# unsuscribe Digest urth.v017.n002 *The Urth list — 1 messages, 1 voices, 17 Jul 1998* > Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright > in each message remains with the person who wrote it. > Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original > archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than > retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact. --- ### Internet Megantic *17 Jul 1998, 16:19* > At 15:10 15-07-98 -0700, you wrote: > > -------------- BEGIN urth.v017.n002 -------------- > > 001 - raster at highfiber.com (Cha - Digest Urth, or brains thereof > 002 - Dan Parmenter 003 - Michael Straight 004 - "Mark Millman" 005 - mary whalen 006 - Michael Straight > URTH Digest -- for discussion of Gene Wolfe's New Sun and other works > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.1 --------------- > > From: raster at highfiber.com (Charles Dye) > Subject: Digest Urth, or brains thereof > Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 15:57:05 -0600 (MDT) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > adam louis stephanides explicates: >> raster argued that, as long as Severian was still alive or if he'd been >> lost at sea, nobody could be a legitimate Autarch. It's not clear to me >> whether this is because a legitimate Autarch must eat his predecessor's >> brains ... > Such an ugly phrase, that. Can't we come up with some polite euphemism? > "Breakfast for your head" ... no, wait, I like "eating brains" better. > Never mind. Yes, that was my point: you need a body for succession to > proceed. >> ... or simply that a legitimate Autarch must be chosen by his >> predecessor. If the former, it would seem that the Autarchy runs a >> grave risk of being permanently lost, either through the Autarch being >> captured by the enemy, or killed in battle or by assassination with >> the designated successor unable to arrive in time. > But note that ol' Appian has been captured by the enemy! It's made > pretty clear that Severian is the "designated successor," but I'm not > certain that there always is one. Alls ya needs is a corpse, a knife, > and the drug -- all provided by Appian -- and instructions, which > presumably Inire would have provided had A been unable to. The next- > in-line may be a randomly chosen bystander, if you don't have a > designated successor handy. > > (You'll notice that after Appian's injury and capture, Inire can be > seen skulking about. Severian thinks he's trying to carry out a > rescue. Fat chance -- Appian's as good as dead. I believe Inire is > there to ensure the continued dynasty.) > > That said, yes, the regime does have some problems. It also has a > few advantages. Fr'instance, it's easy to decide whether or not an > individual claiming the Autarchy is the real McCoy. He knows the > words! > > m.driussi at genie.com writes: >> Actually I believe raster's primary concern re: authentic autarchs is >> the same as my own--the brain eating bit. It seems to define >> "autarch" as distinct from "monarch," "suzerain," "dictator of the >> proletariate," etc.; it also seems to figure into the equation of >> "how one person can represent many" in a concrete way rather than >> just the lip-service paid by representative democracy. The autarch >> =is= legion--it isn't just a metaphor. > And also provides a slick justification for the royal plural. >> So yes, yes, very rickety. I imagine Inire stepping out of the >> shadows to help along a situation that requires a deus ex >> machina to deliver a brain-eater--that is, Inire won't allow the >> system to fail; the autarch breaks his neck, a scullary maid becomes >> Autarch. > Or a honey steward, of course. > > mary whalen -- well, okay, prion -- notes: >> Has anyone noticed that the Autarch Appian's name is a homophone for >> apian (bee-like)? Any connection with the Honey Steward? > Bingo! Name pun -- Wolfe loves 'em. Also, of course, another Claudian > reference. > > raster at highfiber.com > > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.2 --------------- > > From: Dan Parmenter > Subject: Hethor's robot love-doll > Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 15:08:21 -0700 (PDT) > > From: m.driussi at genie.com >> Or as Ranjit put it (and I paraphrase): Hethor lusts after Agia >> because she's so Korean. :) > I thought he just missed his paracoita :-) > > Can Jolenta love anyone? Didn't we once assume that there was > something of Norma Jean Desmond (Marilyn Monroe) in her too? > > D > > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.3 --------------- > > From: Michael Straight > Subject: Re: (urth) Digest Urth, or brains thereof > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 11:17:07 -0400 (EDT) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > In-Reply-To: <199807142159.OAA23796 at lists1.best.com> > > On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Charles Dye wrote: >> That said, yes, the regime does have some problems. It also has a >> few advantages. Fr'instance, it's easy to decide whether or not an >> individual claiming the Autarchy is the real McCoy. He knows the >> words! > I have to admit some confusion on that point. Wouldn't anyone judging the > Autarch also have to know the words in order to recognize them? Shouldn't > any such person be able to speak "the words" and pose as the Autarch? > > Are they perhaps some sort of hypnotic triggers that people recognize but > are unable to remember? > > -Rostrum > > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.4 --------------- > > From: "Mark Millman" > Subject: Re: (urth) Digest Urth, or brains thereof > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 12:04:38 -0400 