{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3173", "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": 3173, "subject": "Belated thoughts RE: (urth) Shadowy reflections on an", "messages": 4, "voices": 2, "first": "2002-04-19T15:59:27+00:00", "last": "2002-04-19T19:39:13+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-04-19T15:59:27+00:00", "subject": "Re: Belated thoughts RE: (urth) Shadowy reflections on an", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At 10:04 AM 4/19/2002, Adam S. wrote:\nNigel observed:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Severian in some sense takes on the role of Christ when he resists\nTyphon's three-fold temptations, but as the author has insisted\nelsewhere, Severian is not Jesus..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l rejoined:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "and I insist that this is a case where the author either is -- I was\ngoing to say \"lying\" but let me say instead \"being deliberatly \ndisingenuous\"\n-- or doesn't know what he's talking about. Or maybe some combination of\nthe two. And it doesn't start with the temptation in the desert.\n\nI mean, come on: his career starts with baptism and ends with\nresurrection. Before he meets Typhon, he raises the dead, heals the\nsick turns water into wine, tames wild beasts, and (I think a case\ncould be made) banishes demons. Not to mention coming back from the\ndead repeatedly, telling parables (what _do_ you think the stories\nin the Book of Urth and Sky are?), etc., etc., etc." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam saith:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, he isn't literally Jesus: he's not God, and his return isn't the\nSecond Coming of Christ (and I've never understood how the events of UotNS\nare to be reconciled with the Christian eschatological scheme). But I agree\nthat the similarities between Severian and Jesus go far beyond \"he's a\nChristian, and Christians are supposed to imitate Christ.\"\n\nWhen I read UotNS, it seemed to me that the portions of the book where\nSeverian is the original Conciliator might have been Wolfe's attempt to\nimagine why someone might behave as Jesus does in the Gospel of Mark\n(reluctant to perform miracles, and telling those he's cured not to say\nanything about it)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " It's more than \"imitating Christ\" and less than \"being a new \nChrist.\" Rather, the Christian conception is that Christians live \"in \nChrist\" and Christ lives \"in them.\" Thus, Christians in a \"mystical\" way \n\"fill out\" the life of Christ, extending it so to speak, into further \nhistory. For Wolfe, as for any \"high church\" Christian (like myself), \neating Christ's body and drink His blood in the sacrament is part of this.\n Though \"Church activities\" are way in the background in the \nSeverian series -- about the only thing I recall is the Pelerines, and they \naren't exactly an \"orthodox Church\" -- Wolfe is presupposing that Severian \nis \"extending\" Christ's life and work in this \"Byzantine-esque\" and \ntherefore generally Christian culture.\n For Wolfe, such an \"extension\" means incorporating and \nnew-applying the \"best\" of pre-Christian paganism; hence, Severian as New \nSun is an Apollo-like \"application\" of Christ, as well as being a \nre-publication of reconciliation between God and man and all creation as \nthe Conciliator.\n Severian is a special man with certain special God-given talents, \nprovided at a certain time in history. He both abuses and properly uses \nthese special talents. Those things are true, one way or another, for every \nperson.\n Now, Severian's applying the \"life in Christ\" is only possible \nbecause aeons ago there lived and died and came to life again the \n\"theoanthropos,\" who is mentioned only once. Severian is not a new \n\"theoanthropos,\" but someone living out further the mission of the original \nand unique \"theoanthropos.\"\n This is the sense in which Severian is a \"Christian figure\" and \nnot an allegorical \"Christ figure.\"\n As for how all this fits with conventional Christian eschatology; \nwell, it does not have to. The events are in the midst of history, not at \nits full end. But the Bible repeatedly uses Flood language to refer to \ninvading armies and other similar disasters, and also relates the Flood to \nbaptism. Thus, Wolfe can have a Flood-event in the midst of history, which \nis a judgment on an old Ur-world and also a baptism of that world, ushering \nin a new Ushas world.\n Hence I don't think Wolfe is being \"deceptive\" when he says \nSeverian is not a Christ-figure. He means the book is not an allegory where \nJesus himself is being presented in a guise. I hope I've done a little \njustice to what he means when he says Severian is a \"Christian figure.