XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien
From: mr@sandman.net
In article , Michael Ikeda
wrote:
> > > > Right, but my point was that you "knew" what he looks
> > > > like since he is called "dragon", and I have no doubt that
> > > > Tolkien meant for Smaug look like a "conventional" dragon, but
> > > > if he had called the creature/species something else to which
> > > > you had no preconcieved notion about how it looks, then
> > > > Smaug's description might well have led you as much astray as
> > > > the description of the Nazgul mounts.
> > >
> > > Stan Brown:
> > > Tolkien gave us a picture of Smaug. I don't think he ever drew a
> > > picture of the Nazgūl mounts.
> >
> > Sandman:
> > I know, I was in reference to the words alone. :)
>
> > > Stan Brown:
> > > Did he ever draw a picture of a Balrog, with or without its wig?
> >
> > Sandman:
> > If he had, would there have been such a controversy about it? :-D
>
> No, no, we do NOT want to restart the "did Balrogs have wigs"
> discussion...
Pffft, we all know he did, this passage says it all:
"His enemy halted again, facing him, and the shadow about it reached out
like two vast wigs"
I can see it clearly! :-D
--
Sandman[.net]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
