{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/1973", "note": "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.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 1973, "subject": "Mankind", "messages": 11, "voices": 9, "first": "1999-11-22T16:39:05+00:00", "last": "1999-11-29T12:21:26+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "1999-11-22T17:45:56+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Mankind", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Apparently, the Hierogrammates intend to exact revenge/retribution on all of\nmankind, not just Urth. From (V, XIX), Sev to Apheta:\n-------------\n\n\"Is Urth really so important to you?\"\nShe shook her head.\n\"Then why bother with it or me?\"\n\"Because your race is important to us. It would be far less laborious if we\ncould deal with it all at once, but you are sown over tens of thousands of\nworlds, and we cannot.\"\n-------------\n\nShe then goes on to explain the difficulties of space/time travel, hence why\n\"it\" can't be dealt with all at once. I think this answers the question of\nwho crippled the Old Sun. Will all the suns of all the other worlds also\ndevelop black holes? Will the Cataclysm wrecked on Urth be visited on all\nthe other worlds of the imperium? Seems like it. This implies a slaughter of\nlife unparalleled by even a comic-book villain. Are there thousands of other\nSev-like dupes on as many worlds?\n\nIf, according to the fundamental Christian tenet that the birth, death, and\nresurrection of Christ was a one-time-only historical event, then it follows\nthat any other beings in the universe cannot have known Jesus. Never having\nknown Jesus, whatever mean-old-Man may have done to them, they cannot be\nregarded as equivalent to humans, no matter how human-like they may be or\nbecome--rather like how the Pelerines viewed the Ascians. God gave Man\ndominion over all the lower lifeforms. To scourge Mankind because they\nwronged another lifeform would seem to me a violation of the unique covenant\nof God with Man, which was signed in the blood of Christ.\n\nHow then can the Hieros, a higher, or at least more powerful lifeform than\nMan, be any less culpable for doing to Man what Man is being punished for\ndoing? Whence the moral authority? The Increate? This is at best cosmic\nhypocrisy. Or is this another case of \"do not as I do; do as I say do\",\nwhich is a variation of the \"might makes right\" ethos.\n\nRoy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ron Hale-Evans", "address": "rwhe at apocalypse.org" }, "date": "1999-11-22T16:39:05+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "At 05:45 PM 11/22/99 -0600, Roy wrote:\n\n[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "How then can the Hieros, a higher, or at least more powerful lifeform than\nMan, be any less culpable for doing to Man what Man is being punished for\ndoing? Whence the moral authority? The Increate? This is at best cosmic\nhypocrisy. Or is this another case of \"do not as I do; do as I say do\",\nwhich is a variation of the \"might makes right\" ethos." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think this falls under \"willing, temporary suspension of disbelief.\" The\nsame problems that many on the list see with the plotline of the Book of\nthe New Sun also apply to, er, the plotline of the Bible. Would I worship a\nGod who behaved as does the God in the Bible? No, and I am not obliged to\nassent to statements made by anyone who both believes the Bible and\nbelieves that their God is good.\n\nBut Wolfe has created a \"secondary world\" in the Tolkien sense. In a very\nreal way, it is *Wolfe* who is the God of Yesod and Briah. The Increate\nthat he describes is really just Wolfe's hand puppet -- just another\ncharacter in the book! Wolfe tells us that (a) the Increate is good, and\n(b) the Increate sees fit to destroy Urth. A contradiction? Maybe, but we\nhave to accept it in the context of the book, because those are the\npremises of the book. To deny them would be equivalent to chanting \"Death\nof the Author, Death of the Author\" under one's breath and deliberately\nreading, say, the Foundation Trilogy as merely being the demented ravings\nof Hari Seldon, who is actually a patient in a mental hospital on Trantor\n(or better, Earth). This kind of Borgesian PoMo deconstruction and\nreconstruction can be done -- nothing is easier -- but it is far more\ninteresting to me (in this context, at least) to try to understand what the\nauthor is saying, or trying to say. Wolfe obviously has something to say,\nand to deliberately read his book in a perverse way is equivalent to\nhanding a salt shaker to someone asking for water. You might have your\nreasons for doing so, but they have very little to do with rational\ncommunication.