\" In \nterms of this, we should not be surprised when Severian and Silk do many \nChrist-like things and seem to play out the life of Christ in new \nsituations; but we should also not be surprised when they often fail.\n All this is, of course, only one dimension of the narrative.\n Hope this helps.\n\nPatera Nutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2002-04-19T17:45:02+00:00", "subject": "RE: Belated thoughts RE: (urth) Shadowy reflections on an", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam and Nutria say a great deal of what I was going to say, in response \nto Nigel, and frankly better than I imagine I would of said it. I agree with\nthe \nfundamental point that tBotNS is not an allegory. Tolkien, who \"casually\"\ndetested allegory, made a careful distinction between allegory and \n_applicability_: in the former, the author forces upon the reader a \nconstruct of correspondences between the allegory and the reality; in the \nlatter, the author may consciously create such a construct but leaves it\nto the reader to discover and accept or reject, or may not consciously \ncreate it at all but be satisfied with such correspondences as the reader\nmay discover. (This latter has happened to me at least once, with my\n_Realms of Fantasy_ story \"Outside the Walls,\" which has a somewhat Lupine\nstructure -- it's a horror story disguised as a science fiction story\ndisguised as a fairy tale; and I was quite shocked, but pleased, when a\nreader pointed out to me that underneath all these things, it was a \nparable of salvation.)\n\nIn the case of _tBotNS_, the Severian/Christ correspondences are too\nmany and too complex for \"unconscious\" to be plausible in such a\nconscious craftsman (not to say artist) as Jean-Loup. Since I did not\nand do not want to say or believe that M'sieu le Loup is fibbing to\nus, \"disingenuous\" seemed the kindest word.\n\nSome specifics... Quotes from Adam:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, he isn't literally Jesus: he's not God, and his return isn't\nthe Second Coming of Christ ... But I agree that the similarities\nbetween Severian and Jesus go far beyond \"he's a Christian, and\nChristians are supposed to imitate Christ.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Exactly my point. Actually, I'm not at all sure that Severian is \"a\nChristian\" -- that is, he clearly doesn't (and can't) have literal\nfaith in Christ, of whom he's never heard. He seems, at times, to \nhave some degree of faith in the being known as the Conciliator, and\nmore vaguely in the Theoanthropos. Throughout tBotNS we are free to \nbelieve that the Conciliator is identical with the Theoanthropos; \nUotNS takes this possibility away (unless we are to consider Severian \nthe Theoanthropos, which Wolfe denies and I would not seriously \nconsider). " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... I've never understood how the events of UotNS are to be\nreconciled with the Christian eschatological scheme. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ummm... _which_ Christian eschatological scheme? If you're an\nAmerican, you're probably most familiar with the complex schemas\npropounded by the Baptists and various Fundamentalist cliques. But\nthere is in fact very little agreement among the whole body of \nChristians on just _what_ the various eschatological statements and\nprophecies mean, let alone how to fit them into a coherent scheme \nof Final Things. The only things I think all Christians would agree\non are that neither our current lives nor this world will last \nforever, and that we will be judged after one or both of these\nthings ends and sent to our final eternal destinies. Nothing I see\nin UotNS actually conflicts with this (though the ability of \nSeverian to come back from the dead apparently at will does add\na bit of discomfort). " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "When I read UotNS, it seemed to me that the portions of the book\nwhere Severian is the original Conciliator might have been Wolfe's\nattempt to imagine why someone might behave as Jesus does in the\nGospel of Mark (reluctant to perform miracles, and telling those\nhe's cured not to say anything about it)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, Wolfe has described tBotNS as an attempt at theodicy, that is,\na justification of God's ways to man. Well, Webster's actually \ndefines it as a \"defense of God's goodness and omnipotence in view \nof the existence of evil,\" but I think Wolfe goes farther than that\nand attempts to explain a great deal of God's, uh, behavior. (The\nmost cogent example of what I'm talking about would _not_ be the\nclassic example of theodicy, _Paradise Lost_, but CS Lewis' \n_Perelandra_ -- I am thinking particularly of the scene where the \nhero, Ransom, struggles with his inability to defeat his possessed\nfoe by argument and brought to the unhappy conclusion that he must \nfight him hand-to-hand. He is consoled by a Voice saying, \"My name \nis also Ransom.