{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/2882", "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": 2882, "subject": "The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "messages": 32, "voices": 8, "first": "2002-01-03T10:57:16+00:00", "last": "2002-02-09T20:07:27+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "treilly", "address": "treilly at ozemail.com.au" }, "date": "2002-01-04T11:44:28+00:00", "subject": "The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, the naive political content certainly detracted from the admirably heartfelt remainder. Can it be seriously questioned that societies of hundreds of millions require more complex self regulation than Anglo Saxon tribes of a few thousand at most? Bureaucratic this might be, but there are worse things than bureaucracy. I suppose Wolfe must say he would prefer to live among the Goths and Vandals than in Rome of the same era. I would prefer now, and Rome next.\n\nThe (Heinleinesque) political asides irresistably reminded me of Sir Peter Medawar's comment on a similar essay by C S Lewis idealising the traditional feudal relationship of old England where every man knew his place and was happy. Medawar pointed out that of course Lewis in writing this unquestionably envisaged himself as lord of the manor! The same assumption runs deep in Wolfe's words.\n\nI will try to find the exact quote when I return home to Sydney in a few weeks.\n\nTim\n\n\nThis message was sent through MyMail http://www.mymail.com.au" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-01-04T15:31:52+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "on 1/3/02 5:16 PM, James Jordan at jbjordan4 at home.com wrote:\nWolfe's illustrations of Tolkien's \"discovery,\" which he allegedly wrote\nLOTR to propagandize for, both center on the willingness of people to serve\nand be led by their \"betters.\"\n\nAnd if he is really talking about libertarianism, it's curious he should\npick the \"Dark Ages\" as his exemplar, a time not particularly known for\nsecurity of property." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The \"Christian model\" of societal hierarchy, to which Wolfe surely\nsubscribes, and which people on this list are free to reject, affirms the\nfollowing matters, among others:" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[summary snipped]\n\nI agree that these are probably Wolfe's political views, with a couple of\nexceptions:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "3. People usually but not always grow into their callings as a\nresult of their upbringing.\n3a. Corollary: Some kind of political aristocracy, with sons (and\ndaughters nowadays) reared for rule, in inescapable: Kennedys, Bushes, etc.\nThe \"skull & bones\" elite.\" The Eastern Establishment. Etc." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This I'm not so sure about. None of Wolfe's \"good rulers\" are reared for\nrule that I can recall, although Silk is \"bred\" for rule. And surely you\ndidn't mean to imply that Wolfe sees \"Kennedys, Bushes, etc. The \"skull &\nbones\" elite. The Eastern Establishment. Etc.\" as the sort of people who\nshould be running things. With the possible exception of the Bushes, these\nare precisely the sort of people he despises." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This is not a matter of \"lessers\" serving\n\"betters,\" but of mutual service of various sorts." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Here I disagree. Wolfe does believe in \"betters,\" which implies the\nexistence of \"lessers,\" even if he doesn't use the latter word. Quoting\nagain from his essay, the Sylvan Elves \"choose to be ruled by people better\nthan themselves...\": not better at governing, but better period. Examples\ncan be found in his fiction, too: Silkhorn is better than the people around\nhim, and the protagonist of \"Tracking Song,\" as a true human, is better than\nthe animal-people he moves among." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Thus, I did not read Wolfe's article as saying that Tolkein had\n\"discovered\" a society where the lessers delight to serve their betters --\nthough Adam may be right that those who rejected his essay thought he was\nsaying this -- but as saying Tolkein was reflecting on the nature of\nsocietal hierarchy as delineated above." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm not sure if you're objecting specifically to my use of the word\n\"discovered,\" but while the specific word may not be in Wolfe's article, I\nthink it accurately reflects it:\n\n\"Philology led him [Tolkien] to the study of the largely illiterate\nsocieties of Northern Europe between the fall of Rome and the beginning of\nthe true Middle Ages (roughly AD 400 to 1000). There he found a quality --\nlet us call it Folk Law -- that has almost disappeared from his world and\nours.\"\n\nIt seems to me that Wolfe does indeed think that Tolkien \"discovered\" a\nsociety which followed the principles you listed, however one wishes to\ndescribe it. I certainly don't get the impression Wolfe regards Tolkien as\na political philosopher." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Finally, \"dark ages\" is just sarcasm. What most of us were taught\nin high school about this period is mostly rubbish, and Wolfe knows it (or\nbelieves it, anyway)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm aware that the popular stereotype of the \"Dark Ages\" is thoroughly\nmisleading; that's why I put it in quotes. Wolfe used the term himself, and\nI don't think he's being sarcastic. And it is true that there wasn't much\nsecurity of property in Europe between 400 and 1000 A.D.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at home.com" }, "date": "2002-01-04T18:03:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam,\n Thanks for your reply. Just a few clarifications, bearing in mind \nthat all we want to do in this discussion is to understand what Wolfe thinks:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I wrote:\n3. People usually but not always grow into their callings as a\nresult of their upbringing.\n3a. Corollary: Some kind of political aristocracy, with sons (and\ndaughters nowadays) reared for rule, in inescapable: Kennedys, Bushes, etc.\nThe \"skull & bones\" elite.\" The Eastern Establishment. Etc." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You replied:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This I'm not so sure about. None of Wolfe's \"good rulers\" are reared for\nrule that I can recall, although Silk is \"bred\" for rule. And surely you\ndidn't mean to imply that Wolfe sees \"Kennedys, Bushes, etc. The \"skull &\nbones\" elite. The Eastern Establishment. Etc.\" as the sort of people who\nshould be running things. With the possible exception of the Bushes, these\nare precisely the sort of people he despises." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " To be sure. I was speaking generally, that some kind of ruling \nelite is inescapable in every society. Becoming part of the class usually \ninvolves some kind of adoption or marriage into it. Americans like to \npretend that there is no such class in America, but of course there is and \nalways has been. It's not a \"conspiracy,\" of course. An interesting book on \nthis, a few years old, is by Konolige, *The Power of Their Glory: America's \nRuling Elite, the Episcopalians.* They called America an \"episcocracy.\" Of \ncourse, there were non-episcopalians (Rockefeller) in this goodoldboy \nnetwork, and in recent years, Jews have been able to \"join.\" But you're \nright, I did not mean that Wolfe would like the Kennedys, or that he would \nlike the fact that you cannot become President unless you are a Freemason.\n And of course, the existence of such a class need not be the whole \nstory. In the Severian Quintet, the Autarch is not part of that class, and \ndeliberately so, as a check and balance in the society.