Re: [elfling-d] Re: Hege's seemliness
- I read Helge's post yesterday, and for a moment I thought about replying to
it. Then I though I had so many better ways of spending my Sunday.
Seriously, does it hurt that much to write a disclaimer and add a few
asterisks here and there?
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Carl F. Hostetter <Aelfwine@...>
> Well, OK, I will respond to this particular point, as it highlights[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> what I just wrote in my most recent post, about Helge's use of "seem"
> to telegraph the assertion of a blatant falsehood:
> > Elsewhere, Hostetter seems to be telling us that any desire to
> > actually use
> > Tolkien's Elvish is wrong and immoral from the beginning. In Elfling
> > Message
> > 11150 he likens such desires to Boromir desiring to use the Ring:
> > > > Boromir wanted to use the Ring, instead of disposing of it
> > properly; and
> > > > resented the fact that it was given to another instead of
> > himself, and
> > > > that it was kept only by that other until the quest could be
> > fulfilled;
> > > > and succumbed to his desires and attacked the Ringbearer.
> Helge's big lie here is that "the Ring" in this parable refers to
> "Tolkien's Elvish". Whereas in fact it refers (plainly, and as
> instantly seen from the context of the discussion from which Helge has
> dislocated this statement) to Tolkien's _linguistic papers_: which is
> what Helge and David Salo wish to possess as greatly as Boromir did
> the Ring, which they feel they are entitled to as strongly as Boromir
> did the Ring, and which like Boromir they have attacked us for in an
> attempt to gain it (though Boromir only did so once, and he repented
> of it).
> There is _obviously_ _nothing at all_ "immoral" about using Elvish.
> What a gapingly absurd thing to claim! Really, can even HELGE believe
> this nonsense? And how dumb must Helge think his readers are, to think
> that they will believe his claim?