Subject: (urth) Hyacinth and Silk

From: David Duffy <davidd at qimr.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 07:09:26 +0000

I think, just as Gevers suggests Wolfe is deconstructing all the other
genres in BotLS, he is having a hack at profane love as not (necessarily)
being a solution to the existential questions.  I am reminded explicitly
of _Of Human Bondage_.

| David Duffy.                                                     ,-_|\
| email: davidD at qimr.edu.au  ph: INT+61+7+3362-0217 fax: -0101    /     *
| Epidemiology Unit, The Queensland Institute of Medical Research \_,-._/
| 300 Herston Rd, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia                 v

--

---

From: Andy Robertson <andywrobertson at clara.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 06:49:09 +0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Duffy" <davidD at qimr.edu.au>

> being a solution to the existential questions.  I am reminded explicitly

So how does that relate to the "false-but-deeply-felt humanity" of the
inhumi, and its equivalent sexuality?

Is Hyacinth the converse of Jahlee: a blood-drinking reptile trapped in the
body of a beautiful woman?   A human being with an inhumi's soul?

    hartshorn

.

--