Subject: (urth) catamites and narrators

From: maa32 <maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 04:28:32 +0000

Just a short note based off an old point made by James Jordan:
he claimed that Wolfe would never have a protagonist with homosexual 
encounters.  However,there is some evidence that works against this both in 
Fifth Head of Cerberus, in the relationship of Blood and Musk, and in the 
strange commentary made by Severian about little Severian - (when he insists 
that he didn't have anything to do with molesting the child, who would have 
thought of that before he brought it up?  He plants the seed in the mind with 
his occupatio - "I didn't do it, so don't think I did")

Blood and Musk aren't evil becuase they are homosexual.  Not even in Wolfe.  
To have Severian defend himself creates a bit of suspicion, doesn't it?  And 
Additionally, Mr. Borski has already elucidated on the strange preoccupation 
with circumsicions and various other repressed evidence of homosexual behavior 
in The Fifth Head of Cerberus, available at Cave Canem.  For an author who 
should be a bit opposed to it, there seems to be an awful lot of it in his 
books - and a lot of it that goes relatively uncommented upon, too.  While 
Wolfe may be clearly anti-feminist at times, I don't pick up this hostility to 
the very idea of homosexuality.  After all, he loves Proust's Remembrance of 
Things Past.  Just my two cents on something that was said many days ago.  
Sorry I'm so far behind.
Marc Aramini

--

---

From: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 14:46:04 +0000

>his occupatio - "I didn't do it, so don't think I did")

         Sorry I was unclear. I meant a "Christian moral exemplar" like 
Silk would not be involved in homosexual acts, in Wolfe. Severian is a 
"Christian symbol," but not much of a moral exemplar.

Nutty-Ria

--

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 16:02:10 +0000

> encounters.  

While acknowledging Nutria's correction to "Christian moral 
exemplar," I wish to observe that it wasn't really necessary. 
Wolfe does not, in my opinion, involve any protagonist in such 
an encounter.

> However,there is some evidence that works against this both in 
> Fifth Head of Cerberus,

With all due respect, Number Five is not a "protagonist." 5HC
has none; it has viewpoint characters, but we do not -- I think
it's clear that we are not supposed to -- "identify" with them.
They are horrible, and we perceive them as horrible, and if any
single thing is clear from the cryptic last line of the first
novella, it's that there is no salvation or hope for any of 
them unless they are radically changed.

> in the relationship of Blood and Musk,

Hardly protagonists. That would be Silk. Musk is one of 
several clearly and unambiguously evil figures in tBotLS;
even his "love" is deeply warped by his evil. Blood is
a more ambiguous figure, and at times there seems to be
hope for him, but in the end he dies in, and because of, 
his own corruption.

> and in the strange commentary made by Severian about little
> Severian - (when he insists that he didn't have anything to
> do with molesting the child, who would have thought of that
> before he brought it up?  

Anyone familiar with the culture of the Commonwealth, I
think. As Nutria points out, Severian is not a "Christian
moral exemplar," but he does seem to be very heterosexual
... unless you want to go for the "don-Juanism as a cover
for homosexuality" blag. 

On the other hand, Severian commits almost every other
sexual sin available to him in the circumstances of his
travels -- incest, fornication, a kind of adultery, 
rape ... though not, as near as I can recall, bestiality
-- so the lack of homosex actually kind of stands out as
a blatant absence, donnit?

> Blood and Musk aren't evil becuase they are homosexual.  Not 

No, though it might be argued that they're homosexual because
they're evil.

> While Wolfe may be clearly anti-feminist at times, I don't 
> pick up this hostility to the very idea of homosexuality. 

I think one point is that feminism is a political postion, 
while "homosexuality" (i.e., actual homosexual _acts_) are
a sin. The one is something that can be vigorously opposed;
the other is ... well, the orthodox Christian and Catholic 
position is that we are all sinners. I'm not to concentrate
on your sin, but my own. And sins like homosexuality are, 
in the end, appetitive sins and so not as extreme as sins
like blasphemy and violence. (Well, except in the somewhat 
extreme moral theology that regards all sexual sins as 
blasphemy against the Image of God.)

