20 questions- Raven (IV)
Raven
Hr�fn.
Tamf Moo
> Animal kingdom.
is it a bird?
--
tamf
(since plane was ruled out... )
Raven
news:7oncnoF...@mid.individual.net...
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
No.
Ramn.
Troels Forchhammer
"Raven" <jon.lennart.be...@mail.its.in.danmark>
spoke these staves:
Is it a living animal?
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Lo! we have gathered, and we have spent, and now the time
of payment draws near.
- Aragorn, /The Lord of the Rings/ (J.R.R. Tolkien)
Raven
news:Xns9CE1C7EB...@130.133.1.4...
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
The Elvish answer.
Karasu.
Raven
news:me1-031108.2...@news.t-online.de...
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
No.
Marghvran.
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b26ac7f$0$56769$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
> "Nautilus" <m...@privacy.net> skrev i meddelelsen
>> Animal kingdom.
>> 1. is it a bird?
>> No.
>> 2. Is it a living animal?
>> The Elvish answer.
>> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
4. Does it appear in LotR?
�jevind
Raven
news:7onq7eF...@mid.individual.net...
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
No.
Korpen.
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b26b555$0$56768$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>> Animal kingdom.
>> 1. is it a bird?
>> No.
>> 2. Is it a living animal?
>> The Elvish answer.
>> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
>> No.
>> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
�jevind
Raven
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No. 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
No.
Korppi.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> > Animal kingdom.
> > 1. is it a bird?
> > No.
> > 2. Is it a living animal?
> > The Elvish answer.
> > 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> > No.
> > 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> > No.
> > 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> > No.
>
--
Arvind
Raven
news:1e98e4f6-d464-4359...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
> 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> No.
> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
The Elvish answer.
(Tolkien's fiction were set in the same world - ours - though in
imaginary times, if I've understood his intentions correctly. Frodo lived
in Middle-earth. So did Farmer Giles of Ham and Smith of Wootton Major. So
do we.)
(Ponder my replies well. I always put thought into them. Perhaps often
silly thought, but hey!)
Kauv�.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "TT Arvind" <ttarv...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelelsennews:1e98e4f6-d464-4359...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
I was trying to narrow down the works in which it might have
appeared. To rephrase:
7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
of Hurin?
--
Arvind
Raven
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
> 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> No.
> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
> The Elvish answer.
> (Tolkien's fiction were set in the same world - ours - though in
> imaginary times, if I've understood his intentions correctly. Frodo lived
> in Middle-earth. So did Farmer Giles of Ham and Smith of Wootton Major. So
> do we.)
> (Ponder my replies well. I always put thought into them. Perhaps often
> silly thought, but hey!)
> I was trying to narrow down the works in which it might have
> appeared. To rephrase:
> 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
> of Hurin?
No. Or I would *probably* have simply answered "yes" to question 6. :-)
The Elvish Answer is "yes and no", you know.
K�kam.
Rebecca
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "TT Arvind" <ttarv...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelelsennews:d6da1df3-7a39-42ac...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
A general question on this- do the works Tolkien translated, like the
Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight count in this, or is it only
fiction or poetry he created? And what about scholarly works like the
Beowulf essay on Critics? (Not that I expect birds to come flying from
those pages ( a murder of critics- oops- crows).) He really has
three categories of writings. (And then then the letters.) This may
have been made clear eons ago, and so I apologize, but I don't
remember an answer since I started lurking.
Rebecca
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b26e0d9$0$56794$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
8. I'm losing patience with this. The category of "Middle-earth works" could
also be called "works containing Tolkien's general mythology". It includes
TH, UT, LotR, HoME, the Children of H嚙緝in, PoME, the Adventures of Tom
Bombadil, the Book of Lost Tales, The Road Goes Ever on, the map of
Middle-earth by Paulin Baynes and other works which recognise Beren,
L嚙緣hien, the Ainur, Elendil, Gondor and all the other things which belong
together as the world of Il嚙緞atar. The category, as you well know, does not
include "Farmer Giles", "The Homecoming of Beorhthelm", "Smith of Wootton
Major", "Leaf by Niggle" and the rest of the non-Arda stuff. Let's ignore
the pretense that we live in the same world that Beren and L嚙緣hien lived in;
we do not. Neither do Farmer Giles or Niggle or Smith; thery inhabit
separate literary universes. Tolkien's Letters do not belong to "the
Middle-earth works", not even those letters that were written in response to
readers' inquries about Middle-earth, N嚙練enor and the rest, simply because
they are letters, not literary conceits. Neither do Tolkien's scholarly
works, such as "Finn and Hengest" or "On Fairy-stories". If one wants to,
one could establish a grey zone consisting of the early drafts written
before he had fashioned his mythology: "The Notion Club Papers" and that
stuff; but those early writings are also rather obviously disqualified from
belonging to "Tolkien's general mythology" since they are situated in a
literary universe which has not yet recognisably coalesced into that of
Tolkien's Arda mythology; furthermore, they are so arcane and obscure to
most people that I very much hope no one will ever ask about something from
*them*. The early occurrence of a few names and terms that would become part
of his mythology means nothing; I would not call Tolkien's awful early poem
"Goblin Feet" part of his writings about Arda/Middle-earth/the world of
Il嚙緞atar even though it contains the word "goblin". So I ask: Is whatever we
are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works containing Tolkien's
general mythology? Don't make me list every work that qualifies as such; I
can, but I don't think I should have to.
嚙篌evind
Raven
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
> 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> No.
> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
> The Elvish answer.
> 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
> of Hurin?
> No.
