|
|
Post by zaphod73491 on Feb 13, 2020 1:28:24 GMT -5
Without revealing what I believe Forrest's blaze to be, if it is intimately tied to the location of the treasure (a feature I imagine most searchers are comfortable with), would it not be best if ONLY a Fenn searcher could discover it? And to be clear, I don't mean that it would be merely ~unlikely~ for a non-searcher to find it. I mean literally impossible. Not a waterfall, not a mark on a tree or a rock wall, not an "X marks the spot." Rather, something only a Fenn searcher armed with the poem could possibly find.
|
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Feb 13, 2020 5:34:03 GMT -5
Without revealing what I believe Forrest's blaze to be, if it is intimately tied to the location of the treasure (a feature I imagine most searchers are comfortable with), would it not be best if ONLY a Fenn searcher could discover it? And to be clear, I don't mean that it would be merely ~unlikely~ for a non-searcher to find it. I mean literally impossible. Not a waterfall, not a mark on a tree or a rock wall, not an "X marks the spot." Rather, something only a Fenn searcher armed with the poem could possibly find. Yes. Assuming it's a physical object, how can that be achieved? |
|
|
|
Post by astree on Feb 13, 2020 6:22:25 GMT -5
Without revealing what I believe Forrest's blaze to be, if it is intimately tied to the location of the treasure (a feature I imagine most searchers are comfortable with), would it not be best if ONLY a Fenn searcher could discover it? And to be clear, I don't mean that it would be merely ~unlikely~ for a non-searcher to find it. I mean literally impossible. Not a waterfall, not a mark on a tree or a rock wall, not an "X marks the spot." Rather, something only a Fenn searcher armed with the poem could possibly find. zaphod, do you mean “find” as in see, or as in identify as a blaze? I think you mean see, just want to confirm. jenny, i think Occams Razor is a useful idea when dealing with real world situations, but not necessarily puzzles and treasure hunts. for me, a blaze is usually a marker along a trail, not at the final destination.. Let’s say the blaze is something and that youve figured that the final clue is something else... say, a mineshaft (i dont think it actually is, just an example). So, why couldn’t forest say to look down when you get to the final clue. He could even say look quickly down but he doesn’t have to be talking about the blaze. But he could use that wording to challenge people |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Feb 13, 2020 7:27:09 GMT -5
I've been thinking on something else too...... the poem line is 'if you've been wise and found the blaze'..... we have to find it... Forrest hints to this again in the following MW Q/A: Mr. Fenn: How far is the chest located from the blaze? ~ casey
Casey, I did not take the measurement, but logic tells me that if you don’t know where the blaze is it really doesn’t matter. If you can find the blaze though, the answer to your question will be obvious. Does that help?fmysteriouswritings.com/featured-question-and-weekly-words-from-forrest-blaze-measurement/So is it hidden in some way or is it just at the location of the chest... which since that location must be found, so is the Blaze found by default (and it will be obvious once at location?) I'm reminded of the decoded words: “If you are in the right spot, something you probably haven’t thought about, should be obvious to you.” |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Feb 13, 2020 7:46:34 GMT -5
In a recent interview didn't he say that you tarry scant because you've found the treasure? That's right after the line about the blaze. So if the blaze isn't the last clue, can we not be fairly comfortable that if we find it we are very close to finding the treasure? Can we be brave and say we are very likely less than 200 feet from the treasure? Yes, Forrest tells us what 'tarry scant' means and that we have the chest at that point in the poem. (link/quote below) What gives us the exact location of the treasure chest? The poem suggests, and also comments by Forrest imply, it is the Blaze. In order to look quickly down and know where the chest is, I would feel you'd have to be rather close. Within several steps. From Dal's site: dalneitzel.com/2019/10/01/tarry-scant/Forrest says Tarry Scant means: F: Take the chest and get the hell out of here.
Comment by Dal: Later that day after Mike and Penelope had left I mentioned to Forrest that I was surprised that he had answered her question about tarry scant. Forrest said “Why? What else could it mean?” I responded that searchers had been talking about what those words meant from the very beginning of the search. Forrest just shook his head and said, “It’s not complicated.” |
|
|
|
Post by me9 on Feb 13, 2020 8:09:59 GMT -5
Question posted 6/30/2014: Hi Forrest, I would like to know if the blaze can be found during the day without a flashlight. Thanks, Ron Perhaps your question is wrought with trickiness Ron. Are you really asking if the blaze could be in a cave where it is dark during the day, thus the need of a flashlight? If there is no subterfuge intended in your question then I would say yes.f mysteriouswritings.com/questions-with-forrest-fenn-and-the-thrill-of-the-chase/ |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Feb 13, 2020 9:13:04 GMT -5
Without revealing what I believe Forrest's blaze to be, if it is intimately tied to the location of the treasure (a feature I imagine most searchers are comfortable with), would it not be best if ONLY a Fenn searcher could discover it? And to be clear, I don't mean that it would be merely ~unlikely~ for a non-searcher to find it. I mean literally impossible. Not a waterfall, not a mark on a tree or a rock wall, not an "X marks the spot." Rather, something only a Fenn searcher armed with the poem could possibly find. Yes. Assuming it's a physical object, how can that be achieved? What if it is a ray of light/sun shining through some natural feature pinpointing a location and you have to position yourself at the right spot to 'find/see it'. That's an imaginative answer, but I suppose a possibility. Also goes against 'Forrest made the Blaze', but I'm not cemented with my thoughts. They are ever changing.... I appreciate the discussions and the community here to keep them pliable.... |
|
|
|
Post by edgewalker on Feb 13, 2020 9:51:11 GMT -5
"If there is no subterfuge intended in your question then I would say yes".
