Subject: (urth) And When They Appear

From: Adam Stephanides <adamsteph at earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:50:08 +0000

I finally got around to reading STRANGE TRAVELLERS, though I'd read a
number of the stories in it before.  On a first reading, I'd say the
major one I'd missed is "And When They Appear."  This is one of Wolfe's
grimmest stories (which is saying a lot), made more powerful by the
matter-of-fact narration and by the deceptive "Christmas story"
atmosphere of the first half.  (It just struck me that this first half
reads a lot like a Bradbury pastiche.)  It's also one of the most
effective uses of a child narrator by anyone that I've read.  In some
ways the story is like a reprise of "The Death of Doctor Island," with a
boy protagonist in an enclosed setting controlled by an AI, but the new
story stands on its own.

Anybody else have any thoughts on it?  (Forgive me if I've been
redundant; I don't recall anything being said about it during the
STRANGE TRAVELLERS discussion, but I can't download that volume of the
archives onto my computer.)

--Adam

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

---

From: Peter Westlake <peter at harlequin.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:32:42 +0000

>archives onto my computer.)

Tony Ellis recently offered the comforting observation that Mouse,
inoperative but still containing a deadly blade, is under Sherby's
pillow at the end. Look for "The mirror crack'd" in the most recent
archives for that article and James Jordan's follow-up.

Peter.

---

From: Adam Stephanides <adamsteph at earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:25:37 +0000

Peter Westlake wrote:
> pillow at the end.

I'm not comforted, since he's already been molested (Charlie tells him
"'We'll take off our clothes and have some fun, Chris.  _Then_ we'll go
to bed.'" (195, emphasis mine)) and there's no indication that he knows
the blade is there (the owl-slicing is "the first time [the blade] had
been used since Mouse had been made" (170) and Sherby doesn't see it). 
Besides, the most horrific moment is not the molestation, but Sherby's
throwing a rock at Smoky.

> Look for "The mirror crack'd" in the most recent

Thanks for pointing this out; I'd forgotten about it.  Now that I've
read the story, I have a couple of comments.

On Tony Ellis's point about hiding in the freezer: yeah, that had
niggled at me.  We're told explicitly that Sherby can't open the door by
himself (170); Eddi says that House will open the door when it's safe,
but if House is destroyed, how can it (of course, the AI core might
survive, but it might not, and apparently it doesn't)?  And even Eddi
(House) thinks there's a good chance of Sherby freezing to death before
being rescued: the best he can say is "If you snuggle up with Smoky, you
might stay alive until they leave." (188)  It looks like Sherby's
refusal to take House's advice saved his life, although it wasn't based
on any rational calculation.

On Jim Jordan's point that by leaving House, Sherby will be able to meet
Jesus (or Yeshua, as he's called in the story): but according to Eddi,
the real Yeshua is in House too (185).

--Adam

---

From: akt <akt at attglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:05:54 +0000

>From Adam:

> boy protagonist in an enclosed setting controlled by an AI, but the
new

I don't think it's a quarter as good as TDoDI. It's too disjointed; the
gothic elements don't come together. Mouse and Owl, Smoky, the parents
in the freezer, Corporal Charlie, the folklore figures, the gratuitous
Jesus, the angry mob--why?. Even the gnomic sentence at the end: "'I
don't like it,' he said [regarding Christmas], but as soon as he said
it, he knew it was not true." This is, we are led to believe, is after
Corporal Charlie has had his way with Sherby. Messy stories irritate me.
>From Bradbury too, who, in later work, epitomizes mess.

> throwing a rock at Smoky.

Me too, as it happens. But more annoying is that Smoky is never used
properly in the story. He and Cpl. Charlie are the only "real" figures,
and they're virtually thrown away.

> While I'm thinking of it: the man who takes Sherby is referred to
> several times as "Corporal Charlie" (as he instructs Sherby) but once
as
> "Uncle Charlie."  Is this last a typo?

Given what I feel to be the general carelessness throughout, I'd say
yes.

-alga