\n\nMe:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "This is not a matter of \"lessers\" serving\n\"betters,\" but of mutual service of various sorts." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Here I disagree. Wolfe does believe in \"betters,\" which implies the\nexistence of \"lessers,\" even if he doesn't use the latter word. Quoting\nagain from his essay, the Sylvan Elves \"choose to be ruled by people better\nthan themselves...\": not better at governing, but better period. Examples\ncan be found in his fiction, too: Silkhorn is better than the people around\nhim, and the protagonist of \"Tracking Song,\" as a true human, is better than\nthe animal-people he moves among." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Hmmm. I guess it's the sense of \"betters\" that is at issue. \nSilkhorn is morally better, and the protagonist of TS is higher on the \n\"evolutionary\" scale. I took Wolfe's sentence about the elves to mean \n\"better at ruling,\" since that was the context (\"ruled by people better \nthan themselves\"). I'm used to how this works in my field (theology): the \nSon subjects himself to the Father, though they are ontologically equal. \nParents are \"betters\" and children \"lessers,\" but only in such a \ngovernmental sense, not in other possible senses. Given Wolfe's familiarity \nwith Thomas Aquinas, I impute such a meaning to him. But I can admit that \nhis brief statement was not fully clear, and that there may be something to \nwhat you say." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Thus, I did not read Wolfe's article as saying that Tolkein had\n\"discovered\" a society where the lessers delight to serve their betters --\nthough Adam may be right that those who rejected his essay thought he was\nsaying this -- but as saying Tolkein was reflecting on the nature of\nsocietal hierarchy as delineated above." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm not sure if you're objecting specifically to my use of the word\n\"discovered,\" but while the specific word may not be in Wolfe's article, I\nthink it accurately reflects it:\n\n\"Philology led him [Tolkien] to the study of the largely illiterate\nsocieties of Northern Europe between the fall of Rome and the beginning of\nthe true Middle Ages (roughly AD 400 to 1000). There he found a quality --\nlet us call it Folk Law -- that has almost disappeared from his world and\nours.\"\n\nIt seems to me that Wolfe does indeed think that Tolkien \"discovered\" a\nsociety which followed the principles you listed, however one wishes to\ndescribe it. I certainly don't get the impression Wolfe regards Tolkien as\na political philosopher." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " No. I was not objecting to your word. I thought a bit of nuancing \nof \"lessers serving betters\" would be helpful; thus, my post. I was not \nwriting to criticize at all, just to expand the discussion a little. Since \nI myself am sympatico with Wolfe's religious and political views, in the \nmain, I thought explaining a bit of how such views work \"from the inside\" \nmight be of help to some on this list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Finally, \"dark ages\" is just sarcasm. What most of us were taught\nin high school about this period is mostly rubbish, and Wolfe knows it (or\nbelieves it, anyway)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm aware that the popular stereotype of the \"Dark Ages\" is thoroughly\nmisleading; that's why I put it in quotes. Wolfe used the term himself, and\nI don't think he's being sarcastic. And it is true that there wasn't much\nsecurity of property in Europe between 400 and 1000 A.D." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Hmm. Well, given Wolfe's description of the times, I took it that \nhe does not think they were all that \"dark,\" and thus was being a bit \nsarcastic. But it's neither here nor there. (Again, \"dark\" in what \nsense?) And I certainly agree about the insecurity of those times!\n\nJim Nutria Jordan" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-01-04T19:49:58+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Andy, I think you're putting too much emphasis on the libertarian elements\nin Wolfe's political thought (which are certainly present), at the expense\nof his call for submission to legitimate authority, which is just as\nimportant, if not more so. This is clear in the opening paragraphs of\nWolfe's essay, both the very first paragraph--one of the \"definite duties\"\nof \"Dark Ages\" peasants was submission to those whom God had appointed to\nrule over them--and the code of conduct Wolfe learned from his father:\n\"Legitimate authority was to be obeyed without shirking and without\nquestion.\" It's also evident in Wolfe's example of the Sylvan Elves, which\nI quoted earlier.\n\nIt's found in his fiction, too, I think, though less prominently (as you\nsaid, he's more detailed on what's wrong than with what's right). But\nSilkhorn does rule Gaon, and there's no suggestion that the Gaonese would be\nbetter off without his rule. A big reason why New Viron is such a mess,\niirc, is that none of the \"leading citizens\" are willing to submit to\nanother's authority. And TBOTNS, as I noted earlier, ultimately comes down\nvery strongly against rebellion.\n\nAnd afaik, in none of his works does Wolfe reject the state in toto, merely\nunjust states. (And I would disagree with your reading of \"The Death of\nDoctor Island.\" Doctor Island represents authority in general, not just the\nstate.)\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Bitterman", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2002-01-04T21:32:43+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:\nAndy, I think you're putting too much emphasis on the libertarian elements\nin Wolfe's political thought (which are certainly present), at the expense\nof his call for submission to legitimate authority, which is just as\nimportant, if not more so. This is clear in the opening paragraphs of\nWolfe's essay, both the very first paragraph--one of the \"definite duties\"\nof \"Dark Ages\" peasants was submission to those whom God had appointed to\nrule over them" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This pretty standard Catholic fare for every society everywhere. See, \nfor example:\nhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03794b.htm, which states:\n\"Love for his country will lead the citizen to show honour and respect \nto its rulers. They\nrepresent the State, and are entrusted by God with power to rule it for \nthe common good.\nThe citizen's chief duty is to obey the just laws of his country. \"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--and the code of conduct Wolfe learned from his father:\n\"Legitimate authority was to be obeyed without shirking and without\nquestion.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This may actually be a heresy (kind of, it is described as\" now \nabandoned by all Catholics, and\nhas become obsolete\"), and it's unlikely Wolfe means it in the simple \nsense in\nwhich it is stated. See, for example: \nhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02137c.htm :\n\"A legal enactment may be immoral, and then it cannot in conscience be \nobeyed; or it\nmay be ultra vires, beyond the competence of the authority that enacts \nit, in which case\ncompliance with the law is not a matter of obedience, but of prudence. \"\n\non the same page, Pius IX (in his _Syllabus_) condemns the following \nstatement:\n\"It is allowable to refuse obedience to lawful princes, and even to \nrebel against them\"\n\nPerhaps he has reserved some wriggle-room in \"legitimate\", but it seems \nunlikely given\nthe \"Luciferian\" element in Vodalus's opposition to the autarch. Wolfe \nseems to be\nimplying that any form of civil disobedience is immoral. I can't find a \nbetter cite,\nbut see: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03794b.htm:\n\"According to that teaching citizens are religiously bound to reverence \nand obey their\ncivil rulers in all matters which belong to the sphere of civil \ngovernment.