Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Elf ear fight positions (was Re: Tolkien Newsgroups FAQ) Date: 07 Nov 1999 22:57:14 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 40 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6ug0yim0cl.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) writes: > > I suspect that the Elf ears section will need to be revised at least > once before it's "final"; I'm hoping that I get some comments from > advocates of each position on that one. > > about the shape of Elvish ears. Those who argue in favor of pointed ears > generally cite a remark which seems to support that position found in the > "Etymologies" (part of _The Lost Road_). Can that remark be put into an single sentance? Is that the the "same word for leaf/ear" thing? > extent it should be treated as a canonical source. Those who argue against > pointed ears focus on Tolkien's statements that Elves and humans were > sufficiently similar that they could be mistaken for each other. Hmmm. Where is that statement? Reference? And how does it fit with this section from RotK, book 5, chapter "The Last Debate", first page of the chapter: Together the Elf and the Dwarf entered Minas Titith, and folk that saw them pass marveled to see such companions; for Legolas was fair of face beyond the Measure of Men, ... ; but Gimli stalked beside him, stroking his beard and staring about him. That they noticed Gimly is obvious, simply the hight difference and the large beard. But they marveled at _them_, so including Legolas, in his case because he looked "fair of face beyond the Measure of Men". So elves do not look "sufficiently similar that they could be mistaken for each other". I suppose that kills that argument. Of course Legolas as an Doriath-descendant Sindar and son of the king of Mirkwood is not your typical average elf. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Elf ear fight positions (was Re: Tolkien Newsgroups FAQ) References: <6ug0yim0cl.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test70 (17 January 1999) From: sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) Lines: 87 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 15:38:50 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.135.12.7 X-Trace: uchinews 942075530 128.135.12.7 (Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:38:50 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Nov 1999 09:38:50 CST Organization: The University of Chicago Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newspeer.te.net!news.indigo.ie!iol.ie!newsfeed.icl.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!uchinews!not-for-mail [Concerning the FAQ] Quoth Neil Franklin : > sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) writes: > > Those who argue in favor of pointed ears generally cite a remark > > which seems to support that position found in the "Etymologies" > Can that remark be put into an single sentance? Is that the the "same > word for leaf/ear" thing? As you guessed, I left out the specific reference for brevity (which seems to be a theme of the "Great Debates" section of this FAQ). Also, the Etymologies quote is covered at length in the old Tolkien FAQ. In brief, it's not just a "same word for leaf/ear thing" (though that's a part of it), but an actual quote that says that "Quendian ears were more pointed and leaf-shaped than [some not entirely legible word that Christopher Tolkien suggests might be "human"]". > > Those who argue against pointed ears focus on Tolkien's statements > > that Elves and humans were sufficiently similar that they could be > > mistaken for each other. > Hmmm. Where is that statement? Reference? Again, you've stumbled on the regrettable but I think inevitable lack of references in the FAQ as I've written it. Hopefully, we'll come up with some "mini-FAQs" to fill in all the gory details at some point. A few references: "...[Galadriel] clothed [Aragorn] in silver and white, with a cloak of elven-grey and a bright gem on his brow. Then more than any kind of Men he appeared, and seemed rather an Elf-lord from the Isles of the West." [RotK, Appendix A] "Then Voronwe looked at [Tuor] long in silence. 'But who are you?' he asked again. '... And now I perceive that despite your raiment you are not of [my people], as I thought, but are of the kindred of Men.'" [UT, "Of Tuor and his Coming to Gondolin"] "And one day Turin said to [Sador]: 'Was [my sister] Lalaith indeed like an Elf-child, as my father said?'... 'Very like,' said Sador; 'for in their first youth the children of Men and Elves seem close akin. But the children of Men grow more swiftly, and their youth passes soon...'" [UT, "Narn i Hin Hurin"] "'Look!' cried one of the watchmen to his companion. 'Do you see what I see? Is it not one of the Eldar of the woods that comes to speak with us?' ... [Tal-Elmar's] voice was clear and fair, but the language that he used was but a form of the half-savage language of the Men of the Dark, as the Shipmen [Numenorians] called them. The watchman stirred. 'Elda!' he said. 'The Eldar do not use such a tongue.'" [_The Peoples of Middle-earth_, "Tal-Elmar"] Mind you, none of those indicate that the ears were or weren't a distinguishing feature, but all of them clearly show that humans could be thoroughly mistaken for Elves. (In the last in particular, despite seeing him under full sunlight quite nearby, the Numenorians are not convinced that Tal-Elmar is not an Elf until he speaks.) [snip RotK quote] > That they noticed Gimly is obvious, simply the hight difference and > the large beard. But they marveled at _them_, so including Legolas, > in his case because he looked "fair of face beyond the Measure of > Men". So elves do not look "sufficiently similar that they could be > mistaken for each other". I suppose that kills that argument. Note that I didn't say "sufficiently similmar that nobody could tell the difference until the human got old and died". I said "could be mistaken for each other". Your quote in fact highlights the fact that the biggest difference was the Elves' greater nobility and beauty of features. To me, that's a difference of degree, not of detail (or at least, it could be). I would also point out that in your quote, it's just the fairness of face that is mentioned for Legolas, while Gimli does get his beard mentioned. Nobody says of Legolas, "Look at the ears on that thing!" As I tried to demonstrate with the quotes above, mortals could at times duplicate the "fairness of face" of the Eldar, and in those cases they were difficult to tell apart. It's not conclusive proof, no, but it _is_ an argument that deserves consideration. I suppose that the argument is alive and kicking, and that your reports of its demise were a bit premature. (Perhaps you were a bit hasty?) Steuard Jensen ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Elf ear fight positions (was Re: Tolkien Newsgroups FAQ) Date: 09 Nov 1999 23:11:48 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 86 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6ug0yfgvrv.