huooommm … I never cheated about my entries, Master Barliman … hom … another possibility is to write a post and immediately afterwards delete it … rhûom … the deleted entry counts as yours though it isn’t there anymore as you deleted it … grrûHommm …. I once came across that because I made some mistakes … hoooOmmm … strange world that is …
And what good is all of this doing? Either you have something to say or you don’t!
Well, I’m not the talkative one looking at count of my post it seems…:lol::lol::lol:
No, not yet. I think I didn’t like the figure. But now you mention it, it’s a figure that fits with the boats… in a very large diorama as Gollum may not come too close.
Yes, there are issues with the “Gollum-on-log” figure insofar as he doesn’t tally with JRRT’s description of how he laid on the log in such a way that he was only discernabe by his “paddle-feet” dipping in and out of the water. But we have to acknowledge that he isn’t likely to be redesigned any time soon, and must work with what we’ve got!
I discovered Gollum in my collection, so I did buy him. Always nice to be surprised by your own collection.:rolleyes:
So he’s next on my painting list.
Now here is my painted Gollum, the Log with Eyes.
I was happy with the paintjob, but the picture reveals a spot on his face (under his eye) I didn’t see on the real figure. After all it is a small miniature.
I must admit I have long wondered why Gollum is (nearly ?) always portrayed as only wearing a loincloth when you would think that it was bloody cold down under the mountains and the goblins he occasionally snacked on would have worn clothes.
I suppose we have just come to accept it (not that I am complaining ).
Well after my ‘howling’ success in the last GF vote (a nice birthday present as well), can I offer some more gold across the bar to stand a dring to any who may drop by for breakfast, second breakfast, nuncheon, lunch etc. etc.