{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3448", "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": 3448, "subject": "Heavy Hyacinth", "messages": 9, "voices": 5, "first": "2002-09-07T15:59:34+00:00", "last": "2002-09-09T21:18:24+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-09-07T15:59:34+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "At 06:37 PM 9/6/2002, Roy wrote:\nCrush asks:\nIs anyone aware of any textual evidence that non-military chems are not\nlight-weight? I know Sand was five-hundred weight, but that was useful for\nhis function." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Yes. Silk was no weakling -- he threw Mamelta over his shoulder and ran with\nher, bad ankle and all, after Lemur was killed. Yet when Marble/Rose was\ntelling him about Blood's birth, and it finally dawned on Silk that somehow\nRose was speaking through Marble, he tested his theory:\n\n \"Watching carefully for her reaction, Silk said, 'I would have carried\nyou, Maytera, if I could; but I knew you'd be too heavy for me to lift.'\"\n(LS3, 4; p. 119 pb.)\n\nAlso, earlier, following Marble's collapse after being possessed by Echidna,\nSilk gave her a hand to help her to her feet: \"He heaved with all his\nstrength, reawakening the half-healed wounds left by the beak of the\nwhite-headed one.\" (ibid. 117)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Then doesn't that settle the question of whether Hyacinth was a \nchem? I guess I don't remember anybody's picking her up, but OTOH I don't \nrecall anything about her being too heavy to heave!\n\nNutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2002-09-09T15:16:26+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nutria (Coypu) quoted:\n\"Watching carefully for her reaction, Silk said, 'I would have carried you,\nMaytera, if I could; but I knew you'd be too heavy for me to lift.'\"\n(LS3, 4; p. 119 pb.)\n\nThat doesn't that settle the question of whether Hyacinth was a\nchem? I guess I don't remember anybody's picking her up, but OTOH I don't\nrecall anything about her being too heavy to heave!\n\n\nCrush whimpers:\nI'm afraid it does. Silk picked her up two or three times and when he does,\nthe narrator notes her light weight. I don't' have the references but I did\n(do) note them as clues after the last reference. By that time I knew that a\nre-reading of the book was necessary to figure out what it was a clue to.\n\nThose of the bio-Hyacinth side should mark this down as special victory. I\ncertainly would if the tables were turned. As I said, I consider her light\nweight a clue because I don't believe Wolfe repeats a description without it\nbeing a clue to something (and why offer a clue that Hy is human?).\n\nStill the only reason I'm not on my back on the mat from this shot to the\nmelon listening dreamily to the referee's count is Andrew Reeve's recent\nlinkage of Jonas to this discussion. Jonas was notably light-weight. I\noccurred to me then that Jonas' eventual conversion was just like - or\nsimilar - to what (I argue) Hy did.\n\nThis makes me believe two things - one of which makes me ambivalently happy\nand the other not at all happy. (1) I'll have to re-read The Book of the New\nSun to search for similarities between Hy and Jonas. (2) The nature of\nJonas' transformation has never been fully explained so the negative clues\nof Hy's apparent humanity may never be resolved.\n\nIs it inconceivable that a Hy and Jonas could be based on similar\nengineering concepts? No, it could be that Wolfe sees the engineering\nchanges necessary to transform a chem to bio involves processes that have\nthe added (potential) benefit of lightening their weight (removal of a\nhardened outer chasis, etc.) Or, it could be merely a literary connection,\nthe details of which Wolfe has left to the readers.\n\nI reiterate that clues that Hyacinth is human, that she is female, does not\nresolve clues that she is not. I realize that I am partly to blame for your\nskepticism for posting a theory that I had not fully developed (just \"hey!\nLook at all the suggestions that Hy is chem!\"), but an alternate theory to\nexplain the clues and Silk's explanation to Horn would be useful to me." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-09-09T16:44:40+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 10:16 AM 9/9/2002, you wrote:\nI reiterate that clues that Hyacinth is human, that she is female, does not\nresolve clues that she is not. I realize that I am partly to blame for your\nskepticism for posting a theory that I had not fully developed (just \"hey!\nLook at all the suggestions that Hy is chem!\"), but an alternate theory to\nexplain the clues and Silk's explanation to Horn would be useful to me." