on
the Elves and other so-called "Higher" beings of Middle-earth.
>I wasn't going to post this much on the ng, but this e-text
>thing drew me back in
Same here. Steuard did it. It's all his fault. ;-)
(Just kidding, Steu.)
Prembone
the softrat
<s_hu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I am an atheist with no axe to grind for any belief system,
Hay, Stanly, hang it in your ear!
the softrat
mailto:sof...@pobox.com
--
"There is a wicked pretense that one has been informed. But no
such thing has truly occurred! A mere slogan, an empty litany.
No arguments are heard, no evidence is weighed. It isn't news at
all, only a source of amusement for idlers." (Gibson-Sterling,
The Difference Engine)
Prembone
>> But Hobbits alone, without
>> Men and Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Maiar, would be
>> dreadfully boring.
>
>Sure, as would the lives of suburbans from Wheaton, Illinois (my
>hometown). Then again, no! Plenty of works about mundane lives
>become works of art! Why do you need the fantastic to make
>your story interesting?
"Seek the holy in the base, and all wisdom shall be yours."
Which also applies to the assertion that Hobbits are cute and
dumb with nothing interesting and substantial to say to us. If I
could believe that gods are more than figments of the
imagination, I vote for the Quaker version: god as the Light
that dwells within each living being. What is the saying?
"There is that of god in every one of us." Don't know who said
it; it might just be a proverb.
Prembone
<beatrice...@earthlink.com> wrote:
> As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
>cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
>say to us.
IIRC, Ermanna is your teenage daughter. My teenager says many
things, some of which even make sense, but I don't usually quote
him as an authority on Hobbits. ;-)
Prembone
..who disagrees thoroughly with Ermanna, but cuts her more slack
for thinking such a thing because she's young and has much to
learn.
China Blue Board
/ so much to the inception and organisation of the e-text, are not
/ included, why on earth should anyone else be?
How about a bondage chapter devoted to Éowyn and Faramir?
--
CACS: Collective Against Consensual Sanity v0.123
Now a text site map! http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/cacs/
pretty? http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Studios/5079/
:)-free zone. Cthulu in '00: .../cacs/politics.html
China Blue Board
/ that suggests the determinism that you appear to be attributing to the
/ One.
The Valar, Maiar, and Quendi are all bound by the Music. Only Man and Eru
were granted true freedom in the world.
Stanley Hubris
> Not my intention at all! Just wanted to make reference to the adverse
> reaction to E-Text Chapter 8!
Why? Surely it isn't that important.
> Actually it might be a good idea to exclude real life characters on
> the newsgroup -- who knows what might be written about "Wilbur"!!!
My point exactly. While reference to the many points of contention
that have been raised in the newsgroups can be funny (and has been),
the self-referential theme can be overplayed.
--
In a puddle, every fish is a big fish.
Wilbur07
>> reaction to E-Text Chapter 8!
>
>Why? Surely it isn't that important.
Look at DejaNews and the number of articles that the thread Chapter 8: Fog on
the Barrow Downs has. Last I checked it was nearing 800 or so follow ups.
That's pretty significant, even for this high bandwidth newsgroup.
>While reference to the many points of contention
>that have been raised in the newsgroups can be funny
And is one of the better aspects of this parody! Mentioning things happening
on the ng in the e-text is wonderfully self-referential and funny.
Mark Constantino
Flame of the West
> > As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
> >cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
> >say to us.
> ..who disagrees thoroughly with Ermanna, but cuts her more slack
> for thinking such a thing because she's young and has much to
> learn.
Sorry, I was unclear. Ermanna only says that Ewoks
are Hobbits, and I think she just means they're cute
in the same way. I am responsible for the bit about
being cute, dumb little critters. So your disagreement
is with me, tho I doubt I get much slack for youth. ;-)
--
-- FotW
Aris Katsaris
Wilbur07 <wilb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000608003348...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
> >> Not my intention at all! Just wanted to make reference to the adverse
> >> reaction to E-Text Chapter 8!
> >
> >Why? Surely it isn't that important.
>
> Look at DejaNews and the number of articles that the thread Chapter 8:
Fog on
> the Barrow Downs has. Last I checked it was nearing 800 or so follow ups.