\") All of which is to say, yes, whenever we see Sev\nbehaving in a way that parallels what Christ did in the Gospels, we\nmight be looking at some attempt to justify or explain Christ's\nmotivations and behavior to us. I think one of the most touching \nthings about Severian is how _embarassed_ he often seems to be to\nbe working miracles.\n\nThen Nutria picks it up ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It's more than \"imitating Christ\" and less than \"being a new Christ.\" " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is so perfectly what I was trying to say that I bow in awe." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Rather, the Christian conception is that Christians live \"in Christ\"\nand Christ lives \"in them.\" Thus, Christians in a \"mystical\" way\n\"fill out\" the life of Christ, extending it so to speak, into further\nhistory. For Wolfe, as for any \"high church\" Christian (like myself),\neating Christ's body and drink His blood in the sacrament is part of\nthis. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The only thing I could add to this is that we (the Church) are \"Christ's\nmystical body,\" and His hands on Earth, doing His work (however \nimperfectly)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "For Wolfe, such an \"extension\" means incorporating and new-applying the\n\"best\" of pre-Christian paganism; hence, Severian as New Sun is an\nApollo-like \"application\" of Christ, as well as being a re-publication\nof reconciliation between God and man and all creation as the Conciliator." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes. And it's very much worth comparing this to the \"pagan\" deities of \ntBotLS, who (in general) are not allowing themselves to be the hands of \nthe one God, but rebels against Him, making themselves into gods. (A \nnumerological reflection relevant also to 5HC: \"666,\" the Number of the \nBeast, is \"the number of a man.\" Kaballistically, 6 is a man and 3 is \nGod; 666 is Man making a God of himself.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian is a special man with certain special God-given talents,\nprovided at a certain time in history. He both abuses and properly\nuses these special talents. Those things are true, one way or another,\nfor every person." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes: one workable definition of \"Christian behavior\" is \"(attempting) \nthe proper use of one's gifts.\" And, whatever else we may say of \nSeverian, he seems to have an admirably humble awareness that his \n\"gifts\" are just that, that they are not of his making, and that he \nhas some responsibility to use them properly. It might be argued that \nthe three moments of \"unjust\" mercy which inform and, more or less, \ndefine his path through tBotNS are precisely refusals to use his gifts \n(that is, his skill and talent as a torturer) improperly; quite possibly\nthe sparing of Agia in particular is the moment at which his \"success\"\n(as over against the failures of the previous Severians) is determined." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This is the sense in which Severian is a \"Christian figure\" and not\nan allegorical \"Christ figure.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Right. The problem with the term \"Christ figure\" is that it immediately\nmerges in many folks' minds into \"allegory.\" Severian is not a Christ \nfigure in the way that Valentine Michael Smith, gawdhelpus, is; he's a\nChrist figure in the way that Frodo Baggins is (something that, to my\nastonishment, looks as if it may not get lost in the movie trilogy).\nIt's interesting to note that Wolfe goes so far as to provide Severian\nwith explicit links to other such figures, i.e., the wounded thigh;\nthough this (unlike the \"other figure\") does heal, it never heals\ncompletely, and Severian is left to us as a limping metaphor rather \nthan a full allegory." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Hence I don't think Wolfe is being \"deceptive\" when he says Severian is\nnot a Christ-figure. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "H'mmm. Did I say deceptive? (Checks mail archive.) No, I didn't. \nWhew. He's just being ... h'mmm. Lupine. Literally, no, Severian \nis not a \"Christ\" figure. Practically, though, he is figuring \nChrist in some fairly significant ways." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "... we should not be surprised when Severian and Silk do many\nChrist-like things and seem to play out the life of Christ in new\nsituations; but we should also not be surprised when they often fail." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Right. Completely with you here. My point, I suppose, is that they\ndo this (and Severian particularly) in ways more direct and, well,\nliteral than most of us. Though I suppose that's at least partly a\nmatter of presentation ... I remember I once had an experience at \nthe end of which I said, \"That guy was Simon of Cyrene.\" It was kind\nof harrowing because by realizing that I realized that I had been\none of the guys mocking Christ as He toiled under the cross...\n\n--Blattid/Dan'l" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-04-19T19:12:08+00:00", "subject": "RE: Belated thoughts RE: (urth) Shadowy reflections on an", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "At 12:45 PM 4/19/2002, you wrote:\n\n(A numerological reflection relevant also to 5HC: \"666,\" the Number of the" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Beast, is \"the number of a man.\" Kaballistically, 6 is a man and 3 is\nGod; 666 is Man making a God of himself.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Don't know what Wolfe thought about this, if anything, but FWIW \nfor those interested:\n In Rev. 13 the number is six hundred, sixty, six, not three 6s. A \nlot of people are confused on this, simply because we say \"sixsixsix\" and \nthe English could be read either way. The number has to do with rulers who \nturn against God, and comes from Solomon's defection from God in 1 Kings \n10:14, where it signals Solomon's breaking the \"three laws of kingship\" \n(Deuteronomy 17:16-17; 1 Kings 10:14ff., 26ff., and 11:1ff.).\n \"The number of a man\" also trips up English readers, and many \nothers. In Greek, \"aner\" means a specific male person, and \"anthropos\" a \nmember of humankind. The word here is \"anthropos.\" So, contrary to many \nattempt to make 666 out to be a numerical code for Nero or someone else \nwhose name gematrically adds up to 666, it really only says, \"a human \nnumber.\" Beyond that, it depends on how you take Revelation. I take it as \ndescribing, down to chapter 20, the fall of Jerusalem and of Rome. In \nRevelation, gentiles are called \"peoples, nations, tribes, and tongues,\" \nwhile Jews are called \"men, anthropoi.\" Thus, IMO, when Rev. 13 says, IMO, \nis that the number is an \"anthropic\" number, it means a \"Jewish\" number, \nand again points back to Solomon. The two evil beast powers (Sea and Land) \nare like Solomon: rulers who turn against God and oppress the people.\n More than most wanted to know, I'm sure, but I thought a few might \nlike to see it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " Beyond that: I unfairly wrote:\nHence I don't think Wolfe is being \"deceptive\" when he says Severian is \nnot a Christ-figure." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And you answered:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "H'mmm. Did I say deceptive? (Checks mail archive.) No, I didn't." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " My apologies. Did not intend to overstate your case. I wasn't \nreally thinking of your particular sentence when I wrote that, and the \nquotation marks were not intended as a citation from you but just as a way \nof generalizing the opinion.\n Enjoyed your post muchly." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--Blattid/Dan'l" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nutria/Jim" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-04-19T19:39:13+00:00", "subject": "Re: Belated thoughts RE: (urth) Shadowy reflections on an", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 02:20 PM 4/19/2002, you wrote:\nOn Fri, 19 Apr 2002, James Jordan wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " As for how all this fits with conventional Christian eschatology;\nwell, it does not have to. The events are in the midst of history, not at\nits full end. But the Bible repeatedly uses Flood language to refer to\ninvading armies and other similar disasters, and also relates the Flood to\nbaptism. Thus, Wolfe can have a Flood-event in the midst of history, which\nis a judgment on an old Ur-world and also a baptism of that world, \nushering\nin a new Ushas world." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Which raises the question again, are there no more rainbows on\nUrth? (Other than the one Severian pulls butterflies out of, that is.)\n\n-Rostrum" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Cool question!! Is history running backwards on Urth, so that we are moving \nback toward a Garden of Eden with a Green Man? Probably not, I guess. I \nguess we just have to leave this problem to authorial license.\n For those who might not know, Rostrum refers to Genesis 9:11-16.\n Hey, I do have an answer, though it may be more than Wolfe \nintends. The rainbow is generated by the sun. If the Old Sun winks out for \nan instant before the New Sun kicks in, then briefly there is no rainbow, \nso there can be another Flood. Can't recall if this is so, though.\n That the best I can do!\n\nNutria" } ] } ] }