\n\nI despise the Bible's Book of Revelations and think the world would have\nbeen a lot better off if that particular opium nightmare had been omitted\nfrom the canon, as it almost was. But because TBOTNS is such a rollicking\ngood read, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for the duration,\ntemporarily accept that there are Great Beasts in the oceans, etc., and dig\nin.\n\nThis, incidentally, is what I was trying to get across to Ori the other day.\n\nRon H-E" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Ron Hale-Evans: rwhe at apocalypse.org ... \nCenter for Ludic Synergy: \nKennexions GBG artgame: \nHexagram-8 I Ching Mailing List: \nPositive Revolution FAQ: " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jim Henley", "address": "jlhenley at erols.com" }, "date": "1999-11-22T21:00:43+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-----Original Message-----\nFrom: urth-errors at lists.best.com [mailto:urth-errors at lists.best.com]On\nBehalf Of Roy C. Lackey\n\nApparently, the Hierogrammates intend to exact \nrevenge/retribution on all of\nmankind, not just Urth. From (V, XIX), Sev to Apheta:\n-------------" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \n \"Is Urth really so important to you?\"\n\n She shook her head.\n\n \"Then why bother with it or me?\"\n\n \"Because your race birthed Ori and Roy, our sworn\n enemies. We will stop at nothing to destroy them - \n NOTHING I TELL YOU!!! BWA-HA-HA!!!\n\n \"Excuse me. I got carried away. Would you like to\n have sex with me now?\"\n\n \"Do ducks quack?\"\n\n\n *****************************************\n \"Took my pistol and a hundred dollar bill\n I had everything I needed to get me killed\"\n -- Steve Earle " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ori Kowarsky", "address": "orik at sprint.ca" }, "date": "1999-11-22T19:52:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ron Hale-Evans wrote:\n\n\"But Wolfe has created a \"secondary world\" in the Tolkien sense. In a very\nreal way, it is *Wolfe* who is the God of Yesod and Briah. The Increate\nthat he describes is really just Wolfe's hand puppet -- just another\ncharacter in the book! Wolfe tells us that (a) the Increate is good, and\n(b) the Increate sees fit to destroy Urth. A contradiction? Maybe, but we\nhave to accept it in the context of the book, because those are the\npremises of the book. To deny them would be equivalent to chanting \"Death\nof the Author, Death of the Author\" under one's breath and deliberately\nreading, say, the Foundation Trilogy as merely being the demented ravings\nof Hari Seldon, who is actually a patient in a mental hospital on Trantor\n(or better, Earth). This kind of Borgesian PoMo deconstruction and\nreconstruction can be done -- nothing is easier -- but it is far more\ninteresting to me (in this context, at least) to try to understand what the\nauthor is saying, or trying to say. Wolfe obviously has something to say,\nand to deliberately read his book in a perverse way is equivalent to\nhanding a salt shaker to someone asking for water. You might have your\nreasons for doing so, but they have very little to do with rational\ncommunication.\"\n\nWell, I don't know about that, Ron. I understand your point, but I don't\nthink what I'm saying is quite the same as \"how could that heartless Tolkien\ncreate a world where Sauron could threaten those wee Hobbits?\". Nor am I\ntalking about whether in our universe there is a God, or a just God, or how\nbad things happen to good people or whatnot.\n\nI'm just saying why not re-read The Book of the New Sun without interpreting\nits events the way you're somehow *supposed* to, although I don't know where\nthis supposed obligation comes from -- Wolfe's text is wonderfully ambiguous\nand only has an \"official\" meaning because the author or some of his\nreadership seems determined to impose one from outside of the text. Why not\nconcentrate on what is actually there in terms of what Sev relates to us of\nwhat he actually sees and hears and what is said to him and by whom on its\nown terms, as opposed to assuming that it's all one big wink at us here in\nthe 20th century? TBOTNS is obviously written by an American male of the\nCatholic