[�jevind wrote:]
> I'm losing patience with this. The category of "Middle-earth works" could
> also be called "works containing Tolkien's general mythology". It includes
> TH, UT, LotR, HoME, the Children of H�rin, PoME, the Adventures of Tom
> Bombadil, the Book of Lost Tales, The Road Goes Ever on, the map of
> Middle-earth by Paulin Baynes and other works which recognise Beren,
> L�thien, the Ainur, Elendil, Gondor and all the other things which belong
> together as the world of Il�vatar.
I know it is somewhat difficult to pinpoint the definitions. Within the
literary conceit, as you call it in the part I snipped, all Tolkien's
fiction took place in our world. "Il�vatar" is just God, the same being the
parson of Ham prayed to.
"Tolkien's general mythology" would work as the definition of the subset
of Tolkien's fiction where you may expect to meet Eldar and individuals who
are familiar with names like Manw� and F�anor, and individuals fluent in
Quenya and Sindarin, Khuzd�l and Westron. The list you compiled above
includes (and nearly exhausts) the full list of that. Farmer Giles and
Smith and Mr. Bliss and such are not included, as I do know well. It would
seem somewhat odd if Chrysophylax referred to Smaug in conversation, or Garm
spoke of Huan as an ancient dog hero.
Perhaps I am just being obstinate, as if I were on one side in the Balrog
wing debate of yore. I know well the difference between Smith of Wootton
Major and The Hobbit in terms of which literary worlds they belong to, yet I
stubbornly refer to them as belonging to the same world in the author's
literary conceit. Perhaps we should agree to the term you used, "Tolkien's
general mythology", as what was apparently asked in question 6 before I
obscured the answer by being pedantic. Or perhaps the rest of you should
just insist, forcing me to change my mind, that "the Middle-earth works"
refer to this subset of Tolkien's literary universe.
> 8. Is whatever we are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works
> containing Tolkien's general mythology?
No.
Voron.
Raven
news:f6c31d12-ced4-4f3d...@c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> A general question on this- do the works Tolkien translated, like the
> Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight count in this, or is it only
> fiction or poetry he created?
It hasn't formally been made clear to me either, but I should say fiction
and poetry.
Hr�fn.
Steve Morrison
> Perhaps I am just being obstinate, as if I were on one side in the
> Balrog wing debate of yore. I know well the difference between Smith of
> Wootton Major and The Hobbit in terms of which literary worlds they
> belong to, yet I stubbornly refer to them as belonging to the same world
> in the author's literary conceit. Perhaps we should agree to the term
> you used, "Tolkien's general mythology", as what was apparently asked in
> question 6 before I obscured the answer by being pedantic. Or perhaps
> the rest of you should just insist, forcing me to change my mind, that
> "the Middle-earth works" refer to this subset of Tolkien's literary
> universe.
Or perhaps Tolkien's "Legendarium"? It would be useful anyhow to
agree on some way to refer specifically to these writings.
Öjevind Lång
"Steve Morrison" <rim...@toast.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:IvednXG1MoQIr7rW...@posted.toastnet...
Why not "Tolkien's general mythology"? "Legendarium" is less rpecise.
�jevind
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b271da0$0$56780$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
I don't see any need for that. :-) Let's just call it "Tolkien's general
mythology" when referring to the Quenya and Sidnarin and soon stuff you
mention.
>
>> 8. Is whatever we are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works
>> containing Tolkien's general mythology?
>
> No.
9. Is it from one of his other works of fiction?
�jevind
Dirk Thierbach
>>> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
>>> The Elvish answer.
>>> (Tolkien's fiction were set in the same world - ours - though in
>>> imaginary times, if I've understood his intentions
>>> correctly. Frodo lived in Middle-earth. So did Farmer Giles of Ham
>>> and Smith of Wootton Major. So do we.)
>>> I was trying to narrow down the works in which it might have
>>> appeared. To rephrase:
>>> 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
>>> of Hurin?
>>
>> No. Or I would *probably* have simply answered "yes" to question 6. :-)
>> The Elvish Answer is "yes and no", you know.
> A general question on this- do the works Tolkien translated, like the
> Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight count in this, or is it only
> fiction or poetry he created? And what about scholarly works like the
> Beowulf essay on Critics? (Not that I expect birds to come flying from
> those pages ( a murder of critics- oops- crows).) He really has
> three categories of writings. (And then then the letters.) This may
> have been made clear eons ago, and so I apologize, but I don't
> remember an answer since I started lurking.
As you can see, there's no consensus. It probably depends on how one
does define "a world" (in the sense of "a backdrop for a story").
Personally, I prefer a somewhat narrow definition: Different stories
share the same "world" if it obeys the same "rules" (or laws of nature,
if you want), and if the stories contain reference to common elements
(e.g. history, or places).
So in this sense, LotR, SIL, UT all share the same world (Arda).
/Farmer Giles/ has its own world, as does /Smith of Wooton Major/ and
/Leaf by Niggle/. Similarly both /Pearl/ and /Sir Gawain/ each have their
own world (and in this case, one not even invented by Tolkien).
Letters, essays and so on form a completely different category, because
they are not stories with a subcreated world as backdrop.
But, for some reason, as they grow older, many SF&F authors seem to
want to merge the different worlds they invented in their lifetime (a
tendency I find annoying, because often they don't fit very well).
So in this sense one could indeed argue that all of Tolkiens works take
place in the same world, just at different times.
So for playing the twenty-questions game, maybe it's best to phrase
the questions in a more neutral way. :-) And, again IMHO, I find
these type of questions not very elegant. There really should be better
ways of asking (like maybe "Is it around in the Third Age?")
- Dirk
Öjevind Lång
news:20091215081342...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
[snip]
> So in this sense one could indeed argue that all of Tolkiens works take
> place in the same world, just at different times.
>
> So for playing the twenty-questions game, maybe it's best to phrase
> the questions in a more neutral way. :-) And, again IMHO, I find
> these type of questions not very elegant. There really should be better
> ways of asking (like maybe "Is it around in the Third Age?")
