Subject: (urth) credit Adam, then argue

From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis at sirius.com>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 13:59:31 +0000

Alga started it, Nutria compounded it:

>>Mantis:
>>
>>> I don't think there are meant to be logical explanations for all these
>>> things.  At any rate, that seems to be the meaning of Mrs. Underhill's
>>> speech to Eigenblick in "Give Way, Give Way" (Book Six, Chap. Five), the
>>> gist of it is that there are no explanations, it's just the way the
>>> world is.

This was actually =Adam= who wrote that (and we thank him for using those
citations all over the place).

Adam also argues against my numerology/cycles by saying that the number of
fairies is 52 =now=, that it was more before; thus the magic number
=cannot= be 52.  Well, sure, you can believe that . . . but I think there
are two things: first, the magic number for the Alice & Co. is 52, or
there-abouts (since after all that is the number that go through and take
up their stations); there is no guarantee that the previous (or "old")
magic number was 52.

Which is why I brought up Tarot before.  As alga mentioned long time past,
the tarot deck varies in number of cards (there isn't really a "standard"
except by more or less arbitrary), but it is alway much more than 52.  The
52 deck, aka the deck of standard playing cards, forms the basis for the
JCdeck (not to be confused with "the Crowley Tarot"!!) as it appears in THE
DEEP and LITTLE, BIG.

So you see where I'm heading with this: the old "real" Tarot reflects the
old order of fairies.  The shifting of numbers, arranged from high to low
as if a sequence across time, reflects their real dying off.  Through the
history of the real Tarot deck, from many cards to fewer, we see reflected
the hidden history of the fairies.

(Over-reading?  Who, me?)

The Alice family was given their freakishly short deck (only 52 cards) a
few generations prior to the big transition.  The fairies, their plan; the
humans, "learn it, live it, love it."

Nutria,

Questions of heaven and hell.  Granted, there is ambiguity as to whether
the formerly human are evolving upward toward angel status or devolving
downward into nature idols.  This is a point you've made and I agree with
it.

That whatever-it-is that happens to Alice & Co. isn't simply death seems to
be the case, because if so, then Smoky would show up at the party, since we
know he just died.  Maybe.  That is, there is some sort of division between
Smoky and the group.  So you (Nutria) suppose that he has gone to heaven,
while the group (Alice & Co., not alga & friends) takes a detour through
hell.

Possible.  But you know how JC keeps turning things over, examining things
in other works: don't forget "Her Bounty to the Dead" (in ANTIQUITIES).
Here the afterlife situation is basically this (iirc): there is only so
much room in heaven, so if you'd rather go into non-being, that's fine.  Or
"everybody gets the afterlife they want and feel they deserve" kind of a
thing.

So, in the JC universe, there are many options as to "where Smoky goes when
he dies."

=mantis=

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

---

From: Jim Jordan <jbjordan at gnt.net>
Date: Tue, 02 May 2000 17:32:15 +0000

>while the group (Alice & Co., not alga & friends) takes a detour through

	Sorry I was not more clear. I don't think Alice etal. really died, but
that their transition is parallel to Smoky's death. "heaven and hell" are
probably too loaded as terms to describe the two avenues. 
>in other works: don't forget "Her Bounty to the Dead" (in ANTIQUITIES).

	How could I forget it? I cannot find this book, and I've never read this
story. Finding JC stuff, outside the novels, is a labor of hercules. I
don't care to pay $100 for a copy. Maybe I'll get one on interlibrary loan
and PHOTOCOPY IT! Yeah. That's what I'll do. And then they can SUE me.
	(Anybody want a pirated photocopy of Carmichael Smith's *Atomsk*?)

Nutricious