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <6ug0yim0cl.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) writes: > > Quoth Neil Franklin : > > sbjensen@midway.uchicago.edu (Steuard Jensen) writes: > > > Those who argue in favor of pointed ears generally cite a remark > > > which seems to support that position found in the "Etymologies" > > > Can that remark be put into an single sentance? Is that the the "same > > word for leaf/ear" thing? > > As you guessed, I left out the specific reference for brevity (which > seems to be a theme of the "Great Debates" section of this FAQ). I suppose that, like any youngster, the FAQ will grow a bit of meat on the bone in due time. > that's a part of it), but an actual quote that says that "Quendian > ears were more pointed and leaf-shaped than [some not entirely legible > word that Christopher Tolkien suggests might be "human"]". Aha. Now if only my copy of the Etymologies (ordered nearly 3 months ago) would arrive... > > Hmmm. Where is that statement? Reference? > > Again, you've stumbled on the regrettable but I think inevitable lack > of references in the FAQ as I've written it. Hopefully, we'll come up :-) > A few references: Thanks for the contra details. The Tolkien FAQ only had the pro ones: http://www.daimi.aau.dk/~bouvin/tolkien/elfears.html And as this is the FAQ you refer to one you site, I assume it is the up-to-date one, despite being from 1995. > > Men". So elves do not look "sufficiently similar that they could be > > mistaken for each other". I suppose that kills that argument. > > Note that I didn't say "sufficiently similmar that nobody could tell > the difference until the human got old and died". I said "could be > mistaken for each other". Your quote in fact highlights the fact that Particularly at distance, or in elven clothes, it seems. And with the tops hidden behind hair? :-) > mentioned. Nobody says of Legolas, "Look at the ears on that thing!" [chuckle] Actually I would doubt them to be Elfquest size. Rather more like this: http://www.tiac.net/users/dangweth/quendo1.gif > cases they were difficult to tell apart. It's not conclusive proof, > no, but it _is_ an argument that deserves consideration. That it does. As nearly(?) allways with the "big wars". After all, if a point had so little merrit that it were not worth considering, it would have no supporters, and so cause no war. > I suppose that the argument is alive and kicking, and that your > reports of its demise were a bit premature. Seems so. > (Perhaps you were a bit hasty?) Not particularly. Just managed to confuse "sufficiently similar" with "looking alike" :-). Too tired I suppose. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/ ###### From: Michael Guenther Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Elf ear fight positions (was Re: Tolkien Newsgroups FAQ) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 18:21:45 -0500 Organization: Purdue University Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <6ug0yim0cl.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <6ug0yfgvrv.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> NNTP-Posting-Host: london.physics.purdue.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: mozo.cc.purdue.edu 942189707 8176 128.210.67.35 (9 Nov 1999 23:21:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@mozo.cc.purdue.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 9 Nov 1999 23:21:47 GMT In-Reply-To: <6ug0yfgvrv.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.stealth.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.indiana.edu!news.iupui.edu!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!london.physics.purdue.edu!mbguenth On 9 Nov 1999, Neil Franklin wrote: [snip elf ears discussion] > > cases they were difficult to tell apart. It's not conclusive proof, > > no, but it _is_ an argument that deserves consideration. > > That it does. As nearly(?) allways with the "big wars". After all, if > a point had so little merrit that it were not worth considering, it > would have no supporters, and so cause no war. How long have you been here? -- Michael Guenther mbguenth@physics.purdue.edu ###### Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin Newsgroups: rec.arts.books.tolkien Subject: Re: Elf ear fight positions (was Re: Tolkien Newsgroups FAQ) Date: 10 Nov 1999 19:54:45 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 29 Sender: neil@chonsp.franklin.ch Message-ID: <6uzowmyy6i.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> References: <6ug0yim0cl.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> <6ug0yfgvrv.fsf@chonsp.franklin.ch> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Michael Guenther writes: > > On 9 Nov 1999, Neil Franklin wrote: > > > That it does. As nearly(?) allways with the "big wars". After all, if > > a point had so little merrit that it were not worth considering, it > > would have no supporters, and so cause no war. > > How long have you been here? :-) My computer says that my first r.a.b.t download was on Jul 14 1999: chonsp:ttyp0:root:~# la /var/spool/news/rec/arts/books/tolkien/1 -rw-rw-r-- 1 news news 1501 Jul 14 14:27 /var/spool/news/rec/arts/ books/tolkien/1 chonsp:ttyp0:root:~# So 4 months. But above statement fits for all reoccurent wars on all Usenet groups and all mailing lists. So make that about 7 years for experience. -- Neil Franklin, neil@franklin.ch.remove http://neil.franklin.ch/