Subject: (urth) Fairy Tale logic

From: Nicholas Gevers <vermoulian at yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 23:32:07 +0000

As a follow-up to my posting of a few days ago on
whether "The Brown Book" can be seen as in some way
synonymous with THE BOOK OF THE NEW SUN itself: I
didn't mean that the two Books are identical; I was
suggesting that they are akin. In other words, Wolfe
intends us to understand that the structure and logic
of Severian's narrative are in important respects
similar to those of an anthology of folk tales, fairy
tales, myths, and legends: TBOTNS is episodic, and
each episode is a tale, or representative of a tale,
in its own right.

To illustrate this: many Lupines feel that, as a work
of SF, NEW SUN must be subject to scientific
explanation at every stage. This can be a very
productive approach, as when calculations of the size
and effect of solar sails help explain the crucial
eclipse in THE URTH OF THE NEW SUN. But elsewhere,
Wolfe's conceptual logic is implicitly magical, as in
the intuitive symbolic construction of a fairy tale.
One may see the grafting of Typhon's head to Piaton's
body as scientifically plausible; but viewed closely,
the two-headed Typhon must be an uncomfortable
arrangement for the Typhon head, which is presumably
situated on one of Piaton's shoulders. When the Piaton
head is removed, as Typhon's surgeons plan, the
monocephalic being left over will be lopsided on top,
whether he wears a shirt to cover the scar or not...
So Typhon is a mythic construct rather than a
plausibly scientific one. Sev's encounter with him is
the tale of the bearding of an ogre in its den.

Another example: Inire's recounting (through Domnina,
through Thecla, through Sev) of the mechanics of
Inire's mirrors. How accountable to physics is his
explanation? It sounds like magic under a veneer of
pseudo-scientific doubletalk. Again, the logic of a
fairy tale holds, with a wizard preserving the secrecy
of his craft through misdirection.

=====

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/

---

From: Michael Straight <straight at email.unc.edu>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 12:09:44 +0000

On Sat, 30 Oct 1999, [iso-8859-1] Nicholas Gevers wrote:

> explanation at every stage. 
[...]
> But elsewhere,

I agree.  I think this is one of Wolfe's tricks with TBOTNS.  On the
surface it looks like swords and magic fantasy.  As you read more
carefully, you're led to believe that there's a "scientific" explanation
for everything, but I think ultimately there's too much that can't be
explained that way: the relationship among Severian, the fountain, and the
claw, the nature of the Undines (and Baldanders, maybe), Severian's
dreams, as well as the things you mention (the mirrors, Typhon's weird
two-headed scheme). 

If TBOTN were straightforward fantasy, the various unexplaned wonders
could be dismissed as part of the genre, but by tricking us into reading
the book as science fiction, the wonders are more striking, perhaps even
questioning the adequacy of materialistic explanations for everything in
our world.

-Rostrum

---

From: Daniel Fusch <dfusch at hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:20:36 +0000

(snip)
>but by tricking us into reading

Well said! I agree.

Daniel

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

---

From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis at sirius.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 15:24:21 +0000

>the tale of the bearding of an ogre in its den.

Now, as one reader who is obviously guilty of at least some of this
"scientism," folks might think that I would be in disagreement with Nick's
post--but I'm not, and I suspect that Nick knew that beforehand.  I agree
with nearly all of it, and the Typhon/Piaton example is an excellent
example, as I'll further comment upon in a bit.

Then again, not to be reflexively jerking my leg here, but I really think
TBOTNS was initially received/perceived/awarded as a =fantasy= work; to
read it as "science fantasy" is the first step of evolution (which seems
validated by comparisons to THE DYING EARTH as an icon of science fantasy);
to read it as "pure" sf is a further step (or perhaps misstep) of evolution.

It might seem far-fetched right now, but honestly, in my experience it has
been a great deal of =work= over a decade to convince people that there
really was some sort of sfnal element to TBOTNS that makes it categorically
different from, say, THE LORD OF THE RINGS.  One small example: all the
misdirections given in the text with regard to the age of the solar system
(and thus the historical setting), especially the issue of a "dying sun,"
leads many sf readers to raise arguments regarding stellar evolution ("it
will eat up the inner planets as it swells"; "it will be in billions of
years, not millions"; etc.).

(Those who grasped on their own reading that there is a black hole eating
at the Old Sun seem to have been a special minority of bright, careful
readers, who quietly kept it to themselves.  But everybody here already
knew that about themselves! <g>)

So it may be the case that some have gone "too far" in using a science
fictional reading of Severian's Narrative, but it is within a context of
earlier readings that were completely blind to sf elements.  It is a valid
tool, but it does not have universal application throughout the text--yet
often the only way to tell if a sf rationale works for a given detail is to
actually try it out.

>of his craft through misdirection.

Not to give Nick a hard time, but this is not a good example: since the
vast majority of even diamond hard sf uses some form of ftl, and all that
is explained with "pseudo-scientific doubletalk" of one kind or another.
Within the sf genre, transportation devices are traditionally immune to
such scrutiny (and weapons are, too); this by itself does not cause all
genre sf--with--ftl to crumble into genre "fantasy."

Ah, but the Typhon/Piaton case!  I find it excellent because 1) I've never
been overjoyed with any of the sfnal interpretations, and 2) I've always
been strongly aware of its magical iconography.

"Magical," yes, but most specifically it is "alchemical."

If you pick up a modern book on alchemy, chances are it will have some of
those great old woodcuts regarding the stages of The Great Work: which is
"turning lead into gold" for the laity.  Red Lion, Green Dragon, Black
Raven, Virgin Milk--all sorts of wild stuff.  Anyway, in the midst of all
this Chemical Wedding, there appears a potent symbol: a two-headed being,
usually a big muscular creature with a king's head and a queen's head (both
crowned, iirc).  Mind you, this is an =allegorical= representation of some
funky chemical process --it isn't meant to be some sort of Frankenstein's
monster that literally appears.

But this double-header is =not= the end-product: it is not the
philosopher's stone.  It is only a stage along the way.  So, true to form,
it must be "killed" so that the next mode can emerge--this woodcut shows
the critter being put to bed in a tomb.

THUS, in addition to the Satan's Temptation of Christ elements in the
scenes with Typhon and Severian, I have reason to believe that there is an
even stronger thread of alchemical thought and tradition represented: one
that links up with other keystones of the text to form an adamantine chain.

I strongly suspect that Damien Broderick knows exactly what I'm talking
about. (I also know that alga is rolling her eyes at all this!)

=mantis=

P.S. I could've sworn that Jim Jordan wrote something about "The Seraph
from Its Sepulcher," at sometime or another, on this list.  But I've
searched using the Incredible Search Engine and have found no such thing.
I recently re-read this story and was wondering what Nutria and/or anybody
else had to say on it--that's why I was searching.

=m=

---

From: Jim Henley <jlhenley at erols.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 20:14:17 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: urth-errors at lists.best.com [mailto:urth-errors at lists.best.com]On
> Behalf Of Michael Andre-Driussi
>

I tend to read BOTNS in an SF context until I absolutely can't. But what
strikes me is how Wolfe communicates that the scientific habit of mind has
pretty much disappeared from Urth itself. The idea of verifying facts about
the world through controlled repetition seems alien to just about everyone
with the _possible_ exception of Fr Inire, and he's a bug-eyed space
monster . . .

Even simple classification seems somewhat negligent. Sev tells us he fills
the unused vincula tunnels with "a mixture of sand, loose stone, lime etc"
but never bothers to name the compound.

Best,

Jim
 ******************************************
"There will always be                                 Costello/
 a little larceny                                           Bacharach,
   in everyone"                                             "My Thief"

---

From: Daniel Fusch <dfusch at hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 01:53:11 +0000

OK, Jim,

I have to disagree with this:

(snip)
"The idea of verifying facts about
the world through controlled repetition seems alien to just about everyone
with the _possible_ exception of Fr Inire, and he's a bug-eyed space
monster . . ."

The Scientific Method has NOT disappeared from Urth; it is simply that 
organized (academic) sciene has disappeared. And of course the good old 
"manifest destiny conquer the stars" drive toward technological achievement 
seems to be missing--that's Vodalus' complaint, after all.

What we see in Urth are the solitary scientists, the lone natural 
philosophers who experiment privately, without involving themselves with 
agencies or universities. Baldanders is one example--he is obviously a 
tinkerer, an experimenter--of the darkest kind. He performs experiments on 
his captives in order to gain scientific knowledge.

Another rather sinister scientist appears near the end of The Citadel of the 
Autarch, while Severian is a captive of Vodalus.' Severian meets a man who 
hypothesizes that organic material exists to feed light, and he tests his 
hypotheses (or so Severian suspects) by repeatedly burning human children.

Further, we might argue that the Scientific Method was well-known, at least, 
in Typhon's time. The Typhon/Piaton project was attempted after much 
experimentation.

Nor is classification or biology absent--it is simply that Severian does not 
know much about classification. But remember the Botanic Gardens. The 
curators there had the plants well classified, I would say.

Anyway, I submit to you that the Scientific Method is still very present in 
the world of Urth. The thing that is missing is an organized group of 
scientists. There are no grants, there are no associations, and there 
doesn't seem to be much teamwork (with the possible exception of the 
botanists). Instead you have scattered, isolated scientists pursuing their 
separate paths.

That's all I had to say--

Daniel

---

From: Daniel Fusch <dfusch at hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 02:06:11 +0000

Hello, Michael.

(snip)
"So it may be the case that some have gone "too far" in using a science 
actually try it out."

In the words of Tevye the dairyman (from "Fiddler on the Roof") -- "You are 
also right."

I wonder about your comments on an alchemical interpretation of Typhon, 
however. Typhon is connected both to the temptation of Christ in the 
wilderness and to classical mythology--and these connections seem to me far 
clearer and more useful than a connection to an alchemical symbol.

Here are my objections:

First--Piaton is not a woman.

Second--The two-headed man is a symbol all over the place--not just in 
alchemy.

Third--What does Typhon have to do with alchemy? Unless you're trying to 
draw a vague connection to the "dark arts" in attempting to "make" a 
man--via Mary Shelley, etc.... But that leaps back to necromancy, not 
alchemy.

Fourth--If Typhon is related to an alchemical symbol--then just what does 
that mean? Is it a statement about alchemy? Is it a statement about Typhon's 
science or society? What relevance does it have?

Anyway, I'm skeptical.

(By the way, thought I'd mention--I enjoyed your book! And, incidentally, 
another definition for Erebus--in Roman mythology, Erebus is the hell into 
which Jupiter cast the Titans who aided Saturn in attempting to overthrow 
him. And the Titans were giants, in one sense. Seems relevant, so I thought 
I'd mention it.)

Daniel

---

From: Jim Henley <jlhenley at erols.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 1999 21:35:25 +0000

> Behalf Of Daniel Fusch
> organized (academic) sciene has disappeared.<snip>

Daniel, I yield to your superior evidence. Indeed, I roll on my back and
stretch my neck before you, making piteous mewling sounds.

BTW, are there any "good scientists" in the saga?

Best,

Jim
 *****************************************
"All God's children got a little bit of soul
 but not that much . . . "
              -- Graham Parker, "Obsessed with Aretha"