I can think of better ways to spend my time than discussing which term to
use to distinguish Tolkien's Arda stories from the rest of what he wrote,
not least since nobody really is in any doubt about what, for example, the
expression "his Middle-earth stories" means. As a sort of compromise or
whatever, I'll stick to "Tolkien's general mythology" or "the mainstream
stories", or words to that effect. Everyone knows what it means, and that's
all that matters - at least to me in this context.
As for "more elegant" - asking "Is it around in the Third Age?" means that
if the answer is no, one must then find out whether it is situated in
Tolkien's general mythology and, if that is the case, which of the other
Ages we are talking about. I can't think of anything more cumbersome.
Öjevind
Dirk Thierbach
> "Dirk Thierbach" <dthie...@usenet.arcornews.de> skrev i meddelandet
> news:20091215081342...@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...
>> So in this sense one could indeed argue that all of Tolkiens works take
>> place in the same world, just at different times.
>>
>> So for playing the twenty-questions game, maybe it's best to phrase
>> the questions in a more neutral way. :-) And, again IMHO, I find
>> these type of questions not very elegant. There really should be better
>> ways of asking (like maybe "Is it around in the Third Age?")
>
> I can think of better ways to spend my time than discussing which term to
> use to distinguish Tolkien's Arda stories from the rest of what he wrote,
So can I :-)
> not least since nobody really is in any doubt about what, for example, the
> expression "his Middle-earth stories" means. As a sort of compromise or
> whatever, I'll stick to "Tolkien's general mythology" or "the mainstream
> stories", or words to that effect. Everyone knows what it means, and that's
> all that matters - at least to me in this context.
I don't really mind which term to use, either. But apparently others do,
so I'll accept whatever they propose.
> As for "more elegant" - asking "Is it around in the Third Age?" means that
> if the answer is no, one must then find out whether it is situated in
> Tolkien's general mythology and, if that is the case, which of the other
> Ages we are talking about. I can't think of anything more cumbersome.
Binary questions are cumbersome by definition :-) But by "less elegant"
I mean I mean that one can certainly narrow it down in a "mechanical"
way: Is it in LotR? Is it in one of the first three books? ... Is it
in chapter 8 to 12? ... Is it between pages 128 and 196? Etc.
That works, and is very efficient in terms of number of questions used,
but is not really appealing. Asking something like
1) Is it around in the Third or Fourth Age?
2) Is it around in the First or Second Age?
would give you a good indication if it's likely in LotR/Hobbit, or SIL,
or some of the other "non-meanstream" (or whatever term we should use)
works. Without having to resort to the physical appearance of the stories.
But that was just a suggestion, of course everyone can ask any question
they like :-) And I'm always amazed that it works, even if the initial
questions are completely off.
- Dirk
Öjevind Lång
[snip]
> But that was just a suggestion, of course everyone can ask any question
> they like :-) And I'm always amazed that it works, even if the initial
> questions are completely off.
Let us then agree to let everyone be happy in their own way. :-)
Öjevind
Tamf Moo
> Perhaps I am just being obstinate, as if I were on one side in the
> Balrog wing debate of yore. I know well the difference between Smith of
> Wootton Major and The Hobbit in terms of which literary worlds they
> belong to, yet I stubbornly refer to them as belonging to the same world
> in the author's literary conceit. Perhaps we should agree to the term
> you used, "Tolkien's general mythology", as what was apparently asked in
> question 6 before I obscured the answer by being pedantic. Or perhaps
> the rest of you should just insist, forcing me to change my mind, that
> "the Middle-earth works" refer to this subset of Tolkien's literary
> universe.
kom an d�, Hrafn! no one can force a black bird /or/ a Bergensian to
change their mind. we're entitled to our well-dug trenches (more like
comfortable hobbit holes after many years of inhabiting) with regards to
balrogs or classification of Tolkien's magnificent octopus.
to me, there's a sharp difference between the world which has hobbits
and elves in it and the slightly more mundane ones. to many, the term
"middle earth" is just shorthand for that.
--
tamf
I see two Gandalfs and church bell. And two half lions chasing
a bull rat each over the lake. (Rorschach tests seen by "Illogic")
Derek Broughton
I did rather take your answer to 6 as a clear and resounding "no!"
--
derek
Noel Q. von Schneiffel
>
> 8. I'm losing patience with this. The category of "Middle-earth works" could
> also be called "works containing Tolkien's general mythology". It includes
> Bombadil, the Book of Lost Tales, The Road Goes Ever on, the map of
> Middle-earth by Paulin Baynes and other works which recognise Beren,
> together as the world of Ilúvatar. The category, as you well know, does not
> include "Farmer Giles", "The Homecoming of Beorhthelm", "Smith of Wootton
> Major", "Leaf by Niggle" and the rest of the non-Arda stuff. Let's ignore
> we do not. Neither do Farmer Giles or Niggle or Smith; thery inhabit
> separate literary universes.
Frankly, I do not understand what you are trying to claim. Of course
we live in the same world Beren and Luthien lived in. As Tolkien
explained himself, LotR, the Silmarillion etcetera are historical
sources which he translated (and formed into gripping tales with his
divine creativity). Are you saying Tolkien lied when he claimed to
have translated Findegil's copy of the Red Book? And concerning Beren
and Lúthien, of course they lived here. They are even buried here, in
the very same grave as Tolkien. Have you never read the inscription on
his gravestone? It says:
"Edith Mary Tolkien
Lúthien
John Ronald Reuel Tolkien
Beren"
So very clearly, all four of them are buried there. That is, unless
Bqggz has stolen the corpses and sold them to finance communist
parties. He's capable of anything.