--

---

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 22:24:51 +0000

--- Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <ddanehy at siebel.com> wrote:
...
> it's clear that we are not supposed to -- "identify" with them.

I certainly identified with Number 5, despite his great differences
from me, and I think the reader is supposed to.  I don't have any
problem with calling him the protagonist of the story.  Not the
hero.

> them unless they are radically changed.

Now I agree with that.
...

> a blatant absence, donnit?

Simply because all Severian's sexual acts require the same
preference--grown women--whereas homosexuality, pedophilia,
bestiality, latex, etc. require other preferences?  Regardless
of which ones you consider sinful and which you don't.

Incidentally, if by incest and "a kind of adultery" you mean
his relationship with Dorcas, I really think those are Not
His Fault.
...

Jerry Friedman

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
http://news.yahoo.com

--

---

From: Robert Borski <rborski at charter.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 01:01:06 +0000

Marc Aramini writing originally:

>For an author who
> the very idea of homosexuality.

> Wolfe does not, in my opinion, involve any protagonist in such

Among my many works-in-progress (most of which will probably never see light
of day), but promised to another venue, is an essay entitled "The Stained
Altar Boy: The Pederast as Villain in the Works of Gene Wolfe." In it I hope
to show that while on the whole Wolfe has remained relatively
non-judgemental about homosexuality, he has frequently cast pederasts as
villains, both major and minor, in a number of his works; whether it's the
original John Marsch of Earth; the nameless physician in Vodalus's camp who
sleeps with the youth Mamas; or Pasicrates, who may see in Latro the ideal
victim (and whose continued sexual exploitation may be the source of Latro's
deep depression at the end of ARETE, it being sensed but not remembered by
our hero); moreover, how (with the exception of the middle example above)
the pederastic acts are all off-stage and never directly mentioned, but must
be deduced (Wolfe being far too subtle a writer to offer us an easily
recognized child molester as villain).

Blattid again

> rape ... though not, as near as I can recall, bestiality

But he does bed larval Apheta, who is clearly outside our species, and
immature to boot. To some--and especially those factions on Urth who see all
aliens as cacogens ("those filthy born"), this may constitute bestiality.

Robert Borski

--

---

From: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 01:32:42 +0000

At 08:01 PM 9/16/2002, Borski wrote:

>Altar Boy: The Pederast as Villain in the Works of Gene Wolfe."

Good points, and there are other examples also. But I question your title, 
since Wolfe grew up outside the Roman Catholic church. I doubt he had much 
if any knowledge of this problem growing up -- though I cannot recall if 
Louisiana was where he spent time as a youth, so he might have encountered 
it by hearsay. At any rate, I would question whether he had altar boy 
molestation in mind as he wrote these works -- as your title would imply to 
most readers of your essay.

FWIW

Nutria

--

---

From: Alice K. Turner <aturner6 at nyc.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 03:35:40 +0000

From: "Jerry Friedman"

> his relationship with Dorcas, I really think those are Not

I agree. It is certainly an original situation, and one that could only
occur in SF. Both were unaware of it. Wolfe surely meant it to be
provocative: more power--and I think he intended intellectual power to
consider it--to him. It is the sort of thing SF seems to me to be meant to
explore. If "a kind of adultery" refers to Cyriaca, well, I can't get too
exercised about that, either. Nor rape if that refers to Jolenta, good
grief! And fornication--since when do we start bleating about that? Yikes.
Pederasty would be entirely different and entirely more reprehensible than
any of the above as they are presented. Baldanders does seem to be guilty,
but he also commits a lot of crimes and tortures. Which, it seems to me,
would indicate that pederasty is Not Permissible to a Hero, i.e. sinful.