faith in the late 20th century, I can read the *dust jacket* to\nfigure that out; but if you suspend your disbelief and allow that Wolfe is\ndoing what he claims to be doing, namely translating Sev's memoirs, then\nmaybe what's going on is not a medieval morality play meant to entertain and\ncomfort us with a space age Paroussia but perhaps is something completely\nother, and when we're quite done patting ourselves on the back for catching\nthe biblical and Catholic allusions why are we so content to stop there and\nnot continue digging behind *that* false facade of angels and devils to get\nat what the book might be saying perhaps even in spite of itself? How many\nmasks do the hierodules actually wear, in the end?\n\nOri" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alex David Groce", "address": "alex_groce at gs246.sp.cs.cmu.edu" }, "date": "1999-11-23T11:18:58+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "But Ori, as I pointed out, I read BOTNS when I didn't know anything about\nWolfe (other than, from having stumbled across \"The Fifth Head of Cerberus\"\nnovella in an anthology, that he could write like nobody's business) and I came\nto an interpretation that's pretty much what Wolfe & us conspirators claim is\nthe \"official version.\" Am I just naive? Or did I come to BOTNS with a\ndifferent metaphysics, and so reach what is the natural, textual interpretation\nfor anyone of that metaphysics (and, apparently, some other people--I know\nseveral atheists who agree with my general view of what BOTNS is about, they\njust think Wolfe's created world is a lot less like ours than I think it is).\nIt's your claim that anyone reading BOTNS in an \"unbiased\" fashion will come to\nsee things your way that I disagree with so strongly.\n\nMind you, it IS pretty ambiguous--if I'm not mistaken, Nutria, who isn't coming\nfrom all -that- far away from my POV on things, at first thought the whole\nthing was about a Gnostic & self-devouring world and that Severian was meant as\na grim parody of Christ. Correct me if I'm wrong. But this doesn't mean that\n\"all right thinking folks who don't close their eyes and shut their ears will\nsee the evil conspiracy lurking behind the hieros.\"\n\n\n\"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.\" John 8:32" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Alex David Groce (agroce+ at cs.cmu.edu)\nPh.D. Student, Carnegie Mellon University - Computer Science Department\n8112 Wean Hall (412)-268-3066\nhttp://www.cs.cmu.edu/~agroce" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ouroboros", "address": "ottofaij at yahoo.com" }, "date": "1999-11-23T09:24:09+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Ori wrote:\n\"...why are we so content to stop [with the" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"official\" meaning of the author]and not continue\ndigging behind *that* false facade of angels and\ndevils to get at what the book might be saying perhaps\neven in spite of itself?\"<<<<<\n\nBecause we don't need Wolfe's work to do that. We can\njust write our own books to investigate those\nquestions. Not a bad recommendation, but the reason\nthis list is so active is because Wolfe intentionally\nput so many real live puzzles, flourishes, and \"Easter\neggs\" in his work. And because as we originally read\nthe story we recognized that stimuli was flooding over\nus faster than we could comprehend it and now we're\nstill trying to comprehend it.\n\nIt's cool that you can read TBOTNS without caring what\nthe author was getting at. I bet you listen to\n\"American Pie\" and Bob Dylan songs and Beatles songs\nwithout ever stopping to wonder what the writers were\nactually trying to say. Undoubtably, when someone\ntells you a joke you ask him not to finish it so you \ncan make up your own punch-lines. Nothing wrong with\nthat, but you don't need anyone else to do that.\nMyself, I side with Carlton Greene when he said,\n\"...the fact that many of the explanations...are\nshadowy, unclear, or apparently paradoxical given\ncurrent scientific understanding does not mean that we\nas readers are not intended to, and should not,\nunderstand that some rational explanation lies lurking\nin the background.\" I think Wolfe put together a\nreally good story that I'm amazed hangs together so\nwell. I want to look close and see how it's put\ntogether.\n\nSpeaking of which, Severian's relationship with women\nhas always been the most devilishly confounding to me.