Noel
Noel Q. von Schneiffel
> On 15/12/09 05:22, Raven wrote:
>
> > Perhaps I am just being obstinate, as if I were on one side in the
> > Balrog wing debate of yore. I know well the difference between Smith of
> > Wootton Major and The Hobbit in terms of which literary worlds they
> > belong to, yet I stubbornly refer to them as belonging to the same world
> > in the author's literary conceit. Perhaps we should agree to the term
> > you used, "Tolkien's general mythology", as what was apparently asked in
> > question 6 before I obscured the answer by being pedantic. Or perhaps
> > the rest of you should just insist, forcing me to change my mind, that
> > "the Middle-earth works" refer to this subset of Tolkien's literary
> > universe.
>
> change their mind. we're entitled to our well-dug trenches (more like
> comfortable hobbit holes after many years of inhabiting) with regards to
> balrogs or classification of Tolkien's magnificent octopus.
>
> to me, there's a sharp difference between the world which has hobbits
> and elves in it and the slightly more mundane ones. to many, the term
> "middle earth" is just shorthand for that.
I think there should be only two categories. The first is named
"Brilliant" and would have all of Tolkien's works in them, and the
second one, "Not so brilliant", would contain no works.
Noel
TT Arvind
<noel.von.schneif...@fats.teunc.org> wrote:
> Have you never read the inscription on his gravestone? It says:
>
> "Edith Mary Tolkien
> Lúthien
> John Ronald Reuel Tolkien
> Beren"
Actually, it says:
Edith Mary Tolkien
Lúthien
John Ronald
Reuel Tolkien
Beren
So clearly, there are *five* persons buried there.
Who, then, was this "John Ronald"? Obviously, it is a pseudonym for
someone from Middle Earth. I suspect a detailed investigation of HoME
will reveal him to be either the Second Thrain or Tom Bombadil.
--
Arvind
Rebecca
Interesting pile of wyrms I seem to have wakened.
There can be a split where the legendarium of Arda, or even Arda for
short, and Tolkien's Other works, which, after this discussion, seem
to be restricted to his fiction and poetry, are the binary definers.
So is it is Arda seems to have been answered in the negative.
9. So, since it seems to be established that it is the Other category
of works; Is it an animal found in Tolkien's poetry?
TT Arvind
> > Animal kingdom.
> > 1. is it a bird?
> > No.
> > 2. Is it a living animal?
> > The Elvish answer.
> > 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> > No.
> > 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> > No.
> > 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> > No.
> > 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
> > The Elvish answer.
> > 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
> > of Hurin?
> > No.
> > 8. Is whatever we are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works
> > containing Tolkien's general mythology?
> > No.
[Öjevind]
> 9. Is it from one of his other works of fiction?
[ Rebecca]
> 9. So, since it seems to be established that it is the Other category
> of works; Is it an animal found in Tolkien's poetry?
11. (guessing, based on No. 2) Is it Rover?
--
Arvind
Öjevind Lång
news:c13643e2-00da-4bbe...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
> On 15 Dec, 14:27, "Noel Q. von Schneiffel"
> <noel.von.schneif...@fats.teunc.org> wrote:
>> Have you never read the inscription on his gravestone? It says:
>>
>> "Edith Mary Tolkien
>> John Ronald Reuel Tolkien
>> Beren"
>
> Actually, it says:
>
> Edith Mary Tolkien
> John Ronald
> Reuel Tolkien
> Beren
>
> So clearly, there are *five* persons buried there.
>
> Who, then, was this "John Ronald"? Obviously, it is a pseudonym for
> someone from Middle Earth. I suspect a detailed investigation of HoME
> will reveal him to be either the Second Thrain or Tom Bombadil.
I think he is the Young Miller from Sarehole.
�kevind
Raven
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
> 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> No.
> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
> The Elvish answer.
> 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
> of Hurin?
> No.
> 8. Is whatever we are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works
> containing Tolkien's general mythology?
> No.
> 9. Is it from one of his other works of fiction?
Yes. But by my answer to Rebecca above it could not be otherwise.
Havran.
Raven
> Interesting pile of wyrms I seem to have wakened.
> There can be a split where the legendarium of Arda, or even Arda for
> short, and Tolkien's Other works, which, after this discussion, seem
> to be restricted to his fiction and poetry, are the binary definers.
> So is it is Arda seems to have been answered in the negative.
> 9. So, since it seems to be established that it is the Other category
> of works; Is it an animal found in Tolkien's poetry?
No. Fiction, yes. Prose, yes. The General Mythology, where you could
expect to meet someone who had heard Mandos pronounce some doom or other,
no.
Kruk.
Raven
news:7op9cuF...@mid.individual.net...
> On 15/12/09 05:22, Raven wrote:
>> Perhaps I am just being obstinate, as if I were on one side in the
>> Balrog wing debate of yore. I know well the difference between Smith of
>> Wootton Major and The Hobbit in terms of which literary worlds they
>> belong to, yet I stubbornly refer to them as belonging to the same world
>> in the author's literary conceit. Perhaps we should agree to the term
>> you used, "Tolkien's general mythology", as what was apparently asked in
>> question 6 before I obscured the answer by being pedantic. Or perhaps
>> the rest of you should just insist, forcing me to change my mind, that
>> "the Middle-earth works" refer to this subset of Tolkien's literary
>> universe.
> kom an d�, Hrafn! no one can force a black bird /or/ a Bergensian to
> change their mind. we're entitled to our well-dug trenches (more like
> comfortable hobbit holes after many years of inhabiting) with regards to
> balrogs or classification of Tolkien's magnificent octopus.
If I choose to yield there is not one damn thing you or any other can do
about it. None has the strength. You *know* that a favourite pastime of us
Norwegians is to polish our halos by doing what we consider right - whether
or not it is.
> to me, there's a sharp difference between the world which has hobbits
> and elves in it and the slightly more mundane ones. to many, the term
> "middle earth" is just shorthand for that.