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Setting aside whether all the mooted clues are really clues or \nmight just be misinterpretations: We can always fall back on thematic \nrather than literal associations. If the name Hyacinth is also a pointer to \nApollo, this relationship stands without her having to be a male. (Look, \nSilk is NOT going to be a homosexual, or engage in homosexual acts. Not in \nanything by Gene Wolfe.) Similarly, the fact that her name can also be that \nof a rock can point to the need for human beings to \"reach down\" and rescue \n\"lesser\" humans, in this case chems, without Hy's actually being a chem. We \nget the same theme in Short Sun, where the humans must live in such a way \nas to redeem the inhumi.\n Hy needs rescuing, clearly. She needs a REAL lover, and for Wolfe \nthat's always God and His agents. To add that she's positioned like the \nchems only adds to the theme. But it does not mean she IS a chem.\n All the stuff about the intelligence and personality of the chems \nand how it might come to pass is interesting, but ultimately irrelevant \nthematically. Wolfe makes them persons. Period. They are like Cordwainer \nSmith's \"underpeople.\" Wolfe and Smith write \"theological SF.\" So, to get \ntheological for a moment, if something can \"speak,\" it has some \nrelationship to the Word of God, and thus has some relationship to God and \nGod's agents. True of Oreb and the kitty cat whose name I forget also. One \nway or another, both writers are playing with this notion.\n As the Theoanthropos has come down from the Increate to redeem \nhumanity, so those redeemed by the Theoanthropos have a duty to go down and \nredeem the sub-human world. Wolfe is not an environmentalist, but he is a \nconservationist. I.e., he's not a neo-Hindu but a conscientious Christian \nin his view of the animal world. Human beings should the shepherds of \ncreation, not the exploiters of it. This is a large concern in some of his \nshorter writings (especially those about wolves -- duh!). So, thematically \nwe should not be surprised to detect various expressions of that concern in \nthese larger books.\n I say you've advanced the discussion, but thematically, not as \nregards the \"literal\" \"facts\" of the narrative.\n FWIW.\n\nNutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-09-09T14:15:18+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Actually, Smith's robots too. And that is a linkage I had not really\nconsidered.\n\nThe robots in Smith's stories may be precursors of the chems and of the many\n\"moral\" mechanisms in Wolfe's stories (which reach as far back as the guard\nrobots in 5HC)\n\n hartshorn\n\n\n----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"James Jordan\" \n All the stuff about the intelligence and personality of the chems\nand how it might come to pass is interesting, but ultimately irrelevant\nthematically. Wolfe makes them persons. Period. They are like Cordwainer\nSmith's \"underpeople.\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2002-09-09T16:58:02+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hartshorn wrote ... " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The robots in Smith's stories may be precursors of the chems \nand of the many \"moral\" mechanisms in Wolfe's stories (which \nreach as far back as the guard robots in 5HC)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...okay, I'm blanking. The only robots I remember from\nSmith are the Manshonyaggers, which I somehow can't really\nthink of as \"moral.\" What am I forgetting ..." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Andy Robertson", "address": "andywrobertson at clara.co.uk" }, "date": "2002-09-09T14:30:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The robots in \"The Dead Lady Of Clown Town\".\n\nLady Panc Ashash, stuck in a robot body as a travel guide:\n\nand the fighter robots sent to kill D'Joan\n\n\n\n\nThis is what we all remember: the first authentic picture tape of the entire\nincident:\n\nThe gold and black sergeant, his milky eyes staring at the Lady Panc Ashash\n\nThe Lady herself, in the pleasant old robot body, lifting a commanding\nhand.\n\nElaine, distraught, half-turning as though she would grab the robot by his\nright arm. Her head is moving so rapidly that her black hair swings as she\nturns.\n\nCharley-is-my-darling shouting, \"I love, love, love!\" at a small hand-\nsome man with mouse-colored hair. The man is gulping and saying nothing.\n\nAll this we know.\n\nThen comes the unbelievable, which we now believe, the event for which\nthe stars and worlds were unprepared.\n\nMutiny.\n\nRobot mutiny.\n\nDisobedience in open daylight.