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And afaik, in none of his works does Wolfe reject the state in toto, merely\nunjust states. (And I would disagree with your reading of \"The Death of\nDoctor Island.\" Doctor Island represents authority in general, not just the\nstate.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is straight Catholic doctrine again: from \nhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03794b.htm, quoting\nLeo XIII in \"Immortale Dei\":\n\"Man's natural instinct moves him to live in civil society, for he \ncannot, if dwelling apart, provide himself\nwith the necessary requirements of life, nor procure the means of \ndeveloping his mental and moral\nfaculties. Hence it is divinely ordained that he should lead his life, \nbe it family, social, or civil, with his\nfellow-men, amongst whom alone his several wants can be adequately \nsupplied. \"\n\nCatholics have traditionally been Aristotelian (man as a social animal, \nnaturally impelled to form a\nstate) as opposed to contracturalists (like Hobbes, where forming a \nsociety is purely a matter\nof choice). This alone would make this topic difficult for a \nCatholic/libertarian mix.\n\nOn the topic of the progenetic model of leadership, any comments on the \ntheory that Silk\nis a clone of Pas? It would support this model, and make it easier for \nan eventual Pas\ntakeover of Silk (as, for, what happened with Oreb).\n\nPas comes off as a very Gnostic-type figure, aping the Catholic social \norder in which everybody\nhas their own special talents. It is interesting of Wolfe to turn the \ntables on the Gnostics.\nIn \"standard\" Gnostic cosmology, the \"real\" God lies outside of the \nlower order the demiurge\n(ie, the Catholic God) rules over. In the Whorl the Catholic God is \noutside, and the demiurge\nis inside, and the \"Gnostic\" Silk is actually correct. But this post is \ngetting too long already." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--Adam" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-04T21:46:09+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \n\nMedawar pointed out that of course Lewis in writing this unquestionably\nenvisaged himself as lord of the manor! The same assumption runs deep in\nWolfe's words." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nonsense.\n\nWolfe is what we call a Nerd, in this decadent age, and in a better one\nwould call an Artisan. His interest is in working quietly, cunningly, and\nwell; his hope is to be ruled by a true and good King; and his nearest self\nimage (in his works) is the protagonist of PEACE.\n\nThis is obvious from his books. Severian is no self-image of Wolfe: I\nnever read a less convincing portrayal of the interior monologue of and\naggressive and sexually violent man. Silk, celibate and constantly\nsuffering for his high status, is something Wolfe is much happier with.\n\n\n Andy R" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-04T22:15:44+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Adam Stephanides\" \nAndy, I think you're putting too much emphasis on the libertarian elements\nin Wolfe's political thought (which are certainly present), at the expense\nof his call for submission to legitimate authority, which is just as\nimportant, if not more so." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you are right. \"Libertarianism\" was just my retreat from having\nto explain all that stuff that Patera Nutria explained so much better than I\never could.\n\nWithout flattering you all, I realise am going to have to post at a rather\nhigher level of sophistication than I expected to keep my nose above water\nhere.\n\n\n Andy R" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at home.com" }, "date": "2002-01-05T02:46:55+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 10:15 PM 1/4/2002 +0000, Andy wrote:\nWithout flattering you all, I realise am going to have to post at a rather\nhigher level of sophistication than I expected to keep my nose above water\nhere." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yeah. You'd better do that. Last year one of the older members of this \nlist, code-name Severian III, visited someone who had put up some sloppy \nposts and cut the fingers off his left hand. Severed them. So, be warned. \nAnd be afraid. Very afraid.\n\nNutria Monomanus" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-01-07T05:33:10+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 1/4/02 3:32 PM, Thomas Bitterman at tom at bitterman.net wrote:\nPerhaps he has reserved some wriggle-room in \"legitimate\", but it seems\nunlikely given\nthe \"Luciferian\" element in Vodalus's opposition to the autarch. Wolfe\nseems to be\nimplying that any form of civil disobedience is immoral." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In other works Wolfe approves not just of civil disobedience but of\nrevolution: Silkhorn leads a revolution in Dorp, and Wolfe endorses the\nrevolution that is gathering at the end of \"Bluesberry Jam\" (perhaps his\nsilliest story). (I can't put my hands on my copy of FREE LIVE FREE at the\nmoment, and don't remember whether the Quadrumvirate were to have been\nrevolutionaries.) Which raises the question, of course, of how one knows\nwhen rebellion is allowable. The Autarch's rule in BOTNS seems on the face\nof it more tyrannical than the judges in Dorp, yet Wolfe approves of the\nlatter rebellion and denounces the former ones.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-07T11:39:01+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Adam Stephanides\" \n\nIn other works Wolfe approves not just of civil disobedience but of\nrevolution: Silkhorn leads a revolution in Dorp, and Wolfe endorses the\nrevolution that is gathering at the end of \"Bluesberry Jam\" (perhaps his\nsilliest story)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Hour of Trust\" is the obvious one here." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I can't put my hands on my copy of FREE LIVE FREE at the\nmoment, and don't remember whether the Quadrumvirate were to have been\nrevolutionaries.) Which raises the question, of course, of how one knows\nwhen rebellion is allowable." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The crucial point here is that the criterion of whether revolution is\nallowable is not the form of government that is being rebelled against, but\nthe character of those in control. Rebellion against evil rulers is\npermitted.\n\nThis is for various reasons a very difficult thing to explain to most\ncontemporary liberals.\n\nMarxism designates all non-Communist forms of government as \"immoral\" by\ntheir *form*, not by their actions: the function being, of course, to\nvalidate the left's eternal quest for power, domination and control, by\nvalidating an eternal attack on culture, customs, and morals .\n\nThe Catholic (I should say \"typical human\") view is slightly different. A\nsociety is likely to be well ruled if good people are in control. The form\nof government is not unimportant, but it is not of primary importance, since\nno form of government can by itself guarantee virtuous behaviour by the\nrulers.\n\n\n Andy R" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "matthew.malthouse", "address": "matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-08T10:34:04+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 02/01/2002 21:51:06 James Jordan wrote:\nWolfe did have some nice things to say about Stephen Lawhead, to me, a few\nyears ago. I imagine he considers Lawhead to be carrying the Tolkein torch\npretty well. Never read Lawhead myself." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've read \"Taliesin\", the first of his Aurthurian cycle. It was excruciatingly\nbad. Simply bad use of language. Normally I'm quite uncritical on a first\nreading and if I get through a book I want to read the rest. In this case I\ncouldn't, and still can't, bring myself to buy any of the others. \"This is not\na book to be set aside lightly...