Perhaps. But "Middle-earth" is a name Tolkien lifted from the real
world. It was the name that the old Germanics, our ancestors included, used
for the world which they lived in. Had you asked Eigill Skallagrimsson if
he lived in Midgaard, or whatever the precise Old Norse form of the word
was, he would have said yes.
Hrafn.
Raven
> Animal kingdom.
> 1. is it a bird?
> No.
> 2. Is it a living animal?
> The Elvish answer.
> 3. Does it appear in the main text of LotR?
> No.
> 4. Does it appear in LotR?
> No.
> 5. Does it appear in the Silmarillion?
> No.
> 6. Does it occur in one of the Middle Earth works?
> The Elvish answer.
> 7. Is it mentioned in The Hobbit, Unfinished Tales, HoME, or Children
> of Hurin?
> No.
> 8. Is whatever we are invited to identify mentioned in one of the works
> containing Tolkien's general mythology?
> No.
> 9. Is it from one of his other works of fiction?
> Yes.
> 10. So, since it seems to be established that it is the Other category
> of works; Is it an animal found in Tolkien's poetry?
> No.
> 11. (guessing, based on No. 2) Is it Rover?
Will people stop cascading their questions before I have time to answer
them? I was delayed home from work by errands, and then there was a tale
from Ancient Rome by the BBC on the telly which I must see - sorry for the
tardiness, but you have had much else to discuss!
No, not Rover.
Annank�kai.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> Perhaps. But "Middle-earth" is a name Tolkien lifted from the real
> world. It was the name that the old Germanics, our ancestors included, used
> for the world which they lived in. Had you asked Eigill Skallagrimsson if
> he lived in Midgaard, or whatever the precise Old Norse form of the word
> was, he would have said yes.
Going by what we the sagas say of him, Egill Skallagrimsson would have
probably picked up an axe and split your skull down to the teeth with
a single blow if you had asked him a question like that. The unknown
Anglo-Saxon poet who wrote those famous lines in "Crist" - 'Eala
Earendel engla beorhtast ofer middangeard monnum sended' - would
probably have said yes, though.
--
Arvind
Raven
> Going by what we the sagas say of him, Egill Skallagrimsson would have
> probably picked up an axe and split your skull down to the teeth with
> a single blow if you had asked him a question like that.
Only if you had refused him full hospitality or otherwise dissed him. He
would kill men for good and bad reasons, but not for none at all, it seems.
Besides, he nearly puked a man to death once - he didn't need an axe to be
the bane of someone.
Hrafn.
Öjevind Lång
"Raven" <jon.lennart.be...@mail.its.in.danmark> skrev i
meddelandet news:4b27da46$0$56770$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
> No, not Rover.
12. Is it Mr Bliss?
�jevind
Pseudonymus al-Faqha'ter III
<noel.von.schneif...@fats.teunc.org> wrote:
> On 15 Dez., 03:35, Öjevind Lång <ojevind.l...@bredband.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 8. I'm losing patience with this. The category of "Middle-earth works" could
> > also be called "works containing Tolkien's general mythology". It includes
> > TH, UT, LotR, HoME, the Children of Húrin, PoME, the Adventures of Tom
> > Bombadil, the Book of Lost Tales, The Road Goes Ever on, the map of
> > Middle-earth by Paulin Baynes and other works which recognise Beren,
> > Lúthien, the Ainur, Elendil, Gondor and all the other things which belong
> > together as the world of Ilúvatar. The category, as you well know, does not
> > include "Farmer Giles", "The Homecoming of Beorhthelm", "Smith of Wootton
> > Major", "Leaf by Niggle" and the rest of the non-Arda stuff. Let's ignore
> > the pretense that we live in the same world that Beren and Lúthien lived in;
> > we do not. Neither do Farmer Giles or Niggle or Smith; thery inhabit
> > separate literary universes.
>
> Frankly, I do not understand what you are trying to claim. Of course
> we live in the same world Beren and Luthien lived in.
He probably doesn't believe that. He's a TEUNC, after all. Nor is
their claim that Tolkien just "made everything up" (of course, He did;
but not in the way they mean; but some truths are too lofty for this
setting) innocent. What they are combatting is the truth that
TOLKIEN's writing have relevance for *this world*. That would put an
end to their nauseating social-"democratic" anti-market propaganda,
wouldn't it?
> and Lúthien, of course they lived here. They are even buried here, in
> the very same grave as Tolkien. Have you never read the inscription on
> his gravestone? It says:
>
> "Edith Mary Tolkien
> Lúthien
> John Ronald Reuel Tolkien
> Beren"
>
> So very clearly, all four of them are buried there. That is, unless
> Bqggz has stolen the corpses and sold them to finance communist
> parties. He's capable of anything.
There is another possibility, which is that Beren and Lúthien became
undertakers after coming back from the dead, and always signed their
graves. Also, if the corpses don't pay their annual fees, they can get
kicked out. That might actually be quite remunerative.
Troels Forchhammer
<f6c31d12-ced4-4f3d...@c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
Rebecca <rscu...@nycap.rr.com> spoke these staves:
> A general question on this- do the works Tolkien translated, like
> the Pearl and Gawain and the Green Knight count in this, or is it
> only fiction or poetry he created? And what about scholarly works
> like the Beowulf essay on Critics? (Not that I expect birds to
> come flying from those pages ( a murder of critics- oops- crows).)
> He really has three categories of writings. (And then then the
> letters.) This may have been made clear eons ago, and so I
> apologize, but I don't remember an answer since I started lurking.
In general I think �jevind is right that there isn't really any
doubt.
The term 'legendarium' is used both by Christopher Tolkien and by
other Tolkien scholars to include all Tolkien's writings about the
universe in which is set _The Silmarillion_, _The Hobbit_, _The Lord
of the Rings_ and other works, but not 'Leaf by Niggle', Smith,
Farmer Giles, the Homecoming, Roverandom, Mr Bliss, the Father
Christmas Letters or, for that matter, the original poems and stories
about Tom Bombadil. This includes poems, narratives, linguistic
writings, philosophical writings, annals and other styles.
The 'Middle-earth' writings are, in Tolkien's own description, set in
an imaginary time in our own world, and so is e.g. Farmer Giles of
Ham, but the imaginary time in which Farmer Giles is set is not one
that includes the Third Age as its pre-history, nor is the imaginary
time of Farmer Giles a part of the future of the imaginary time of
King Elessar. As far as I can tell, the various smaller stories are
not set in the same imaginary time either, so we have the imaginary
time of the legendarium, which is (with some grey areas) intended to
be the same imaginary pre-historical time throughout (which is not to
say that it is constant -- it evolved, but the later Silmarillion is
meant to occupy the same piece of imaginary time as the lost tales
without their wrapper story).
I'm sorry if I am a little incoherent here -- I'm trying to wrap my
mind around something that may be a good way to view not only the
difference between LotR and Farmer Giles, but which may also provide
a framework for understanding some of the complexity of the evolution
of the legendarium, but right now it seems to elude me whenever I
think I have it -- if I manage to get it into shape, I'll post again
;)
--
Troels Forchhammer <troelsfo(a)googlewave.com>
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.
Smile
a while
ere day
is done
and all
your gall
will soon
be gone.
- Piet Hein, /Advice at Nightfall/
Öjevind Lång
news:Xns9CE2F2E6...@130.133.1.4...
> In message
[snip]
> The term 'legendarium' is used both by Christopher Tolkien and by
> other Tolkien scholars to include all Tolkien's writings about the
> universe in which is set _The Silmarillion_, _The Hobbit_, _The Lord
> of the Rings_ and other works, but not 'Leaf by Niggle', Smith,
> Farmer Giles, the Homecoming, Roverandom, Mr Bliss, the Father
> Christmas Letters or, for that matter, the original poems and stories
> about Tom Bombadil. This includes poems, narratives, linguistic
> writings, philosophical writings, annals and other styles.
Eureka! Here it is! The legendarium is a splendid term for it. Thank you,
Troels! :-)
�jevind
Rebecca
> "Raven" <jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> skrev i
> meddelandetnews:4b27da46$0$56770$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>
>
>
> > "TT Arvind" <ttarv...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelelsen
>> 9. So, since it seems to be established that it is the Other category
>> of works; Is it an animal found in Tolkien's poetry?
> No. Fiction, yes. Prose, yes. The General Mythology, where you
could
>expect to meet someone who had heard Mandos pronounce some doom or other,
>no.
>Kruk.
I guess that rules out the Mewlips.
Rather than cascading, another general question which can be answered
by any one knowledgeable; are animal vegetable and mineral the only
categories, or is spirit also a category? It would restrict the
possibilities quickly, but otherwise is only somewhat vaguely able to
be included in animal, or, in some cases, vegetable.
The television in the next room has just said that one third of the
world's (active) lava is found in Iceland. Does that mean Iceland
itself could be considered source material for Mount Doom?
Rebecca
Raven
No.
Gavran.
Rebecca
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "Öjevind Lång" <ojevind.l...@bredband.net> skrev i meddelelsennews:7oqduoF...@mid.individual.net...
13, Back to some basics. Does it go on four legs normally?
Rebecca
Raven
> 13. Back to some basics. Does it go on four legs normally?
No.
Holl�.
Dirk Thierbach
> Rather than cascading, another general question which can be answered
> by any one knowledgeable; are animal vegetable and mineral the only
> categories, or is spirit also a category?
The original game starts with only the first three choices. I guess
spirits belong to the "animal" category, because there were animals once.
> The television in the next room has just said that one third of the
> world's (active) lava is found in Iceland. Does that mean Iceland
> itself could be considered source material for Mount Doom?
I don't think that the Icelanders would like it if you tell them that
they live in Mordor :-)
- Dirk
Tamf Moo
> Who, then, was this "John Ronald"? Obviously, it is a pseudonym for
> someone from Middle Earth. I suspect a detailed investigation of HoME
> will reveal him to be either the Second Thrain or Tom Bombadil.
ahh, so you too have been foiled by the conspiracy of the golden arches.
Tamf Moo
do we witness* its death?
*by "witness", i mean "read about", not "see", PEDANTS!
Raven
> 14. do we witness* its death?
> *by "witness", i mean "read about", not "see", PEDANTS!
Yes. Hence my answer to question 2. Very good.
Ramn.
Clams Canino
"Troels Forchhammer" <Tro...@ThisIsFake.invalid> wrote in message
> The term 'legendarium' is used both by Christopher Tolkien and by
> other Tolkien scholars to include all Tolkien's writings about the
> universe in which is set _The Silmarillion_, _The Hobbit_, _The Lord
> of the Rings_ and other works, but not 'Leaf by Niggle', Smith,
> Farmer Giles, the Homecoming, Roverandom, Mr Bliss, the Father
> Christmas Letters or, for that matter, the original poems and stories
> about Tom Bombadil. This includes poems, narratives, linguistic
> writings, philosophical writings, annals and other styles.
I've always used "The Legendarium" to refer to the above mythology -
rendering all else he wrote "Tolkien's Other Works". Always worked for me,
and I've never been misunderstood yet.
For the record... I thought that the 20 questions games were limited to the
Legendarium world only.
-W
Hari Seldon
"Raven" <jon.lennart.be...@mail.its.in.danmark> schreef in
bericht news:4b28f3c4$0$56790$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Raven
news:164eb$4b2918f7$4dfa73e5$22...@news.chello.nl...
> 15. Long shot. Is it Bellomarius?
No.
Marhvran.