\nJoturna, Valeria, Apheta, The House of Azure, Doras,\nKatherine, the Witches, even Jolenta. Who are these\npeople to Severian? What is the significance of what\nhappens between him and them? Answer those questions\n(I've always felt) an you'll understand what the heck\nis going on in this story.\n\nOf course, rather than vainly trying to figure this\nout, you could do something valuable like make up your\nown answers to these questions.\n\n-Ouroboros" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jim Jordan", "address": "jbjordan at gnt.net" }, "date": "1999-11-23T16:40:53+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 11:18 AM 11/23/99 -0500, you wrote:\n\nMind you, it IS pretty ambiguous--if I'm not mistaken, Nutria, who isn't\ncoming\nfrom all -that- far away from my POV on things, at first thought the whole\nthing was about a Gnostic & self-devouring world and that Severian was\nmeant as\na grim parody of Christ. Correct me if I'm wrong. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You're right. That's exactly how I took it.\n\nNutricious Nutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ori Kowarsky", "address": "orik at sprint.ca" }, "date": "1999-11-23T23:41:42+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alex David Groce wrote:\nBut Ori, as I pointed out, I read BOTNS when I didn't know anything about\nWolfe (other than, from having stumbled across \"The Fifth Head of Cerberus\"\nnovella in an anthology, that he could write like nobody's business) and I\ncame\nto an interpretation that's pretty much what Wolfe & us conspirators claim\nis\nthe \"official version.\" Am I just naive? Or did I come to BOTNS with a\ndifferent metaphysics, and so reach what is the natural, textual\ninterpretation\nfor anyone of that metaphysics (and, apparently, some other people--I know\nseveral atheists who agree with my general view of what BOTNS is about,\nthey\njust think Wolfe's created world is a lot less like ours than I think it\nis).\nIt's your claim that anyone reading BOTNS in an \"unbiased\" fashion will\ncome to\nsee things your way that I disagree with so strongly." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Alex,\n\nI'm sorry that you disagree. If TBOTNS is a successful exercise in theodicy\nfor you, why not just point out to me the place in the book where the\nmost powerful argument justifying the ways of God to man is made? Then\neveryone can simply judge for him/her self.\n\nOri" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ori Kowarsky", "address": "orik at sprint.ca" }, "date": "1999-11-24T21:54:13+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alex David Groce wrote:\nOri, the best argument \"justifying the ways of God to man\" in BOTNS is not\na quick quotation I can pluck out--although Severian, whose meditations I\ndo not ignore while reading the book, says some pithy stuff. This strike\nme as the Dave Barry version of THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV: \"Dear reader, is\nthere a God? -Fyodor\" Gene Wolfe wrote 5 books, not a brief essay\nsolving the problem of evil. Wolfe's a great writer, but he hardly\nmanaged to \"justify the ways of God to man\" in 100 words or less (or even\nin the whole thing--conclusive arguments are generally not the work of\nfiction). Where in BOTNS does it say \"Don't make no theological\ninterpretations of all this, folks?\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In other words, you have no proof.\n\nI am genuinely disappointed, Alex, as I was hoping you'd come up with\nsomething imaginative or at the very least interesting to buttress your\npoint of view. If you are unwilling or unable to suport your opion with any\nactual evidence from the book then all you are doing is making bald\nassertions of fact where the facts are absent. It's a great thing to have\ncertain beliefs about TBOTNS, but if you cannot back up these beliefs then\nthese discussions quickly start generating more heat than light.\n\nOri" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alex David Groce", "address": "adgroce at eos.ncsu.edu" }, "date": "1999-11-25T11:47:49+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In other words, you have no proof.\n\nI am genuinely disappointed, Alex, as I was hoping you'd come up with\nsomething imaginative or at the very least interesting to buttress your\npoint of view. If you are unwilling or unable to suport your opion with any\nactual evidence from the book then all you are doing is making bald\nassertions of fact where the facts are absent. It's a great thing to have\ncertain beliefs about TBOTNS, but if you cannot back up these beliefs then\nthese discussions quickly start generating more heat than light.