Interesting wording. Subterfuge comes up quite a bit. In my opinion there is subterfuge in the solve, so looking at Forrest answer here, it could be rewritten to "If there is subterfuge (and I believe there is) then I would say no" to the question as to whether you need a flashlight.
Just a possibility, not one I am completely convinced is accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by engr101 on Feb 13, 2020 10:30:53 GMT -5
I often wondered if the blaze was intended to have two meanings, blaze as a fire and as a marker. For instance, places where cliff dwelling cooking fires left indelible soot marks on their overhanging walls. Perhaps Mr. Fenn found a small alcove used as a shelter by natives with this soot feature. The soot blaze would be directly above the alcove that could provide shelter for his chest.
|
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Feb 13, 2020 10:55:26 GMT -5
Yes. Assuming it's a physical object, how can that be achieved? What if it is a ray of light/sun shining through some natural feature pinpointing a location and you have to position yourself at the right spot to 'find/see it'. That's an imaginative answer, but I suppose a possibility. Also goes against 'Forrest made the Blaze', but I'm not cemented with my thoughts. They are ever changing.... I appreciate the discussions and the community here to keep them pliable.... I like Indiana Jones too! I guess that relies on being at a spot at the right time of year and time of day (?) so not sure how the poem would tell us that (I guess we would have to be wise). Are there any indications in TTOTC of this, or otherwise what the blaze might be? Just thinking aloud as usual... Edit: There might be a few 'Indiana Jones' types, willing to etc... |
|
|
|
Post by davebakedpotato on Feb 13, 2020 11:02:28 GMT -5
In respect of the original question, 'the blaze is not underneath a manmade object'. If we have to look quickly and *directly* down from the blaze to the hidey spot, the blaze can't be made by f. Imo. And my success rate is bad.  |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Feb 13, 2020 11:39:44 GMT -5
In respect of the original question, 'the blaze is not underneath a manmade object'. If we have to look quickly and *directly* down from the blaze to the hidey spot, the blaze can't be made by f. Imo. And my success rate is bad. Great point..... when considering that removing the Blaze isn't feasible, it has to be assumed the Blaze isn't a mark on a flat rock over a hidden cavity, that so many, including myself, really liked the idea of. This type of Blaze (the marked rock) would easily be removed. Doesn't confirm it isn't hidden that way, but the Blaze is not on/or the rock directly covering it. And while the treasure is not under a man made object, it doesn't necessarily rule out the Blaze isn't man made. Just that the treasure isn't 'directly under' it, as described in the example above..... it could still be 'down from it'. But....... |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny on Feb 13, 2020 11:43:13 GMT -5
I often wondered if the blaze was intended to have two meanings, blaze as a fire and as a marker. For instance, places where cliff dwelling cooking fires left indelible soot marks on their overhanging walls. Perhaps Mr. Fenn found a small alcove used as a shelter by natives with this soot feature. The soot blaze would be directly above the alcove that could provide shelter for his chest. Oh....I like this idea a lot.... what you actually would see would be soot marks above....and know there was once a Blaze under them...... While this wouldn't be a visible sign Forrest himself left there, it would be a visible sign someone else had left there......and something I can see him loving to use.... Thanks for sharing.....I think that is an excellent idea.... |
|
|
|
Post by theoretical on Feb 13, 2020 12:49:15 GMT -5
The other aspect to the blaze discussed by many is the past tense rather than present tense. Why does FF say been wise and found the blaze rather than are wise and find the blaze? That could suggest we found the blaze sooner. Or perhaps that is over complicating and he is simply saying okay you found it now look down. I’m not sure we will know the answer to this until someone finds the treasure!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2020 12:49:26 GMT -5
IMO, the blaze cannot be small. Even if it was a 5 foot around boulder, it easily could be defaced. Since Forrest has stated that it isn't feasible to remove the blaze, I have a hunch that the blaze is massive. When reading TTOTC, what word does he type more frequently than others, that is related to the word blaze. It is also sketched twice in the book. I think that is the answer. I'm of the opposite opinion...I think blaze is the last clue and is very, very localized...Not something large and dramatically eye-catching enough that a person would be drawn to it if they were in the vicinity, like a huge boulder or a waterfall. Those places would make it more likely the treasure had been already found among other things, I think. And 'looking quickly down' once you do have the blaze pegged, seems to imply that you must be in that exact, precise locale to see it. You are probably correct in your interpretation because of this: This is only a 20 second clip so you can play it over again until you are satisfied you heard it correctly. dalneitzel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/tarryscant.mp3?_=1Here is a transcription of the actual words spoken by Forrest and Penelope: F: …hang around P: (interrupting) Don’t hang around. F: Yes F: Take the chest and get the hell out of here. P: Okay F: Tarry means wait around P: Okay F: And scant means… P: (interrupting) Okay F: …for a second or two. P: uh huh, uh huh F: I don’t have the slightest idea what I’m talking about. P: I don’t know. I got the sense of urgency…. F: Yeah P: …when you say that. That there’s some urgency there. F: Yeah ---------- |
|