TT Arvind
16. Is it human?
--
Arvind
Raven
Yes.
K�kam.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "TT Arvind" <ttarv...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelelsennews:d44d9149-8631-4bc5...@x20g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
17. Is it Niggle?
--
Arvind
Raven
news:3f7e6472-e8c0-4153...@g23g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
No.
Rabe.
TT Arvind
18. Does it die a violent death?
--
Arvind
Raven
Yes.
Corbeau.
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b28f3c4$0$56790$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
> "Tamf Moo" <liddle...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelelsen
> news:7orua2F...@mid.individual.net...
>> Animal kingdom.
>> 1. is it a bird?
>> No.
>> 2. Is it a living animal?
[snip]
>> 14. do we witness* its death?
>> *by "witness", i mean "read about", not "see", PEDANTS!
>
> Yes. Hence my answer to question 2. Very good.
I don't want to be pedantic or hostile, but I take exception to this kind of
thing. "Alive" should mean "alive at some time or other", as opposed to
things manufactured out of some organic material or exclusively presented as
something dead. A skellington whose owner has never been introduced to us
would not be "alive", of course. Gimli's oldfathers should all be called
"alive" in a quiz of this type because they were once and matter for that
reason. There are indeed a few beings where one can legimtiately discuss
whether they should be called "alive" or "dead", but they constitute a very
small group. To force people to discover whether the being in question dies
at some point or other in the narrative does not, in my opinion, increase
the enjoyment of these quizes. "Is Denethor a living animal?" - "Elvish
answer." Puh-leeze!
�jevind
Öjevind Lång
"Clams Canino" <cc-m...@earthdink.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:sYudnea4gbPna7XW...@earthlink.com...
[snip]
> For the record... I thought that the 20 questions games were limited to
> the
> Legendarium world only.
That was clearly the original thought, but the first deviationf rom that
happened quite a few quizes ago.
�jevind
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b295647$0$56770$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Is it Beorhthelm?
�jevind
Pseudonymus al-Faqha'ter III
> "Raven" <jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> skrev i
>
> > "Tamf Moo" <liddlelel...@yahoo.com> skrev i meddelelsen
> >news:7orua2F...@mid.individual.net...
> >> Animal kingdom.
> >> 1. is it a bird?
> >> No.
> >> 2. Is it a living animal?
>
> [snip]
>
> >> 14. do we witness* its death?
> >> *by "witness", i mean "read about", not "see", PEDANTS!
>
> > Yes. Hence my answer to question 2. Very good.
>
> I don't want to be pedantic or hostile, but I take exception to this kind of
> thing. "Alive" should mean "alive at some time or other", as opposed to
> things manufactured out of some organic material or exclusively presented as
> something dead. A skellington whose owner has never been introduced to us
> would not be "alive", of course. Gimli's oldfathers should all be called
> "alive" in a quiz of this type because they were once and matter for that
> reason. There are indeed a few beings where one can legimtiately discuss
> whether they should be called "alive" or "dead", but they constitute a very
> small group. To force people to discover whether the being in question dies
> at some point or other in the narrative does not, in my opinion, increase
> the enjoyment of these quizes. "Is Denethor a living animal?" - "Elvish
> answer." Puh-leeze!
The correct answer for mortals, then, is always no, since they're all
dead by now. Frodo and Bilbo included, for assassins murdered them
during their stay in the Undying Lands (see letter
454546377728947474778839.00013).
Raven
> I don't want to be pedantic or hostile, but I take exception to this kind
> of thing. "Alive" should mean "alive at some time or other", as opposed to
> things manufactured out of some organic material or exclusively presented
> as something dead. A skellington whose owner has never been introduced to
> us would not be "alive", of course. Gimli's oldfathers should all be
> called "alive" in a quiz of this type because they were once and matter
> for that reason. There are indeed a few beings where one can legimtiately
> discuss whether they should be called "alive" or "dead", but they
> constitute a very small group. To force people to discover whether the
> being in question dies at some point or other in the narrative does not,
> in my opinion, increase the enjoyment of these quizes. "Is Denethor a
> living animal?" - "Elvish answer." Puh-leeze!
I would answer "yes and no" to the question "is Denethor alive" because
Denethor dies during the main narrative; it's an important plot point. And
now I think I've given a little clue to the answer in this thread.
Were the question about Merry I should say "yes". His death occurs well
after the main narrative, and is quite incidental to the plot. Were the
question about the mushroom meal I should say "no" even though the mushrooms
were clearly alive before Farmer Maggott picked them and Mrs. Maggott cooked
them.
Thus is highlighted the difficulty in agreeing on even such seemingly
straightforward definitions: is someone dead or alive? At least this gives
a trinary answer space to the question "is xxx a living thing"? Yes, no,
and "yes, during part of the narrative".
<it all depends on what the definition of "is" is, doesn't it?>
Corvus.
Raven
> 19. Is it Beorhthelm?
No. Beorhthelm was from one of Tolkien's translations, and very probably
a historical figure.
<we scands should know, we're the ones who got his son>
Korpen.
Öjevind Lång
"Raven" <jon.lennart.be...@mail.its.in.danmark> skrev i
meddelandet news:4b29754c$0$56788$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
[snip]
> Thus is highlighted the difficulty in agreeing on even such seemingly
> straightforward definitions: is someone dead or alive? At least this
> gives a trinary answer space to the question "is xxx a living thing"?
> Yes, no, and "yes, during part of the narrative".
> <it all depends on what the definition of "is" is, doesn't it?>
I disagree. To me, "a living thing" is the opposite of "an inanimate
object", such as a sword, a stick or a jewel.
�jevind
Raven
>> Thus is highlighted the difficulty in agreeing on even such seemingly
>> straightforward definitions: is someone dead or alive? At least this
>> gives a trinary answer space to the question "is xxx a living thing"?