> That's pretty significant, even for this high bandwidth newsgroup.
>
> >that have been raised in the newsgroups can be funny
>
> And is one of the better aspects of this parody! Mentioning things
happening
> on the ng in the e-text is wonderfully self-referential and funny.
Agreed. But great caution must be applied so that no participant here is
poked
fun at - we are mocking the topics and discussions, not the participants in
those
discussions...
Aris Katsaris
Aris Katsaris
China Blue Board <mlin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mlindanne-070...@c158.ppp.tsoft.com...
> / his story. Furthermore, I can think of nothing in any of Tolkien's works
> / that suggests the determinism that you appear to be attributing to the
> / One.
>
> The Valar, Maiar, and Quendi are all bound by the Music. Only Man and Eru
> were granted true freedom in the world.
Depends on how you define freedom. The Valar and Maiar shaped the music
themselves - being bound by their own choices isn't violation or lack of
free will,
any more than being bound by my decisions, means that I haven't myself made
them...
As for the Elves they are an interesting issue - it surprises me that
Tolkien had
Eru seemingly refer also to Elves having their music be their fate - but I
still don't
think at all that it means they have no free will.
Aris Katsaris
Ermanna
Prembone wrote:
> In article <393E0159...@earthlink.com>, Flame of the West
> <beatrice...@earthlink.com> wrote:
> > As Ermanna says, Hobbits are Ewoks:
> >cute, dumb little critters with nothing substantial to do or
> >say to us.
>
> IIRC, Ermanna is your teenage daughter. My teenager says many
> things, some of which even make sense, but I don't usually quote
> him as an authority on Hobbits. ;-)
Ewoks are Hobbits! An Ewok confirmed this! Ewoks are descended
from Hobbits!
> Prembone
>
> ..who disagrees thoroughly with Ermanna, but cuts her more slack
> for thinking such a thing because she's young and has much to
> learn.
Ermanna the Elven Jedi Knight
Ewoks are Hobbits!
Prembone
wilb...@aol.com (Wilbur07) wrote:
>>While reference to the many points of contention
>>that have been raised in the newsgroups can be funny
>
>And is one of the better aspects of this parody! Mentioning
things happening
>on the ng in the e-text is wonderfully self-referential and
funny.
Everyone writing so far seems to think so. I've lost count of
all of the newsgroup in-jokes.
Prembone
..dontcha worry none, Mr. Mark, sir. You've done fine, and
that's a fact.
Prembone
mlin...@hotmail.com (China Blue Board) wrote:
>/ forth. If O.Sharp, Steuard Jensen and Öjevind Lång, who have
contributed
>/ so much to the inception and organisation of the e-text, are
not
>/ included, why on earth should anyone else be?
>
>How about a bondage chapter devoted to Éowyn and Faramir?
If you can write it so that it's funny, wicked, yet still escapes
needing a tilde, go for it.
Prembone
..hoping China Blue gets the chapter with Eowyn and Faramir,
because I'm really curious how the hell he/she will pull this
off.
Bruce N. Hietbrink
<kats...@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
> Agreed. But great caution must be applied so that no participant here is
> poked
> fun at - we are mocking the topics and discussions, not the participants in
> those
> discussions...
For the record, feel free to mock me. I'm pretty un-offendable
(if that's a word).
Bruce Hietbrink
Flame of the West
> FotW is a cute dumb little critter with nothing substantial to do or
> say to us.
Well, it's hard to deny the cute part. ;-)
wilb...@aol.com
jsol...@erols.com wrote:
> wilb...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > FotW is a cute ... critter with nothing substantial to do or
> > say to us.
>
> Well, it's hard to deny the cute part. ;-)
>
> --
>
Okay, I'll give you that one . . .
> -- FotW
>
> Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-Earth.
>
>
Stanley Hubris
Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
> As I said, you are taking this all MUCH too seriously.
Possibly. But at least rampant egomania is not one of my traits.
--
In a puddle, every fish is a big fish.
Prembone
<s_hu...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <0c2a429d...@usw-ex0103-023.remarq.com>,
> Prembone <prembone...@beatmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> As I said, you are taking this all MUCH too seriously.
>
>Possibly. But at least rampant egomania is not one of my traits.
I don't believe anyone ever suggested that it is.
Prembone