Re: Elves and Ill Bethisad (was Re: elves and jinn (...))
|From:||John Cowan <cowan@...>|
|Date:||Sunday, October 19, 2003, 21:24|
J?rg Rhiemeier scripsit:
> I feel reluctant to re-introduce them to Ill Bethisad because
> (1) I think they put a strain on that world's framework;
The other two points are personal to you, of course; but this one,
at least, is not the case. The Elves are no more a problem than the
Kashubians. And it neatly explains what IB-JRRT was up to.
> (3) in my opinion, Ill Bethisad has moved into a direction
> I don't prefer.
IMO, IB has moved in so many directions simultaneously that there is
no longer much point in speaking of it "moving into a direction".
I regret that some people have bailed out, and it's plain that some
cultures (like the Fortunatians) couldn't possibly fit there: the
whole of history is inconsistent.
> I have gone through that hassle *twice*, and it ended in
> frustration on both sides both times. Costentin/Padraic seems
> to have disliked my "Elves" from the start, though Andrew
> welcomed them to Ill Bethisad and John liked them too.
And I still do. Adding to IB's time-depth is a Good Thing, which is
one reason that I thought Judajca was an excellent addition. IB is
a great stew, and adding more flavor(s) can only help it.
> But as Padraic is the one where all the threads run together,
Umm, I think both he and I would contest that!
John Cowan email@example.com www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com
I must confess that I have very little notion of what [s. 4 of the British
Trade Marks Act, 1938] is intended to convey, and particularly the sentence
of 253 words, as I make them, which constitutes sub-section 1. I doubt if
the entire statute book could be successfully searched for a sentence of
equal length which is of more fuliginous obscurity. --MacKinnon LJ, 1940