Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.books.inklings    |    Discussing the obscure Oxford book club    |    1,925 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 1,342 of 1,925    |
|    Sean_Q_ to All    |
|    Re: 20 Questions - =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=D6jev    |
|    02 Sep 09 07:38:40    |
      XPost: alt.fan.tolkien, rec.arts.books.tolkien       From: no.spam@no.spam              Öjevind Lång wrote:               >> 1. It is a live tree.        >        > Well - yes and no. OK, call me an Elf if you wish!              Uh oh. My 1st Q and your A was...               >> Is it a complete, living tree/shrub/vine/bush/reed/tussock/        >> shoot/sprout/frond/grass/whatever?        >        > Yes.        >        > Öjevind              (?)              >> By the same reasoning we can eliminate any other tree of unknown type,       >> unless it explicitly appears at least twice in the story, of which once       >> is in a forest and once isn't.              > Hm. It could be a tree of unknown type. That is to say, Tolkien never       > tells us what species it belongs to.              Here following is a tree which is located in tree-sprinkled grassland,       not forest (those few trees that are present being outliers which lie       outside the approaching woods):               They had been jogging along again for an hour or more when Sam stopped        a moment as if listening. They were now on level ground, and the road        after much winding lay straight ahead through grass-land sprinkled        with tall trees, outliers of the approaching woods.               Frodo hesitated for a second: curiosity or some other feeling was        struggling with his desire to hide. The sound of hoofs drew        nearer. Just in time he threw himself down in a patch of long grass        behind a tree that overshadowed the road. Then he lifted his head        and peered cautiously above one of the great roots.              Well I am saying that our objective could not be this particular tree,       whose species (although tall) is unknown and for all we know might not       ever be found in a forest.              In fact it might be of a particularly anti-social type which stubbornly       refuses to grow anywhere else but in grass-lands with an absolute       maximum tree sprinkling density and prefers at the very most to be an       outlier. Plant another tree within the radius of its comfort zone and       it either expires from overcrowding, fights the new tree or indignantly       gathers up its roots and stalks off in a huff when no one is watching.              I'm not saying for certain that it is of this unsociable type. However       it *could* be, because the author doesn't say otherwise. So we can't say       with absolute certainty that this type can be found in a forest.              SQ              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca