Subject: (urth) Re: Digest urth.v028.n185

From: Nil_Ultra <nil_ultra at email.msn.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 12:52:13 +0000

>3. The book's cover shows Ransom struggling and apparently defeating an
>apeman. This anticipates the narrative in the semi-real world. Also, surely
>Ransom is a nod to Lewis, and to Jesus. Compare Ransom's wrestling with the
>Morlockian Un-Man in *Perelandra.* Also remember that humanity made itself
>bestial by listening to a serpent at the beginning of time.

Nutria,  Great post,  certainly a lot to think about,  but as far as number
three I would have to disagree in regard to man becoming bestial; It seems
more the opposite;  by eating of the fruit of knowledge,  humanity separated
itself from the beasts,  and the paradise of ignorance and innocence that
they live in.  Of course, this abandonment of innocence is what allows  the
potential for both good and evil.

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

---

From: Jim Jordan <jbjordan at gnt.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 13:42:13 +0000

>potential for both good and evil.

Thanks, but your view sounds more like Mormonism and certain other
theologies than what Wolfe himself would believe. No need to debate the
theology one way or another here. It's just a matter of what Wolfe as a
conservative Catholic would be working with.

Nutria

---

From: Richard Horton <rrhorton at prodigy.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 20:22:47 +0000

On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 08:10:10 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

>I don't think "contemporary scholarship" is that monolithic.  A lot of
>those authorship debates seem to me to be based on too little evidence.
>Some of the arguments I've seen for that position could be used to prove
>that the Gene Wolfe who wrote the New Sun books is not the same person who
>wrote the Long Sun books (significant stylistic differences, a large chunk
>of vocabulary unique to one series or the other, different tehological
>ideas and concerns, etc.)

Fair enough, though I'd be interested in seeing what lexical analysis
of the sort used to address authorship questions of Biblical books
would do with New Sun/Long Sun.  On the face of it, the styles are
profoundly different: no one can have failed to notice this.  I
wouldn't be surprised, however, if underlying similarities were
detected.

I confess I don't really know enough about these techniques to say
much more than : "I've read the articles".

We should note that (unlike for instance some of the Epistles now felt
by many not to have been written by Paul) there is no attribution
within Revelation to John the Apostle.

-- 
-- 
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard.horton at sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)

---

From: Alice Turner <akt at attglobal.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:56:40 +0000

Rostrum rote:

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2000, Richard Horton wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 06:10:41 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
> > >Even fewer people know there is no such book as "RevelationS". :-) It's
> > >the Revelation of St. John, or the Apocalypse of St. John, or Revelation,
> > >or Apocalypse, or The Revelation of Jesus Christ.
> > 
> > Attributing it to "St. John" is controversial as well, as contemporary
> > scholarship seems to agree that John of Patmos, the author of
> > Revelation, is not the apostle John.
> 

The scholarship is not that "contemporary" regarding Revelation. It was suspect from the gitgo, with several more sober bishops strongly objecting to it when the 4th century canon was put together. It crawled in because of popular superstition that John the gospeleer wrote it, though  more educated folk with a good "ear" even at that early time found this highly unlikely, and said so. There were lots of similarly apocalyptic texts around, this one being an anti-Rome rant with historical references to Babylon, Israel's prior primo peeve. Modern textual analysis makes the two completely incompatible. "John of Patmos" is the name given to the unknown author of what Harold Bloom (and his insignificant follower, me) call a "rancid" book. OTOH, as a heathen, I do think that it has pepped up the religion considerably! For TV evangelists, say, suicidal cults, and plenty of morons everywhere!

-alga

---

From: Daniel Fusch <dfusch at hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 15:36:39 +0000

>From: "Alice Turner" <akt at attglobal.net>
"John of Patmos" is the name given to the unknown author of what Harold 
Bloom (and his insignificant follower, me) call a "rancid" book. OTOH, as a 
heathen, I do think that it has pepped up the religion considerably! For TV 
evangelists, say, suicidal cults, and plenty of morons everywhere!
>-alga

Just to balance the discussion of the aesthetics of Revelation....

I think Revelation is a spectacularly poetic work, with some gems of great 
beauty. I've always found the sixth chapter (the four horsemen) particularly 
good. And then heaven with the lamps on the crystal sea. And the 
end--something along the lines of "they will need neither candles nor sun 
for God will be their light." Very beautiful. Associated with suicidal cults 
or not, I still think Revelation is one of those books that really deserves 
to be read.

Just my humble opinion,
Daniel
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com