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Disposition: inline > > On Wednesday 15 July 1998, Rostrum wrote: >> On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Charles Dye wrote: >>> That said, yes, the regime does have >>> some problems. It also has a few ad- >>> vantages. Fr'instance, it's easy to de- >>> cide whether or not an individual claim- >>> ing the Autarchy is the real McCoy. He >>> knows the words! >> I have to admit some confusion on that point. >> Wouldn't anyone judging the Autarch also >> have to know the words in order to recognize >> them? Shouldn't any such person be able to >> speak "the words" and pose as the Autarch? >> >> Are they perhaps some sort of hypnotic >> triggers that people recognize but are unable >> to remember? >> >> -Rostrum > This seems entirely possible, though if I recall (and you've > all just had a taste of how bad my memory can be) we're > really given no evidence of how the castellan of the Citadel > reacts to Severian's word of command--whether, that is, he > jumps to an implanted compulsion or simply recognizes > the password, as it were (ignoring the possibility you raise, > Rostrum, that he recognizes a word that deliberately has > been made unavailable to his conscious mind, which I'd > call a special case of the latter situation). > > However, I don't think this is an insuperable obstacle. For > one thing, many of the words command mechanical contri- > vances, so all a putative Autarch would have to do, for ex- > ample, would be to open the door behind the throne and > maybe operate a couple of other devices to prove his or > her legitimacy. Or the words of command for three or four > subordinates could be employed; even if the officers are > consciously aware of their passwords, they may only be > inherited, so to speak, in the line of succession for each > office. The person who knows several must therefore be > the Autarch. > > Or (and to me this seems most likely) Inire, who seems to > be as ubiquitous as flan in Spanish restaurants, could > assert the legitimacy of each successor based either on > his having witnessed the essential act of succession or on > a test of the individual in question. It seems as though he > must know a great many, if not all, of the words of power; > and one would think him, in this context at least, to be for all > practical purposes incorruptible. > > Mark Millman > > > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.5 --------------- > > From: mary whalen > Subject: (urth) French Wolfe sites > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 12:03:05 -0700 (PDT) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > This is Sean Whalen (prion). > > Thanks, Dan. I also found a large site at > www.mygale.org/~lemonon/Teur/teur.html, if anyone's interested in > seeing it. > > prion > _________________________________________________________ > DO YOU YAHOO!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > --------------- MESSAGE urth.v017.n002.6 --------------- > > From: Michael Straight > Subject: Re: (urth) Hues, HORARS: II > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 17:15:54 -0400 (EDT) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > In-Reply-To: <199807142008.NAA20369 at lists1.best.com> > > On Tue, 14 Jul 1998, Robert Borski wrote: >> HORARS is an updated Golem story (which basically Mary Shelley's >> FRANKENSTEIN also is). As God has done with us, so have we humans done with >> the Homolog ORganisms (Army Replacement Simulations). But whereas God has >> created us in His image out of love, we create the HORARS for less noble >> reasons. We certainly don't love them; in fact there's evidence most >> ordinary humans revile them. But if it's a choice between us dying in >> combat with the Enemy or the HORARS, hey, we'll gladly let them be our our >> corporal stand-ins, i.e., the HORARS are bodies only (whores), fit only for >> acting out our vile needs. (We're their puppeteers, as we are Pinocchios, >> the robot tank.) > [...] >> In fact, both stories seem to be cautionary tales about the ill-advisedness >> of tampering with nature, especially in regards to eugenics and attempting >> to improve on God's greatest creation, you, me and all the rest of our >> fellow Homo sapiens--hardly surprising caveats from a writer of Gene >> Wolfe's Catholicity. > HORARS seems to me to be more fundamentally yet another example of one of > Wolfe's favorite themes, the narrator who doesn't know who or what he is, > and who is ignorant of his true role in the world. I suppose this is also > a pretty Christian theme--that fallen humans don't know who they are, > don't know the story the are a part of. > > I think the irony of the narrator's pretending to be something he already > is (does the text leave open the possibility that he really is human after > all?) is more central to the story than a warning about not tampering with > nature. The moral seems not so much that the HORARS shouldn't have been > created in the first place (lest they rise up against us), but that we > shouldn't treat as sub-human creatures that seems so human ("For all you > know, you might be one too!"). > > Hues is one of the few Wolfe stories I neither like nor get (probably some > relation there), so I'm not going to try discussing it. > > Anyone up for making a list of Wolfe stories where the narrator is > mistaken about his own identity? Off the top of my head: > > "HORARS" > "The Other Dead Man" > "Checking Out" > "The Changeling" > "Tracking Song" > "Forlesen" > > Latro > Both Severian and Silk to some extent > Maybe Weer in PEACE > > -Rostrum > > > > --------------- END urth.v017.n002 --------------- ---