\"\n\nThat said I have also read \"Empyrion\" and I think I was surprised that it wasn't\nquite so bad. However I don't think I've ever reread it which, given that I'll\nread almost anything several times, suggests that I was deeply unimpressed.\n\nMatthew" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-01-08T15:43:48+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 1/7/02 5:39 AM, Andy Robertson at andywrobertson at clara.co.uk wrote:\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Adam Stephanides\" " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "In other works Wolfe approves not just of civil disobedience but of\nrevolution: Silkhorn leads a revolution in Dorp, and Wolfe endorses the\nrevolution that is gathering at the end of \"Bluesberry Jam\" (perhaps his\nsilliest story)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"Hour of Trust\" is the obvious one here." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think that Wolfe disapproves of the revolution there, though he doesn't\nlike the corporate forces of order either (but I'd have to read it again to\nbe sure)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I can't put my hands on my copy of FREE LIVE FREE at the\nmoment, and don't remember whether the Quadrumvirate were to have been\nrevolutionaries.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I looked at a copy at a bookstore, and they weren't, or at least there's no\nindication that they were.\n\n--Adam " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-03T10:57:16+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There is a reference to \"The Wild Knight\" in \"Silhouette\", the story with\nicefoam set in a decaying spaceship. The character is reading an e-book\nsort of thing.\n\nI doubt one reader in a thousand has read the poem or knows who it is by.\n\nJust be thankful Wolfe didn't go the whole hog and start on Belloc, eh?\n\n Andy R\n\n----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Matthew Davis\" \nAs for poetry - yes, it does seem that English speaking Catholics in the\ntwentieth century lost all sense of taste. There is a pervading stink of\nChesterton and snug-room balladry." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2002-01-29T20:01:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is a post I composed and mailed right when the list went dead last\nmonth. I'll understand if no-one wants to continue this conversation...\n\nDate: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 11:05:34 -0500 (EST)\nFrom: Michael Straight \nTo: urth at lists.best.com\nSubject: Re: (urth) Re: The Best Introduction To The Mountains" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, 6 Jan 2002, Adam Stephanides wrote:\nrevolutionaries.) Which raises the question, of course, of how one \nknows when rebellion is allowable. The Autarch's rule in BOTNS seems on\nthe face of it more tyrannical than the judges in Dorp, yet Wolfe\napproves of the latter rebellion and denounces the former ones." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "How does Wolfe \"denounce\" rebellion against the Autarch in BOTNS? He\nshows that the Ascian rulers are bad, probably worse than the government\nof the Commonwealth, and he shows that Vodalus is no real revolutionary\n(he just wants to seize power for himself and his friends) and a dupe\nbesides.\n\nAs it turns out, the aliens are supporting and using the Autarchy for ends\nthat Wolfe seems to think are ultimately good, but I can't see how you\nread that as saying Wolfe would condemn a true revolutionary movement that\nwas trying to overthrow the Autarch not because they oppose the New Sun or\nwant to seize power for themselves but to free themselves from tyranny.\n\n-Rostrum\n\nQuestions or problems: write ranjit at urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-30T13:27:31+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Michael Straight\" \n\nHow does Wolfe \"denounce\" rebellion against the Autarch in BOTNS? He\nshows that the Ascian rulers are bad, probably worse than the government\nof the Commonwealth, and he shows that Vodalus is no real revolutionary\n(he just wants to seize power for himself and his friends) and a dupe\nbesides.\n\nAs it turns out, the aliens are supporting and using the Autarchy for ends\nthat Wolfe seems to think are ultimately good, but I can't see how you\nread that as saying Wolfe would condemn a true revolutionary movement that\nwas trying to overthrow the Autarch not because they oppose the New Sun or\nwant to seize power for themselves but to free themselves from tyranny." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Politically, no-one seems to have mentioned Wolfe's only direct statement\non the subject:\n\n\n\nSeverian: \"Unite? Shout? I know that you have isolated yourself, Master,\nto fix your mind on higher things, but I would not have thought any man\ncould know so little of the land in which he lives. Carreerists,\nmercenaries, and young would-be adventurers fight the war. A hundred\nleagues south it is less than a rumour, outside the House Absolute\".\n\nMaster Ash: \"Your Commonwealth is stronger than I would have believed,\nthen. No wonder your foes are in despair\".\n\n\n\nAll of this signals that the goverment of the Commonwealth is a mystery, its\nweaknesses strengths, its disunity hiding a flexible union-in-diversity that\nis highly evolved and exquisitely tuned to survival. Attempts to\nunderstand the politics of Severian's nation are doomed unless this is\nunderstood.\n\n\nIt is a nation that exists by divine right, and speaks for the whole of\nUrth.\n\n\nIn LITTLE,BIG, John Crowley hypothesised that the Holy Roman Empire had,\nthrough a process of amalgamation, extension, and withdrawal, moved to beome\nthe contemporarty USA.\n\nI wonder if Wolfe sees his Commonwealth as the Holy Roman Empire, extended\nyet furthur into the future?\n\n\n hartshorn\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nQuestions or problems: write ranjit at urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2002-01-30T15:58:17+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Andy Robertson wrote:\nPolitically, no-one seems to have mentioned Wolfe's only direct statement\non the subject:\n\nSeverian: \"Unite? Shout? I know that you have isolated yourself, Master,\nto fix your mind on higher things, but I would not have thought any man\ncould know so little of the land in which he lives. Carreerists,\nmercenaries, and young would-be adventurers fight the war. A hundred\nleagues south it is less than a rumour, outside the House Absolute\".\n\nMaster Ash: \"Your Commonwealth is stronger than I would have believed,\nthen. No wonder your foes are in despair\".\n\nAll of this signals that the goverment of the Commonwealth is a mystery, its\nweaknesses strengths, its disunity hiding a flexible union-in-diversity that\nis highly evolved and exquisitely tuned to survival. Attempts to\nunderstand the politics of Severian's nation are doomed unless this is\nunderstood." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To me, all that quote says is that the war is so far away, and the enemy\nso comparatively weak, that the Commonwealth can fight with an army of\nvolunteers. If the enemy were stronger, the war would press closer to the\nCommonwealth and there would be a need to conscript soldiers from among\nthe populace. \n\nThat other stuff about unity-in-disunity you must be getting from\nsomewhere else in the book." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It is a nation that exists by divine right, and speaks for the whole of\nUrth." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Do the Hierodules have a particular love for the Commonwealth, or is the\ninstitution of the Autarchy merely a means of raising up someone who could\nspeak for the whole Urth? Severian doesn't automatically get to speak for\nUrth just because he's Autarch of the Holy Roman Commonwealth. If that\nwere true, Ymar could have brought the New Sun.