>> Blood and Musk aren't evil because they are homosexual.  Not
>> even in Wolfe.

> No, though it might be argued that they're homosexual because they're
evil.

> pick up this hostility to the very idea of homosexuality.

Nor I, though it's a genre trope that occasionally crops up. So no, I don't
think a lack of homosex for Sev stands out at all.

-alga

--

---

From: matthew.malthouse <matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 10:19:33 +0000

>with circumsicions and various other repressed evidence of homosexual
behavior
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

<Profound boggle>

What in hell connects circumcision with repressed evidence of homosexual
behaviour?

>To have Severian defend himself creates a bit of suspicion, doesn't it?
And
......
>Things Past.  Just my two cents on something that was said many days ago.

Not hostile.  The character's little commentary in the area of sexuality
seems to be generally neutral.

However examples of such behaviour, such as Severian's glimpse of what he
speculates might be Baldanders' catamite, are invariably associated with
the "other side" (to be Manichean about it).

Severian doesn't say that he was tempted to paederasty with little Sev,
rather that others would assume that he was.  Perhaps it is more a
commentary on the society of the Commonwealth than on Severian (then and
later as author) that the posibility existed and any assumption worth
pre-emtive denial.

Matthew

--

---

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:36:25 +0000

> most readers of your essay.

I think this problem has featured in stereotypes of the Catholic
church for centuries (see _Candide_), probably for over a millennium,
believed by many among both the knowledgeable and the ignorant.  Want
to read a joke?  I didn't think so.

-- 
Jerry Friedman

--

---

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:50:00 +0000

...
> recognized child molester as villain).

An interesting topic.  I just want to mention that I don't think
it's accurate to call Pasicrates' exploitation of Latro pederasty,
since Latro is a grown man.

Jerry Friedman

--

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at hotpop.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 16:09:46 +0000

--- Robert Borski <rborski at charter.net> wrote:
...Pasicrates, who may see in Latro the ideal victim (and whose continued
sexual exploitation may be the source of Latro's deep depression at the end
of ARETE, it being sensed but not remembered by our hero); moreover, how
(with the exception of the middle example above) the pederastic acts are all
off-stage and never directly mentioned, but must be deduced (Wolfe being far
too subtle a writer to offer us an easily recognized child molester as
villain).

Jerry Friedman then responded:
An interesting topic.  I just want to mention that I don't think it's
accurate to call Pasicrates' exploitation of Latro pederasty,
since Latro is a grown man.

Crush interjects:
I was pretty sure that Pasicrates never had his way with Latro, although he
wanted to. He tried to "force his hand" and lost it. I don't think see any
hint that he was successful after Latro's return from the North. Are there
some things specifically you noted? Latro's depression was surely due to the
death of his lover, the Amazon (whose name I can't remember right now).

--

---

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 17:09:44 +0000

> death of his lover, the Amazon (whose name I can't remember right now).

Don't mind me.  I'd forgotten that incident and was believing Robert.
I'll leave this one to people who have the book.

Jerry Friedman

--

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:07:26 +0000

Things are arriving at my machine in weird, random order.

> I agree. 

As do I, regarding incest. And so what? Consider Oedipus. Incest 
appears to be so vile that even unknown, it pollutes the world. 
Yet this is that world's savior ... go figure.

As for "a kind of adultery," what I basically meant was infidelity
in his going after Jolenta right after his reunion with Dorcas.

> It is certainly an original situation, and one that could only
> occur in SF. 

True; and only because Dorcas is not (or does not appear to be)
a timewalker is Severian prevented from singing the old convention
favorite that ends "... I am my own grampaaaaw!"

> If "a kind of adultery" refers to Cyriaca, well, I 
> can't get too exercised about that, either. 

Good heavens, I'd forgotten that. Skip "a kind of."

