Page 3 of 3
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:22 am
by kevinswatch
Hm, that's interesting. So that was one of the changes he made.
I would say the official one would be the last one to be printed, the paperback.-jay
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:42 am
by Seareach
Wow! That's a fascinating amendment! [Must get myself a Runes paperback edition!]
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 12:52 pm
by dlbpharmd
kevinswatch wrote:Hm, that's interesting. So that was one of the changes he made.
I would say the official one would be the last one to be printed, the paperback.-jay
I would have to agree - the significance of the entire scene is changed.
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 6:37 pm
by ff7hero
Yay! I did a good!
Posted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:33 pm
by MsMary
Welcome, ff7hero.
And that's one awesome avatar you have there.
Posted: Tue Jan 02, 2007 3:10 pm
by wayfriend
Welcome to the Watch, FF7Hero.
dlbpharmd wrote:I would have to agree - the significance of the entire scene is changed.
And we are left to figure out what
is the significance?
There are too many good candidates for what Roger might be alluding to. His father. Jeremiah. Others-who-are-not-yet-named.
If he is refering to his father ... what does it all mean? Covenant's missing fingers symbolize everything he lost, but they also could symbolize (to Roger) the loss of his father. Is Roger demanding Linden pay for what happened to his father, or to him?
Or is it merely a meaningless reference? Or intended obfuscation?
Posted: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:27 pm
by ff7hero
Could it be an attempt to obscure/confuse the meaning of...
The mystery Elohim's warning?