\n\nDoes Erebus support the Ascians against the Commonwealth because the\nCommonwealth is some kind of Holy Empire that he opposes, or do the\nHierodules support the Commonwealth merely as a means of keeping the evil\nof Erebus in check?\n\nAnd, to return to the original point, how on Urth does any of this\nconstitute Gene Wolfe expressing the opinion that rebelling against\ntyranny is wrong?!?\n\n-Rostrum\n\nQuestions or problems: write ranjit at urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at home.com" }, "date": "2002-01-30T16:45:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hartshorn wrote:\nIn LITTLE,BIG, John Crowley hypothesised that the Holy Roman Empire had,\nthrough a process of amalgamation, extension, and withdrawal, moved to beome\nthe contemporarty USA.\n\nI wonder if Wolfe sees his Commonwealth as the Holy Roman Empire, extended\nyet furthur into the future?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Commonwealth is Byzantium.\n\nRostrum wrote:\n\n\"That other stuff about unity-in-disunity you must be getting from\nsomewhere else in the book.\"\n\n I do think it is there. I had the impression, which being years \naway from reading the books twice I cannot support directly, that the \nVodalus part and the Autarch exist in a kind of tension, perhaps both set \nup by Severian the Conciliator. I think (think!) Wolfe is saying (a) every \nsociety needs diversity of leadership; thus the Autarch and the Aristocrats \nand also the Rebels; a (b) no society before the end of history will be \nperfect, so there will always be underground dissenters.\n Look at it sacramentally. The Autarchy is a kind of Established \nChurch, with the Pope eating the memories of his predecessors via the \nalzabo. Vodalus's band is a kind of Sect Church, gathering in little groups \nto partake of the alzabo sacrament. That's not all there is, of course, but \nit seems to be part of it.\n\nRostrum also wrote:\n\n\"And, to return to the original point, how on Urth does any of this\nconstitute Gene Wolfe expressing the opinion that rebelling against\ntyranny is wrong?!?\"\n\n Does he? In \"Hour of Trust\" (*Island of Dr. Death etc.*) Wolfe \nhimself joins a rebellion reciting the Lord's Prayer.\n\nNutria\n\nQuestions or problems: write ranjit at urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Bitterman", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2002-01-30T18:09:30+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Michael Straight wrote:\nAnd, to return to the original point, how on Urth does any of this\nconstitute Gene Wolfe expressing the opinion that rebelling against\ntyranny is wrong?!?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe is more or less committed to the \"rebellion is wrong\" party due to \nhis adherence\nto Catholic theology. From the Catholic Encyclopedia: >>... God is at \nthe back of every\nState, binding men in conscience to observe the behests of the State \nwithin the sphere\nof its competence.<<\n\nWhether rebelling against tyranny is is wrong depends on what is meant \nby \"tyranny\".\nAgain, from the Catholic Encyclopedia: >>\"a tyrannical law, not being \naccording to\nreason, is not, absolutely speaking, a law, but rather a perversion of \nlaw\" (St. Thomas,\nSumma Theol., la, 2ae, q. 92, art. 1, ad 4)<<. If Wolfe is thinking of \na tyranny as\nsimply a government which enforces tyrannical laws, then his characters \nare certainly\nin the right when they decline to obey such tyrannical laws. It is not \nclear, however that\ncharacters in such a situation have a right (or a duty) to rebel against \nsuch authority.\n\nIf Wolfe means by tyranny simply an unpopular dictatorship, then it is \nclear that his\ncharacters have no right to rebel against it. Again, from the Catholic \nEncyclopedia:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "... there must be authority everywhere, and that the authority \nexistent for the time" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "being, under such and such a form, be under that form obeyed... <<\n\nIt doesn't appear that the Autarch is enforcing any tyrannical laws to \nspeak of, so\nSeverian is clearly required to obey him. It's possible that the \nfailing of one of\nthe earlier versions of Sev was rebelling.\n\nIf I had to hazard a guess at the relationship between the Autarch and \nVodalus, it\nwould be God:Autarch::Satan:Vodalus. Vodalus is the \"Prince of Lies\", \neven to the\npoint of giving his followers fake currency as a token of alliegance. \n He also serves\nthe Autarch, though he does not know it, and so many purportedly evil \ndeeds only\nturn out to serve good in the end. And for a requisite bit of misogyny \nit can be noted\nthat Vodalus has a consort, while the Autarch, most pointedly, does not." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-Rostrum" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tom\n\n\nQuestions or problems: write ranjit at urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2002-01-31T22:40:03+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- Michael Straight wrote:\n..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Do the Hierodules have a particular love for the Commonwealth, or is the\ninstitution of the Autarchy merely a means of raising up someone who\ncould\nspeak for the whole Urth? Severian doesn't automatically get to speak\nfor\nUrth just because he's Autarch of the Holy Roman Commonwealth. If that\nwere true, Ymar could have brought the New Sun." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Why? Maybe Ymar was judged unworthy. Or is this something from UotNS,\nabout the memory of ever having read which I'm in denial?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Does Erebus support the Ascians against the Commonwealth because the\nCommonwealth is some kind of Holy Empire that he opposes, or do the\nHierodules support the Commonwealth merely as a means of keeping the\nevil\nof Erebus in check?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "My impression is that Erebus supports (maybe even impels) the Ascians\nagainst the Commonwealth because he wants to enslave everybody and the\ncitizens of the Commonwealth aren't his slaves. Yet. I don't think we\nknow exactly why the Hierodules oppose him, though the evil of slavery is\na sufficient reason. The good question is the one you asked above: What's\nthe reason for the Autarchy, and what's its relationship to the Hierodules\nand the Increate? Can Severian speak for Urth just because he's Legion?\n\nI don't see any kind of evidence that the Commonwealth is some kind of\nHoly Empire. The idea that it's somehow the heir to the Holy Roman Empire\nstrikes me as really sick (not that someone would have to be sick to make\nthe speculation, but somebody would have to be sick to see the HRE as so\ndivinely supported that it persists past its official dissolution as a\nforce for good)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And, to return to the original point, how on Urth does any of this\nconstitute Gene Wolfe expressing the opinion that rebelling against\ntyranny is wrong?!?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not that I can see.\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-01-31T23:17:32+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Jerry Friedman\" \n\nI don't see any kind of evidence that the Commonwealth is some kind of\nHoly Empire. The idea that it's somehow the heir to the Holy Roman Empire\nstrikes me as really sick (not that someone would have to be sick to make\nthe speculation, but somebody would have to be sick to see the HRE as so\ndivinely supported that it persists past its official dissolution as a\nforce for good)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am surprised to find someone reading Wolfe with this sort of binary\nthinking\n\nThe Empire was never simply a force for good. It was *meant* (in Catholic\nlegendarium) to be a pattern of the kingdom of heaven on Earth, with the\nEmperor being in the position of God.