> Nor rape if that refers to Jolenta, good grief! And
> fornication--since when do we start bleating about 
> that? Yikes.

Since we are speaking of traditional Catholic sexual morality,
that's since when. Not late-twentieth/early-twenty-first-
century American secular humanist morality. In which case the
content of sin is not only intentional but formal; and my point 
is not whether Severian is "guilty" (the issue of intention) 
of any or all of these things: it is that he formally does 
commit them, but somehow homosexuality seems to be left out of 
the mix.

--

---

From: Matthew Weber <mweber at library.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:19:19 +0000

>Yet this is that world's savior ... go figure.

Yes, but the ethical/religious world of Sophocles isn't the same as that of 
Wolfe.  In Sophocles (as in the Old Testament, come to think of it:  cf. 
Uzziah and the Ark of the Covenant) it doesn't matter than Oedipus was an 
unknowing wrongdoer; he was guilty of patricide and incest, even if the 
former was self-defense and he had no idea he was committing the 
latter.  Wolfe's sensibility is Christian:  intent is more important than 
result, or at least as important.

Matthew Weber
Curatorial Assistant
Music Library
University of California, Berkeley

My father hath chastised you with whips, but I will chastise you with 
scorpions.
         The Holy Bible (The Old Testament):  _The First Book of the 
Kings_, chapter 12, verse 11

--

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at hotpop.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:39:33 +0000

Marc Arami suggested:
...or Pasicrates, who may see in Latro the ideal victim (and whose continued
sexual exploitation may be the source of Latro's deep depression at the end
of ARETE, it being sensed but not remembered by our hero)
Crush interjected:
I was pretty sure that Pasicrates never had his way with Latro, although he
wanted to. He tried to "force his hand" and lost it. I don't think see any
hint that he was successful after Latro's return from the North. Are there
some things specifically you noted? Latro's depression was surely due to the
death of his lover, the Amazon (whose name I can't remember right now).

Jerry Friedman defered:

Crush responds:
Actually I was directing my question to all readers and participants of this
thread. Important details in Wolfe's works frequently walk right under my
nose (which is no surprise to some).

--

---

From: StoneOx17 <stoneox17 at aol.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 14:07:41 +0000

In a message dated 9/17/2002, matthew.malthouse at guardian.co.uk writes

> >Additionally, Mr. Borski has 
> >already elucidated on the strange preoccupation with circumsicions 
> >and various other repressed evidence of homosexual behavior. 

> What in hell connects circumcision with repressed evidence of 
> homosexual behaviour?

You're parsing this incorrectly.  It's not circumcision that's connected 
with homosexual behavior, it's strange preoccupation with it.  

In Fifth Head of Cerberus, the teenage Victor serves as a guide for 
John Marsch in an expedition to the backcountry to search for abos.
John Marsch writes in his journal about how he watches Victor bathing,
and notes that he is umcircumcised.  He also writes in the journal
that he suspects that Victor is sneaking off to have sex with an abo 
girl, and that if he catches them, he will probably kill them both.  

Altogether, this is generally taken as evidence for Marsch's homosexuality.
(Although arguably, he might just be mad at Victor for withholding
evidence that the abos really exist.)  This was discussed in much more 
detail a while back in a thread called "uncut dogs."

SPOILERS AHEAD

It just occurred to me that this is why Victor killed Marsch.  This murder 
is so obviously against Victor's self-interest -- Marsch serving as Victor's 
only conceivable ticket to a college education and a better life -- that
I had assumed that he hadn't committed it, but that Marsch had been 
killed by a ghoul-bear (the near escape from which Victor later writes 
about in Marsch's diary).  However, self-defense against rape is not only
a plausible reason for murder, but beautifully parallels Number 5's murder 
of Maitre.  Now, I'm going to have to reread 5HC to look for more
evidence of this rape (which is probably very subtle, if it's there at all,
since both Victor and Marsch have good reason not to mention it).

- Stone Ox

--