\n\nThe words are hard to hear on the tape, but we can still make them out.\n\nThe recording device on the police ornithopter had gotten a square fix on\nthe face of the Lady Pane Ashash. Lip-readers can see the words plainly;\nnon-lip-readers can hear the words the third or fourth time the tape is run\nthrough the eyebox.\n\nSaid the Lady, \"Overridden.\"\n\nSaid the sergeant, \"No, you're a robot.\"\n\n\"See for yourself. Read my brain. I am a robot. I am also a woman. You\ncannot disobey people. I am people. I love you. Furthermore, you are\npeople. You think. We love each other. Try. Try to attack.\"\n\n\"I cannot,\" said the robot sergeant, his milky eyes seeming to spin\nwith excitement. \"You love me? You mean I'm alive? I exist?\"\n\n\"With love, you do,\" said the Lady Pane Ashash. \"Look at her,\" said the\nLady, pointing to Joan, \"because she has brought you love.\"\n\nThe robot looked and disobeyed the law. His squad looked with him.\n\nHe turned back to the Lady and bowed to her: \"Then you know what we\nmust do, if we cannot obey you and cannot disobey the others.\"\n\"Do it,\"she said sadly, \"but know what you are doing. You are not really\nescaping two human commands. You are making achoice. You. That makes\nyou men.\"\n\nThe sergeant turned to his squad ot man-sized robots: \"You hear that?\n\nShe says we are men. I believe her. Do you believe her?\"\n\n\"We do,\" they cried almost unanimously.\n\nThis is where the picture-tape ends. but we can imagine how the scene\nwas concluded. Elaine had stopped short, just behind the sergeant-robot.\nThe other robots had come up behind her. Charley-is-my-darling had\nstopped talking. Joan was in the act oflifting her hands in blessing, her\nwarm\nbrown dog eyes gone wide with pity and understanding.\nPeople wrote down the things that we cannot see . . . .\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAnd many more\n\n\n hartshorn\n\n\n\n----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \nTo: \nSent: Monday, September 09, 2002 5:58 PM\nSubject: RE: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth\nHartshorn wrote ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The robots in Smith's stories may be precursors of the chems\nand of the many \"moral\" mechanisms in Wolfe's stories (which\nreach as far back as the guard robots in 5HC)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "...okay, I'm blanking. The only robots I remember from\nSmith are the Manshonyaggers, which I somehow can't really\nthink of as \"moral.\" What am I forgetting ...\n\n--Blattid\n\n\n--" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "tom", "address": "tom at bitterman.net" }, "date": "2002-09-09T19:02:53+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "James Jordan writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "We can always fall back on thematic rather than literal\nassociations. If the name Hyacinth is also a pointer to \nApollo, this relationship stands without her having to\nbe a male." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Silk:Jesus::Hyacinth::Mary Magdelene?\n\nI realize this is a bit obvious. Still, it could fit into an\noverall pattern where Wolfe sends Christ-types on \"alternate\nhistory\" style adventures. Here the variant is \"What would have\nhappened had Christ become a rabbi and married Mary Magdelene?\"" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2002-09-09T20:52:44+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 02:02 PM 9/9/2002, you wrote:\nJames Jordan writes:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "We can always fall back on thematic rather than literal\nassociations. If the name Hyacinth is also a pointer to\nApollo, this relationship stands without her having to\nbe a male." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Silk:Jesus::Hyacinth::Mary Magdelene?\n\nI realize this is a bit obvious. Still, it could fit into an\noverall pattern where Wolfe sends Christ-types on \"alternate\nhistory\" style adventures. Here the variant is \"What would have\nhappened had Christ become a rabbi and married Mary Magdelene?\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oh, no doubt about it. I don't think it's so much the \"what if\" as it is \nthat the penitent Magdelene has always been a symbol of the Church. She is \nthe new Eve who encounters the New Gardener in the New Garden in John's gospel.\n\nNutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2002-09-09T21:18:24+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Heavy Hyacinth", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nutria declares\nWe can always fall back on thematic rather than literal associations. If the\nname Hyacinth is also a pointer to Apollo, this relationship stands without\nher having to be a male. (Look, Silk is NOT going to be a homosexual, or\nengage in homosexual acts. Not in anything by Gene Wolfe.)