\n\nNot that he would be god, or have divine powers, but that he would show\nforth the virtues of heaven as far as it was possible for a man.\n\nOf course in reality the Empire beame utterly corrupt, and was in fact taken\nby the forces of Antichrist (as the Turks were thought to be)\n\nThis corruption was also worked into the legends.\n\nNow of course Wolfe doesn't think his Commonwealh is the literal descendant\nof the HRE: but it is like it symbolically, because it is the bit of the\nUrth uniquely connected to Heaven - or rater to thos powers whch in Wolfe's\nuniverse are the analogs of heaven.\n\n**And Therefore** it is very corrupt.\n\nIf Wolfe thought to trace a historical link, it would be a joke he made.\nHowever, symbolically, the Commonwealth is like the HRE.\n\n\n hartshorn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2002-02-01T15:02:05+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Jerry Friedman wrote:\nSeverian doesn't automatically get to speak for\nUrth just because he's Autarch of the Holy Roman Commonwealth. If that\nwere true, Ymar could have brought the New Sun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Why? Maybe Ymar was judged unworthy. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "He was. That's what I mean. Simply being Autarch of the Commonwealth\ndoesn't automatically mean you have found favor with the Hierodules. You\nalso have to be worthy in some sense.\n\nYmar was \"almost Just\" which means he wasn't just. Maybe this is not a\nbackhanded compliment, and Wolfe's point is that no human ruler could be\nperfectly just. But it also seems to indicate that Ymar and the other\nAutarchs were widely seen as unjust rulers.\n\nHad there been a genuinely democratic movement to overthrow the tyranny of\nthe Autarchs (unlike Vodalus's self-centered plot to seize power for\nhimself), I can see that Wolfe might think it tragic, in that it would be\nunknowingly opposing the coming of the New Sun, but I don't see anything\nin the text to indicate that Wolfe would see such a movement as morally\nwrong. Nor do I think it makes much sense to pull a few quotes from the\nCatholic Encyclpedia and think that gives you enables you a complete\nunderstanding of Wolfe's political ideas.\n\n-Rostrum" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "matthew.malthouse", "address": "matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-02-01T15:48:35+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 01/02/2002 15:02:05 Michael Straight wrote:\nYmar was \"almost Just\" which means he wasn't just. Maybe this is not a\nbackhanded compliment, and Wolfe's point is that no human ruler could be\nperfectly just. But it also seems to indicate that Ymar and the other\nAutarchs were widely seen as unjust rulers." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Questions lead to questions lead to questions...\n\nWas this quality which the Hierodules particularly chose to judge?\n\nWas Severian to be judged on the same criteria as previous Autarch who submitted\nthemselves to the process?\n\nWould the Hierodules, Tzadkiel, Urth (or even Wolf) see \"just\" as we might?\n\n\nAs the epitome of Urth surely Severian was judged by far more than a single\nquality: in fact the crux of the decision seemed to be those who would stank\nwith him and for him rather than any particular interior aspect at the moment he\nstood in Tzadkiel's hall.\n\n\nMatthew" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2002-02-01T15:50:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- Andy Robertson wrote:\n----- Original Message -----\nFrom: \"Jerry Friedman\" " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I don't see any kind of evidence that the Commonwealth is some kind of\nHoly Empire. The idea that it's somehow the heir to the Holy Roman\nEmpire\nstrikes me as really sick (not that someone would have to be sick to\nmake\nthe speculation, but somebody would have to be sick to see the HRE as\nso\ndivinely supported that it persists past its official dissolution as a\nforce for good)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I am surprised to find someone reading Wolfe with this sort of binary\nthinking" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm surprised that someone can tell so much about what I think from one\ncomment as to draw conclusions about my literary tastes." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The Empire was never simply a force for good. It was *meant* (in\nCatholic\nlegendarium) to be a pattern of the kingdom of heaven on Earth, with the\nEmperor being in the position of God.\n\nNot that he would be god, or have divine powers, but that he would show\nforth the virtues of heaven as far as it was possible for a man.\n\nOf course in reality the Empire beame utterly corrupt, and was in fact\ntaken\nby the forces of Antichrist (as the Turks were thought to be)\n\nThis corruption was also worked into the legends.\n\nNow of course Wolfe doesn't think his Commonwealh is the literal\ndescendant\nof the HRE: but it is like it symbolically, because it is the bit of the\nUrth uniquely connected to Heaven - or rater to thos powers whch in\nWolfe's\nuniverse are the analogs of heaven." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The idea I was responding to was that the Commonwealth *was* the literal\ndescendant of the HRE. It seems we agree that that doesn't make sense. \nHowever, I went too far in calling the idea \"really sick\", so I apologize\nto anyone I offended or insulted." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "**And Therefore** it is very corrupt.\n\nIf Wolfe thought to trace a historical link, it would be a joke he made.\nHowever, symbolically, the Commonwealth is like the HRE." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Jerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Bitterman", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2002-02-01T22:08:22+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Michael Straight wrote:\nNor do I think it makes much sense to pull a few quotes from the\nCatholic Encyclpedia and think that gives you enables you a complete\nunderstanding of Wolfe's political ideas." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Complete, no. But Wolfe is a dedicated, intellectual Catholic. It \nseems prudent to assume that\nhe's read both the Encyclopedia and Aquinas (and agrees with them on \nsuch an important\nmatter) until proven otherwise. It would be an interesting thing to ask \nhim about in person.\n\nTo give some relevance to this discussion I'd predict that none of \nWolfe's characters ever\napproves of a rebellion except when the ruler is clearly tyrannical in \nthe narrow sense used\nin the Encyclopedia.\n\nFor example, Silk has that excuse, but Severian does not. Although it \ncould be argued that\nPas/Typhon is a better ruler than the Autarch, Pas/Typhon is tyrannical \n(due to his opposition\nto the Outsider) and the Autarch is not." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-Rostrum" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-02-03T15:35:37+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 2/1/02 4:08 PM, Thomas Bitterman at tom at bitterman.net wrote:\nMichael Straight wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Nor do I think it makes much sense to pull a few quotes from the\nCatholic Encyclpedia and think that gives you enables you a complete\nunderstanding of Wolfe's political ideas." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Complete, no. But Wolfe is a dedicated, intellectual Catholic. It\nseems prudent to assume that\nhe's read both the Encyclopedia and Aquinas (and agrees with them on\nsuch an important\nmatter) until proven otherwise." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Catholic intellectual tradition is wide and diverse. The Catholic\nEncyclopedia may state the \"mainstream\" position, but that doesn't oblige\nWolfe to agree with it. Catholics are obliged to accept papal ex cathedra\nproclamations of dogma, but there aren't too many of those." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "To give some relevance to this discussion I'd predict that none of\nWolfe's characters ever\napproves of a rebellion except when the ruler is clearly tyrannical in\nthe narrow sense used\nin the Encyclopedia." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You quoted the Encyclopedia earlier as quoting Aquinas describing a \"a\ntyrannical law\" as \"not being according to reason.\" I don't see that the\nrulers of Dorp fall under this definition. They're corrupt and unjust, but\nprobably no worse than the average medieval ruler or lord; and presumably\nAquinas would not give a definition of tyranny which would justify rebellion\nagainst most rulers.\n\nAnd when Silkhorn gives reasons for rebellion, he says nothing about\ntyranny. First he explains it on the grounds of necessity for himself, and\nto keep Beroep and Aanvagen from being ruined; and because the judges are\ncorrupt. (181) Later he tells Capsicum \"The judges had taken advantage of\ntheir [the people of Dorp's] good qualities, and so the judges had to go; if\nI had not removed them, the people themselves would have within a few\nyears.\" He also says, rejecting the idea of overthrowing Gyrfalcon, that\nNew Viron would probably be worse off without him. (275) Silkhorn's\ncriterion, it seems to me, is pragmatic. If rebellion would make people\nbetter off, then it's justified; if it wouldn't (which he probably thinks is\nmost of the time), then it's not. I suspect this is Wolfe's criterion as\nwell.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-02-06T02:35:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Sorry this response is so late." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 1/29/02 2:01 PM, Michael Straight at straight at email.unc.edu wrote:\nHow does Wolfe \"denounce\" rebellion against the Autarch in BOTNS? He\nshows that the Ascian rulers are bad, probably worse than the government\nof the Commonwealth, and he shows that Vodalus is no real revolutionary\n(he just wants to seize power for himself and his friends) and a dupe\nbesides.\n\nAs it turns out, the aliens are supporting and using the Autarchy for ends\nthat Wolfe seems to think are ultimately good, but I can't see how you\nread that as saying Wolfe would condemn a true revolutionary movement that\nwas trying to overthrow the Autarch not because they oppose the New Sun or\nwant to seize power for themselves but to free themselves from tyranny." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As the only revolutionary leader in BOTNS, Vodalus represents the idea of\nrevolution. If I read a book in which Lenin played a major role, and turned\nout to be a tool of Satan, I wouldn't think that the author probably\napproved of Communist revolutionaries who weren't tools of Satan.\n\nAnd I think we're intended to believe the Autarch when he tells Severian\nthat he keeps the society of the Commonwealth frozen in barbarism because\n\"all else is worse,\" including rule by the people. (Sword and Citadel, p.\n356, pb edition.)\n\nI thought I also remembered Severian, or Thecla-in-Severian, admitting that\nthe revolutionary had been a fitting punishment for her, but I can't find\nthe reference.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-02-06T02:35:09+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 1/31/02 5:17 PM, Andy Robertson at andywrobertson at clara.co.uk wrote:\nOf course in reality the Empire beame utterly corrupt, and was in fact taken\nby the forces of Antichrist (as the Turks were thought to be)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think you're mixing up the HRE and the Byzantine Empire. The HRE was\nnever taken by the Turks; it was dissolved by Napoleon (who no doubt got\nlabelled the Antichrist himself). And I don't think it was particularly\ncorrupt: it just became decreasingly relevant as its component duchies,\nelectorates, etc. became practically independent states." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If Wolfe thought to trace a historical link, it would be a joke he made.\nHowever, symbolically, the Commonwealth is like the HRE." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe has said that the Commonwealth is modelled on Byzantium, iirc.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2002-02-06T16:33:06+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- Adam Stephanides wrote:\non 1/31/02 5:17 PM, Andy Robertson at andywrobertson at clara.co.uk wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Of course in reality the Empire beame utterly corrupt, and was in fact\ntaken\nby the forces of Antichrist (as the Turks were thought to be)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think you're mixing up the HRE and the Byzantine Empire. The HRE was\nnever taken by the Turks; it was dissolved by Napoleon (who no doubt got\nlabelled the Antichrist himself). " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...\n\nObLit: War and Peace.\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2002-02-06T19:30:38+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Adam Stephanides wrote:\nAs the only revolutionary leader in BOTNS, Vodalus represents the idea of\nrevolution. If I read a book in which Lenin played a major role, and turned\nout to be a tool of Satan, I wouldn't think that the author probably\napproved of Communist revolutionaries who weren't tools of Satan." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think that reading is way too allegorical. Maybe Vodalus represents\nWolfe's belief that many (most?) revolutionaries fight to seize power for\nthemselves rather than for any sort of democratic ideals, but I wouldn't\ntry to argue from there to saying Wolfe revolution is inherently\nillegitimate." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And I think we're intended to believe the Autarch when he tells Severian\nthat he keeps the society of the Commonwealth frozen in barbarism because\n\"all else is worse,\" including rule by the people. (Sword and Citadel, p.\n356, pb edition.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think we're supposed to believe the Autarch genuinely thinks that. I'm\nnot sure we're supposed to assume he's right.\n\nSeverian presents an argument that torture is more humane than\nincarceration, but I wouldn't try to claim that Wolfe agrees with his\nreasoning or expects the reader to." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I thought I also remembered Severian, or Thecla-in-Severian, admitting that\nthe revolutionary had been a fitting punishment for her, but I can't find\nthe reference." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Again, Severian might say that because he disapproves of revolution\n(or because he disapproves of Thecla's particular revolt), but I think\nthat's a weak weak argument for saying Wolfe thinks all revolution is\nillegitimate. \n\nMore likely Severian is just finding morbid humor/irony in her punishment\nfitting the crime she was charged with, without regard to any political\nopinions he might have about the legitimacy of those charges.\n\n-Rostrum" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Thomas Bitterman", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2002-02-06T23:10:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:\non 2/1/02 4:08 PM, Thomas Bitterman at tom at bitterman.net wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Michael Straight wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Nor do I think it makes much sense to pull a few quotes from the\nCatholic Encyclpedia and think that gives you enables you a complete\nunderstanding of Wolfe's political ideas." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Complete, no. But Wolfe is a dedicated, intellectual Catholic. It\nseems prudent to assume that\nhe's read both the Encyclopedia and Aquinas (and agrees with them on\nsuch an important\nmatter) until proven otherwise." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The Catholic intellectual tradition is wide and diverse. The Catholic\nEncyclopedia may state the \"mainstream\" position, but that doesn't oblige\nWolfe to agree with it. Catholics are obliged to accept papal ex cathedra\nproclamations of dogma, but there aren't too many of those." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The RCC is pretty picky about things that are merely \"teachings\" but not \ndogma. Note\nthe animosity between the Pope and many American Catholics on birth \ncontrol. Given\nWolfe's conservative nature it seems reasonable to believe he submits to \nmost teachings." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You quoted the Encyclopedia earlier as quoting Aquinas describing a \"a\ntyrannical law\" as \"not being according to reason.\" I don't see that the\nrulers of Dorp fall under this definition. They're corrupt and unjust, but\nprobably no worse than the average medieval ruler or lord; and presumably\nAquinas would not give a definition of tyranny which would justify rebellion\nagainst most rulers." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That's debatable. Church-state relationships were hardly cozy during \nthe period that Aquinas\nwrote. The fact that most (if not all) medieval rulers were unjust was \na handy weapon for the\nPope in those fights." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And when Silkhorn gives reasons for rebellion, he says nothing about\ntyranny. First he explains it on the grounds of necessity for himself, and\nto keep Beroep and Aanvagen from being ruined; and because the judges are\ncorrupt. (181) Later he tells Capsicum \"The judges had taken advantage of\ntheir [the people of Dorp's] good qualities, and so the judges had to go; if\nI had not removed them, the people themselves would have within a few\nyears.\" He also says, rejecting the idea of overthrowing Gyrfalcon, that\nNew Viron would probably be worse off without him. (275) Silkhorn's\ncriterion, it seems to me, is pragmatic. If rebellion would make people\nbetter off, then it's justified; if it wouldn't (which he probably thinks is\nmost of the time), then it's not. I suspect this is Wolfe's criterion as\nwell." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You give good reasons. I would view Silk, however, in the role of the \nRCC, not as an\nordinary member of society. As the representative of the Outsider on \nthe Whorl (ie, as\nthe representative of God on Earth) he holds ultimate decision-making \npower over\nwhether a government is legitimate or not. In short (in Whorl terms), \nthe theory is\nthat all government ultimately derives its authority from the Outsider. \n In most\ncases that authority is implicitly granted by the mere fact of the \nauthoritiy's existence.\nThat does not change the fact, however, that the Outsider (or a suitable \nrepresentative)\ncan de-legitimize any authority by withdrawing his support. Hence, \nSilkhorn is not\nbound by the rules against rebellion becuase he is not rebelling. He is\nremoving the moral authority underneath the government, making it\ntyrannical by fiat, so to speak." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--Adam" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Tom" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-02-09T01:41:56+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 2/6/02 5:10 PM, Thomas Bitterman at tom at bitterman.net wrote:\nThe RCC is pretty picky about things that are merely \"teachings\" but not\ndogma. Note\nthe animosity between the Pope and many American Catholics on birth\ncontrol. Given\nWolfe's conservative nature it seems reasonable to believe he submits to\nmost teachings." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There are plenty of conservative Catholics who believe that abolishing the\nLatin mass was a mistake." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You quoted the Encyclopedia earlier as quoting Aquinas describing a \"a\ntyrannical law\" as \"not being according to reason.\" I don't see that the\nrulers of Dorp fall under this definition. They're corrupt and unjust, but\nprobably no worse than the average medieval ruler or lord; and presumably\nAquinas would not give a definition of tyranny which would justify rebellion\nagainst most rulers." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That's debatable. Church-state relationships were hardly cozy during\nthe period that Aquinas\nwrote. The fact that most (if not all) medieval rulers were unjust was\na handy weapon for the\nPope in those fights." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "While there was rivalry between secular and ecclesiastical authority in the\nmiddle ages, the Church had no desire to propound a theory which would give\npeasants a generalized right to rebel. Most bishops and abbots were from\nthe nobility, and many exercised temporal lordship in their own right\n(including the Pope)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You give good reasons. I would view Silk, however, in the role of the\nRCC, not as an\nordinary member of society. As the representative of the Outsider on\nthe Whorl (ie, as\nthe representative of God on Earth) he holds ultimate decision-making\npower over\nwhether a government is legitimate or not. In short (in Whorl terms),\nthe theory is\nthat all government ultimately derives its authority from the Outsider.\nIn most\ncases that authority is implicitly granted by the mere fact of the\nauthoritiy's existence.\nThat does not change the fact, however, that the Outsider (or a suitable\nrepresentative)\ncan de-legitimize any authority by withdrawing his support. Hence,\nSilkhorn is not\nbound by the rules against rebellion becuase he is not rebelling. He is\nremoving the moral authority underneath the government, making it\ntyrannical by fiat, so to speak." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is an ingenious argument, but I don't think Silkhorn is the\nrepresentative of the Outsider on the Whorl. To be sure, Silk was\nenlightened, and given a mission from the Outsider, but that doesn't make\nhim equivalent to the Pope (if it did, he presumably wouldn't have shut\nhimself up in a hut with Hyacinth for twenty years). Nor are we intended to\ntake his words as divinely inspired a la an Old Testament prophet. Silk\ncertainly doesn't think of himself in these terms. A fortiori this holds\nfor Silkhorn.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2002-02-09T20:07:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Adam Stephanides wrote:\nThis is an ingenious argument, but I don't think Silkhorn is the\nrepresentative of the Outsider on the Whorl. To be sure, Silk was\nenlightened, and given a mission from the Outsider, but that doesn't make\nhim equivalent to the Pope (if it did, he presumably wouldn't have shut\nhimself up in a hut with Hyacinth for twenty years). Nor are we intended to\ntake his words as divinely inspired a la an Old Testament prophet. Silk\ncertainly doesn't think of himself in these terms. A fortiori this holds\nfor Silkhorn." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The more I see those terms, 'Silk' and 'Silkhorn,' the more I think\nthey're backwards. We oughta use 'Silkhorn' for the character named\n\"Silk\" in the Long Sun books since he's a mix of the real Silk and Horn's\nideas about Silk, and 'Silk' for the narrator of IGJ who knows that he's\nnot the (nonexistent) hero that Horn was sent to find.\n\n\"Is that your real name? Silk? Are you the man in the book?\"\n\"I don't think so.\"\n\n(IGJ, p. 207)\n\nI am, of course, 3/4 kidding. But once I finish rereading RTW, I'll post\nmy theories about how much about the varying Horn/Silk ratio in the\nnarrator...\n\n-Rostrum" } ] } ] }