{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3594",
    "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": 3594,
    "subject": "argh argh argh",
    "messages": 2,
    "voices": 2,
    "first": "2002-11-19T22:12:36+00:00",
    "last": "2002-11-19T22:53:21+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0211-2194@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "maa32",
        "address": "maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu"
      },
      "date": "2002-11-19T22:12:36+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) argh argh argh",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "OK guys.  I just don't understand.  All these myths of Quetzal, cobra-like, \nclimbing up a tree, clinging like a liana, planting a \"parent tree\" in front \nof his little palace, and no one believes that the inhumi are at all related \nto the vanished gods, the trees?  I can't convince you anymore.  I've cited \nand cited.  I've explained how the inhumi evolved from the vines plaguing the \ntrees sent to terraform the green moon.  Of course Quetzal is like those \nserpent like lianas - his mamma might even be on the tree he planted - a vine \nor something that either came up with the lander, or in the words of Juganu, \nboarded on the red sun whorl in the past since \"(ihumi) are everywhere!\"  \nWhatever.  The fruit is the blood that changes them, gives them knowledge, and \naffects their offspring.  They recombine with the fruit.  \nOf course, once again we have blood equated with vegetable matter, as I've \nbeen arguing.  Re-read the Short Sun books, please.  I don't understand how \nyou can argue with sentient trees. It is in like every chapter.  Please.  \nPlease.  I'll try to avoid repeating myself.  Have a nice day.  Even if you \ndon't believe in time travel or polyploidy, those trees are not only alive but \nsentient and doing weird things and inextricably linked to the inhumi and the \nvanished people. And Horn's abilities --- \"walk through brush\" magic?  !!! \ngive me a break!\nMarc Aramini"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0211-2196@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes",
        "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com"
      },
      "date": "2002-11-19T22:53:21+00:00",
      "subject": "RE: (urth) argh argh argh",
      "in_reply_to": "<urth-v0211-2194@digest.urth.net>",
      "reply_link": "subject",
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "That Subject: line sounds like a pirate trio, eh?"
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "Skipping right to the core of the matter, Marc wrote:\n... and no one believes that the inhumi are at all related \nto the vanished gods, the trees?  "
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Whoa, hee-haw, hold on there boyo!  Y're making _far_ too \nsweeping a statement here.\n\nI believe that most of the list would concede that Wolfe\nintends us to recognize that the trees possess some very,\nvery weird properties, and that the inhumi have some kind\nof relationship to them. \n\nYou've inferred/intuited/iumped to a whole lot of conclusions\nabout the nature of that relationship (including your idea\nthat the \"vanished gods\" -- or was it the VP? -- became the\ntrees). And some of your ideas seem (to me) more \npalatable/plausible/probable as I mull them over, live with\nthem, and in particular as I last reread the SS books with\nthem in mind. Some of them have seemed less so, but I (at\nleast) do not feel prepared to dismiss any of your conclusions\nout of hand.\n\nWhen RttW came out, a number of listmembers reacted to it\nwith what I perceived as undue haste and hostility. I said\nat the time that I believed it would take time for the books\nto sink in, that judging a Wolfe book on the basis of a single \nreading seemed to me like a bad idea. (No, I'm not quoting \nexact words here.) The book came out what, a year and a half\nago? No time at all. NS still yields new insights every time\nwe dig into it; Wolfe wrote SS with nearly twenty years' \nadditional practice in craft under his belt; I don't suppose\nwe can reasonably expect it to be _less_, well, crafty.\n\nI suggest only that your attachment to these ideas is as\npremature as rejecting them outright. I don't believe we \neven have the beginnings of a solid handle on the SS \nbooks yet."
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}