>> Yes, no, and "yes, during part of the narrative".
>> <it all depends on what the definition of "is" is, doesn't it?>
> I disagree. To me, "a living thing" is the opposite of "an inanimate
> object", such as a sword, a stick or a jewel.
Well, I would probably not have answered "yes and no" to whether Denethor
or Gollum are living things. I retract that. Instead I put something which
I should have added to my previous answer to you: until you know the object
of this questions thread, you cannot jugde the merits of my answers. When
you do know, perhaps you will still judge me silly. But even though I
concede now that "Denethor is a living person" despite dying rather
spectacularly, and importantly, during the narrative, I do not retract my
answer to question 2.
Answering "yes and no" is not the same as answering "I refuse to tell".
To my mind, and perhaps to others' minds, this adds a bit of riddle to the
questions thread, like when I answered of Frodo's orc-shield that it was at
once one of a pair and one of a multitude.
Cuervo.
Rebecca
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "Öjevind Lång" <ojevind.l...@bredband.net> skrev i meddelelsennews:7ot5rdF...@mid.individual.net...
20. It seems to me that taking stabs at individual names is only
going to find the answer by a fair amount of luck, rather than logic
then applied to leaps of intuition. :D Does the human (who dies at
the end of their life, violently) die at the hands of a human?
Rebecca
Raven
> 20. Does the human (who dies at the end of their life, violently)
> die at the hands of a human?
No.
Kirina.
Steve Morrison
> No. Beorhthelm was from one of Tolkien's translations, and very probably
> a historical figure.
> <we scands should know, we're the ones who got his son>
>
> Korpen.
>
Nitpick: /The Homecoming/ wasn't a translation of /The Battle of
Maldon/, but more of a sequel with commentary. (Although it does
contain Tolkien's translation of the famous lines, "Hige sceal �e
heardra, heorte �e cenre, mod sceal �e mare, �e ure m�gen lytla�.")
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b29754c$1$56788$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
[snip]
>> 19. Is it Beorhthelm?
>
> No. Beorhthelm was from one of Tolkien's translations, and very
> probably
> a historical figure.
> <we scands should know, we're the ones who got his son>
Very probably a histirical person he may be, but he is also the father of
Beorhthelm, whose corpse is carried home in a piece of fiction written by
Tolkien. In that pece of fitcion, B. and B. are not historical persons but
persons in a work of fiction.
�jevind
TT Arvind
> 12. Is it Mr Bliss?
By the way, the first person killed in an automobile accident in the
US happened to be called Henry Bliss. Does we know whether this
played any role in Tolkien's choice of name for Mr. Bliss?
--
Arvind
Tamf Moo
21. is "it" male?
Raven
Yes.
Karasu.
TT Arvind
22. Was the book in which the character appears published while
Tolkien was alive?
--
Arvind
Dirk Thierbach
> On 15 Dec, 21:38, Öjevind Lång <ojevind.l...@bredband.net> wrote:
>> 12. Is it Mr Bliss?
> By the way, the first person killed in an automobile accident in the
> US happened to be called Henry Bliss.
LOL. Thanks, I didn't knew this.
> Does we know whether this played any role in Tolkien's choice of
> name for Mr. Bliss?
I have no idea, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if it's the case.
Seems exactly like the way Tolkien would think.
- Dirk
Raven
Yes.
Korax.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "TT Arvind" <ttarv...@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelelsennews:ab155e9f-9dd4-48bf...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
23. Was the killer a dragon?
--
Arvind
Raven
Yes.
Corb.
Chris Hoelscher
the end of their life, violently) die at the hands of a human?
uhh ... when ELSE do people die?
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b2ad492$0$56790$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Is it the parson of Quercum?
�jevind
Raven
> 24. Is it the parson of Quercum?
Yes. You win.
This is why I answered "yes and no" to question 2. He appears in the
narrative by virtue of being dead. Silly of me? Perhaps, but I took the
question quite literally. The parson of Oakley was not, at the time of the
part of the narrative concerning him, a living animal. However, answering
"no" to the question, while technically being accurate, would effectively be
a lie. For the next many questions you would most likely have been looking
for anything from a leathern shield to a severed skull.
Of course, I could instead have answered "not anymore", but this would
have given away too much in a single question. A pseudo-zen riddle suited
me better. :-)
<go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both no and yes>
Korpen.
TT Arvind
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> This is why I answered "yes and no" to question 2. He appears in the
> narrative by virtue of being dead. Silly of me? Perhaps, but I took the
> question quite literally. The parson of Oakley was not, at the time of the
> part of the narrative concerning him, a living animal. However, answering
> "no" to the question, while technically being accurate, would effectively be
> a lie. For the next many questions you would most likely have been looking
> for anything from a leathern shield to a severed skull.
> Of course, I could instead have answered "not anymore", but this would
> have given away too much in a single question. A pseudo-zen riddle suited
> me better. :-)
And "not anymore" would in any event not have excluded severed skulls,
and would have not really been very different from "no".
--
Arvind
Rebecca
wrote:
> Does the human (who dies at
> the end of their life, violently) die at the hands of a human?
>
> uhh ... when ELSE do people die?
It seemed to be relevant that it was a violent death, and the exact
timing of deaths in relation to answers has been being discussed;
other than that, I confess to facetiousness. :D
Rebecca
Pseudonymus al-Faqha'ter III
<jon.lennart.beck.its.my.n...@mail.its.in.danmark> wrote:
> "Öjevind Lång" <ojevind.l...@bredband.net> skrev i meddelelsennews:7p0vjd...@mid.individual.net...
TOLKIEN never said that ravens are elves. That fragment is a forgery.
Öjevind Lång
meddelandet news:4b2b9be8$0$56769$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Indeed. Heh. All right, I'll post my question. it will be an easy one, so
everybody can relax.
�jevind