\n\nOri" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "OK. I will agree that this thread has degenerated to that point (as it did\nlast time), but I've got to elaborate on what I said above. First of all, my\nevidence would consist of just about every passage where Severian starts\ntalking about the Increate--are these simply window-dressing? But in general,\nthese don't PROVE anything, any more than your Chapter 34 proves anything. I\ncould raise points like \"Why refer so explicitly to 'Eschatology and Genesis'\nin the text unless we're to connect these events to non-secular eschatology and\ngenesis?\" But this also fails as a proof, and even fails to capture what I\nthink Wolfe is getting at. I'm serious when I say you have to read the whole\nthing--trying to explain how a car works by showing someone just the wheel or\nthe cigarette lighter or the fan belt is unwise--and novels are generally more\ncomplex than cars, if they're well done. I doubt that by selective quoting I\ncan prove what I'm saying to you any more than you've proven what you're saying\nto me--I DO grant that your interpretation can be reached, if you bring certain\nassumptions to BOTNS, but you seem to still refuse to grant that I can hold my\npoint of view in good faith, which, considering it's THE AUTHOR'S POINT OF\nVIEW, makes no sense to me.\n\nMuch more interesting is the talk going on about whether the person in the\nstreet would have been happy about the New Sun if they'd understood it. My\nguess is a few would have been, most would not. This ties in with the original\nMessiah's arrival quite nicely--everyone was expecting a secular Messiah who,\nthough annointed by God, would establish a Jewish Kingdom and throw out the\nRoman bums. Severian, of course, IS a secular Messiah--what he's doing may be\ninstrumental in saving men's souls (and Jesus, who had other things to do,\nseems to have been being both literal and figurative when he said \"Feed my\nsheep\"--God isn't completely unaware that people need food and shelter and a\nsun that works) but it's primarily material. Unfortunately for those who have\nbeen waiting for the New Sun, its benefit will not come to all of them (though\nI'm unconvinced the death is as widespread as some seem to think--Severian\nhasn't found the only island of humans). I really think some people would be\nwilling to die to bring better days, but most would not. It is a genuinely\nawful choice, but Ragnarok really is worse than the floods. That Erebus and\nAbaia oppose the New Sun seems the ultimate proof of its desirability--I might\nbelieve the Yesod crowd is lying, but I have trouble believing Erebus and Abaia\nhave anything but ill will at heart--if Abaia made the Ascians what they are,\nthen if Abaia's against it there must be something to be said for it.\n\nHmm... This also makes Dr. Talos perhaps the weirdest semi-John the Baptist\nfigure in literature." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "\"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.\" - John 8:32\n--\nAlex David Groce (adgroce at eos.ncsu.edu)\nhttp://www4.ncsu.edu/~adgroce" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Kieran Cleary", "address": "kierannwn at tinet.ie" }, "date": "1999-11-29T12:21:26+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) mankind", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Carefully plucking the avern...." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Alex David Groce wrote:\nbut Ragnarok really is worse than the floods<<" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "IS it? According to Ash, the majority of humans are eventually airlifted to\nsafety by friendly cacogens. Creeping winter is a little more prosaic as an\nend-of-days scenario, but avoids gigadeath.\n\nThe only people (hypothetically) complaining about Ragnarok are the hieros.\nThe hieros are just teleologically ensuring their own survival, attempting\nto make the snake bite its tail. They don't even know if the humanity of\nUrth are the ones who will eventually become themselves, but are willing to\ndrown most of them on the off-chance. With scruples like that, who wants to\nbe semi-divine?\n\nKieran Cleary\n\nNorth West Labs\nStephen St. Court\nSligo\nRepublic of Ireland\n\nTel. +353 71 69441\nFax. +353 71 69451\nemail: kierannwn at tinet.ie" } ] } ] }