\n\nCrush responds:\nExcellent point that Hy does not HAVE to be male to be thematically\nconnected to Hyacinthus. Of course, there are myriads of heterosexual love\naffairs of Apollo's that Wolfe could have chosen. As for whether Wolfe would\n*never* have a good-guy protagonist engage in a homosexual act - one might\naxiomatically assert that he wouldn't have such a character wander from\nwoman to woman having casual sex (ala Severian). But I agree that *Silk* is\nnot homosexual. Incidentally, I do \"rescue\" a priest from closet\nhomosexuality by identifying Incus as female - and since closet\nhomosexuality is a malicious stereo-type of priests, I doubt Wolfe would\ncoddle it.\n\nBut the homosexual argument is moot in this case because a chem is not\nhuman. Their \"sexuality\" is not mammalian; it is only modeled on human\nroles. \"Male\" or \"Female\" roles for chems is no more applicable for humans\nthan male and female electrical connections. When Jonas becomes human he\nchoose to be a human male due to his love for Jolenta not due to a sexual\npreference in a mammalian sense. The machismo aspect of Typhon's culture\n(exemplified in the requirement of a physically hale male heir) caused all\nthe chem soldiers to needlessly be \"male\"- and this causes the plight of the\nchems.\n\nI reiterate that if Hy is a male chem, it does not make her relationship\nwith Silk homosexual. That is not the \"taint\" in their love-making.\nPersonally, I consider very impressive plotting that IMO Wolfe wove the\nhomosexual undertone of the Apollo/Hyacinthus story into the Silk's love\naffair without making Silk homosexual (in ANY sense).\n\nNutria elaborates:\nSimilarly, the fact that her name can also be that\nof a rock can point to the need for human beings to \"reach down\" and rescue\n\"lesser\" humans, in this case chems, without Hy's actually being a chem. We\nget the same theme in Short Sun, where the humans must live in such a way\nas to redeem the inhumi.\n\nCrush responds:\nExcellent point again, that Hy can be \"associated\" with chems without having\nto be chem - for example she is associated with Marble in the parallel\nCrone-Nymph-Maiden triads (Marble-Rose-Mint = Hy-Chenille-Nettle). She could\nplay the crone as does Marble without being a chem like Marble.\n\nStill, (perhaps this comes up in the Short Sun books) I didn't note the\ntheme where the chems need special rescuing. They aren't slave labor in\nViron, they have full legal rights as persons. I was actually surprised to\nsee so few of the chem army (or any chems except Marble) following Remora to\nBlue.\n\nI agree with you that chems are persons. The discussion about taluses with\nthe brown mechanic directly rubs out all significant distinction between the\npsyches of chems and bios. As for Oreb and Tick, I'm not sure. Both of them\nwere purchased at different times for a sacrifice - one by Silk and the\nother by Hy. I don't recall any move to free the animals in the market.\nThere is the loyalty of Oreb in his hostility to Tick (for being a\nTrivigaunte spy who eventually betrays Silk's meeting with the\nAyuntamiento), but quite often the motives seem limited to the basics (food,\nsurvival, etc.).\n\nAs for Silk's despondency being due to Hy's unfaithfulness, I have been\nassuming that occurred *after* Silk's discussion with Horn - on the trip\nback. The Mantis' additional explanation of the being the \"lie\" being due to\nhelp from Kypris - that's a good rationalization but, gosh, I like mine\nbetter -- it seems to pull Silk's entire explanation together.\n\nOn that point, I never imagined Hy was a chem until I read that conversation\non the airship - up until that time, I was merely perplexed by their\nrelationship. Sure I knew her name could be read as ambivalent - just as\nChenille's and Villus' can -- but what did it mean?. Like you I had lots of\ntheories about how she was connected thematically to chems - particularly\nMarble. But after Silk's despondency, the chem theory seemed to answer all\nmy questions (while adding the problem of explaining the flags to the\ncontrary). It answered for me why their relationship, Hy's behavior, and\neveryone's reaction to the relationship seemed \"off\". If it never seemed\nthat way to you, then I doubt you'll be compelled by anything I say on this\nsubject - I myself came to this explanation begrudgingly.\n\nNutria gushes ;-):\nI say you've advanced the discussion, but thematically, not as regards the\n\"literal\" \"facts\" of the narrative.\n\nCrush responds:\nWell I'll happily take what I can get. Thanks. :-D\n\n--Crush" } ] } ] }