{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3400", "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": 3400, "subject": "sepia man as Tilly?", "messages": 7, "voices": 5, "first": "2002-08-09T19:27:41+00:00", "last": "2002-08-11T13:26:47+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2002-08-09T19:27:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Here is something I wanted to mention before.\n\nThe photo of the giant and the man: as an advertisement (goes well with the\nphoto of Candy as an advertisement; perhaps fits well with the \"commerce\ndocumentary\" of section 5 of PEACE) it makes sense that the \"normal\" man\nbeside the giant actually be rather small, yet still in normal proportions,\nto visually over-state the actual height of the giant.\n\nAnd since we know Smart was small-ish, this is another nice point in favor\nof the normal sepia man as Julius Smart.\n\nOTOH, why wouldn't he be recognized? Robert Borski has pointed out the\nsocial decorum involved whereby the secretary might avoid mentioning it,\nand Weer being opaque as usual takes care of his side.\n\nBut what if the normal sepia man really is a man that neither one has ever\nseen--what if he is Tilly?\n\nAgain, if Charlie is acting as the ghost of the past, then he is showing us\nsomething about a previous owner/manager (I forget, but doesn't the ghost\nshow Scroog the wonderful Christmas parties put on by Marley?). Well, that\nwould work for both Smart and Tilly. Yet the arrival of Charlie initially\nvalidates the story told by Smart about Tilly, nearly like a character\nstepping out of a book; and Tilly is the invisible one (I mean, we even\nquestion whether he exists or is just a mask for Smart!) whereas Weer saw\nthe courtship, the wedding, and even lived in the house with Smart.\n\nSo what does it do, having the sepia man as Tilly? It might point to\nanother offspring, another heir to the factory, if Doris is Tilly's\ndaughter. Because Tilly's condition of being \"stoned\" links to\n\"Mason,\" and Tilly had close ties to the carnies, and so on.\n\nRoy, remind me about the Tilly subsection of the timeline. Tilly died in\n1922 or so? Wife \"died\" when?\n\nIs 1920 a good benchmark for natural sepia, for the clothing, for the\nLombard reference?\n\nEek! Since what I'm saying here is that Doris's story somehow \"fills in\nthe blanks\" to Smart's story of Tilly, then what are the blanks: the wife,\nthe son, etc. What if somehow lovely Candy is the one who ends up in the\naquarium tank?\n\nJust a creepy thought.\n\nAnyway, back to the photos. Adam Stephanides (iirc) wondered why Charlie\nwould not mention the second photo. Weeeellll . . . if it =was= a\nblackmail thing (which would fit with my sense of Charlie running some kind\nof scam), and the photo shows Weer and the giant (or any other kind of\nblackmail evidence), then Charlie doesn't need to say anything -- in fact\nhe =shouldn't= say anything. The artifact speaks for itself, or the\nattempt is off-target (Weer is unaffected) and Charlie cannot be implicated\nin a blackmail attempt (since he makes no mention).\n\n=mantis=" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Robert Borski", "address": "rborski at charter.net" }, "date": "2002-08-09T21:37:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "mantis having speculated:\n\n\"But what if the normal sepia man really is a man that neither one has ever\nseen--what if he is Tilly?\"\n\nI rather like this idea, and I believe StoneOx alluded to it earlier, though\nnot with the same amplification you provided.\n\nIt explains why Miss Hadow does not recognize the two men, as well as Den's\nadmission that he's never met them. Also the antiquated fashion sense of the\ngiant.\n\nThe three relatives of Tilly's who want Smart to take over the pharmacy may\nbe Mrs. Mason, Candy, and Arline (though the latter two must be very young),\nand the giant in the photo is not Tom Lavine but \"little\" Rodney (the bed\nmay be a childhood keepsake or else he simply grew out of it fast). Tilly\nprobably never married \"Mrs. Mason\" so therefore her two children are\nillegitimate. (This would explain why the carnies don't believe there's a\nreal Mr. Mason. ) But as for Tilly being the father of Doris by yet another\nrelationship/marriage, I find this less credible. According to the timeline,\nTilly dies somewhere around 1924, which would make Doris about 39 when\nCharlie Turner shows up. It also makes the ages of Candy and Arline--if\nthey're Tilly's daughters--probably even older--another glitch in the\ntheory.\n\nAnd still to be answered is why Charlie Turner sends a 40 year old photo of\nTilly and giant to D. Weer, as well as why the photo of Candy looks\nsimilarly aged.\n\nBut overall I think the sepia man = Tilly answers more questions than it\nraises.\n\nRobert Borski" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2002-08-09T22:24:52+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Robert Borski wrote:\nThe three relatives of Tilly's who want Smart to take over the pharmacy may\nbe Mrs. Mason, Candy, and Arline (though the latter two must be very young),\nand the giant in the photo is not Tom Lavine but \"little\" Rodney (the bed\nmay be a childhood keepsake or else he simply grew out of it fast)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, this was my other creepy thought: that the three relatives of Tilly\nmight be hereby revealed.\n\nI had not quite made the Rodney-as-giant connection, but that is possible,\ntoo, in which case, though, Doris is not \"of Tilly\" but a prospective bride\nof Tilly's heir (not \"hair,\" if Charlie is really Rodney, which I've often\nwondered), and we might expect the focus of the story to have been on the\ngiant rather than on Doris." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Tilly\nprobably never married \"Mrs. Mason\" so therefore her two children are\nillegitimate. (This would explain why the carnies don't believe there's a\nreal Mr. Mason. ) But as for Tilly being the father of Doris by yet another\nrelationship/marriage, I find this less credible. According to the timeline,\nTilly dies somewhere around 1924, which would make Doris about 39 when\nCharlie Turner shows up. It also makes the ages of Candy and Arline--if\nthey're Tilly's daughters--probably even older--another glitch in the\ntheory.\n\nAnd still to be answered is why Charlie Turner sends a 40 year old photo of\nTilly and giant to D. Weer, as well as why the photo of Candy looks\nsimilarly aged." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Both of these timeline paradoxes are \"solved\" if Charlie is a time-traveler\nfrom the past, like the ghost of Christmas past in \"A Christmas Carol.\" In\nPEACE terms, this =may= mean that Charlie Turner died and really is a\nghost, and his visit of Weer is an example of a haunting from the past (as\nopposed to a haunting from the future), but I'm not going that far, yet,\nI'm just looking at Charlie as being a time-traveler who does =not= know\nthe history of things, he has to go back to the past, live through events,\nand then move to the future to report what happened.\n\nNow as to why the ghost of carnies past would visit Weer on the same day\nthat he is visited by the spirit of factory present and the lady of future\ngrave-trees, well that is a puzzler, unless it is exactly that pattern\nderived from \"A Christmas Carol.\"\n\nI've got to find a copy of \"A Christmas Carol\" if I'm going to keep going\non like this. Maybe there's one online?\n\n=mantis=\n\n\nSirius Fiction\nbooklets on Gene Wolfe, John Crowley\n29 copies of \"Snake's-hands\" until OP!\nhttp://www.siriusfiction.com/" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2002-08-10T06:49:56+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "mantis asks:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Roy, remind me about the Tilly subsection of the timeline. Tilly died in\n1922 or so? Wife \"died\" when?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Close enough. And his wife \"passed on a number of years ago\". (120) Probably\nduring The Great War." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Is 1920 a good benchmark for natural sepia, for the clothing, for the\nLombard reference?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not for Lombard; as Robert has pointed out, her heyday was the 1930s." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Both of these timeline paradoxes are \"solved\" if Charlie is a time-traveler\nfrom the past, like the ghost of Christmas past in \"A Christmas Carol.\" In\nPEACE terms, this =may= mean that Charlie Turner died and really is a\nghost, and his visit of Weer is an example of a haunting from the past (as\nopposed to a haunting from the future), but I'm not going that far, yet,\nI'm just looking at Charlie as being a time-traveler who does =not= know\nthe history of things, he has to go back to the past, live through events,\nand then move to the future to report what happened." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There's a problem with that. In \"real-time\" Charlie's visit/letter happened\nin the early 1960s. If Charlie is a time-traveling ghost of the past, then I\npresume he also has no knowledge of the future? In that case, how to account\nfor his contemporary reference to television? (221)\n\nBTW, I haven't forgotten Robert's (or your earlier) quite valid query about\nmy take on the relevance of Doris's story to Weer or to the book--I just\ndon't have a good answer. I even dug out a 1729 translation of \"Cinderilla\",\ntaken from Perrault's collection. The parallels of Doris to Cinderella are\nobvious, but so are the differences. I can't decide if that is important, or\nif Wolfe just ignores the \"facts\" and recasts the story to suit his purpose,\nas he did with the Sidhe story.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2002-08-10T07:26:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "mantis wrote:\nBut what if the normal sepia man really is a man that neither one has ever\nseen--what if he is Tilly?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It just occurred to me why this can't be--probably, maybe.\n\n\"He was one of the tallest men I ever saw, I guess, but most of the time he\nstood like he didn't have any chest at all, all hollowed out there, so he\ndidn't look much taller than the average.\" (117) Even slouched, Tilly was\nabove average height.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-08-11T00:30:02+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Roy C. Lackey wrote:\nmantis wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "But what if the normal sepia man really is a man that neither one has ever\nseen--what if he is Tilly?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It just occurred to me why this can't be--probably, maybe.\n\n\"He was one of the tallest men I ever saw, I guess, but most of the time he\nstood like he didn't have any chest at all, all hollowed out there, so he\ndidn't look much taller than the average.\" (117) Even slouched, Tilly was\nabove average height." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "But we don't know that the other man isn't above average height. All Miss\nHadow says about him is that he isn't \"really very tall,\" which still allows\nfor him to be taller than average." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "And mantis wrote:\nIs 1920 a good benchmark for natural sepia, for the clothing, for the\nLombard reference?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "All Miss Hadow says is that the girl's face reminds her of Carole Lombard,\nnot the clothes or hairstyle; so the Lombard reference doesn't help to date\nthe photo.\n\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "StoneOx17", "address": "stoneox17 at aol.com" }, "date": "2002-08-11T13:26:47+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) sepia man as Tilly?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hello,\n\nThere's a simple explanation for the second man in Tom's photo. I think the \nphotograph, like Candy's, is a publicity photograph. What do you do to make \na publicity photograph of a giant? You have to establish scale, so you take \na fairly short, normal-looking, man and pose the giant next to him. However, \nyou want to keep the focus of the photograph on the giant, so you pose them \ntogether, maybe shaking hands, so that the second man has his back to the \nviewer, is off-center, and is wearing less noteworthy clothing (possibly a \nplain suit). This explains why Miss Hadow only described the giant and why \nWeer said \"either\" and not \"any\" in \"I've never met either of these people.\"\n\nThis explanation leaves several questions, one being why Tom is wearing the \nsame clothing as Julius. I think this has to be significant and that Wolfe \nis establishing some link between Julius and Tom. Maybe Julius is \nresponsible for Tom's height (people who have followed my postings will \nrealize this is my favorite explanation), or maybe Tom's role in the \nCinderella story relates to Julius in some way. \n\n-Stone Ox" } ] } ] }