Um, that was a joke? Referring to Spain in the quote? And to the Orwell reference? I know where Lepanto is/was. You forgot to point out that Chesterton was not technically a Victorian writer either, which I also know, and was partly the point.
-alga
71 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
I am sorry to disappoint you, but battle of Lepanto had nothing to do with the conquiscadors, except that most Christian soldiers there were Spanish. It was a defensive battle against Turkey. If you think that Europeans having a temerity to defend themselves against an Islamic barbarous invasion constitutes robust Victorian jingoism, I can say nothing more.
I use the word barbarous deliberately. When Famagusta surrendered to the Turks, they made a drum of the skin of the commander.
According to Encyclopedia Britannica
Lepanto, Battle of
(Oct. 7, 1571), naval engagement between allied Christian forces and the Ottoman Turks during an Ottoman campaign to acquire the Venetian island of Cyprus. Seeking to drive Venice from the eastern Mediterranean, the forces of Sultan Selim II invaded Cyprus in 1570. The Venetians formed an alliance with Pope Pius V and Philip II of Spain (May 25, 1571). Philip sent his half brother, Don John of Austria, to command the allied forces. By the time the allies assembled at Messina, Sicily (Aug. 24, 1571), the Turks had captured Nicosia (Sept. 9, 1570), besieged Famagusta, and entered the Adriatic. Their fleet lay in the Gulf of Patras, near Lepanto (N?vpaktos), Greece. The allied fleet of more than 200 ships sailed for Corfu on September 15 and on October 7 advanced in four squadrons against the Ottoman fleet, commanded by Ali Pa a, Mu?ammad Saulak (governor of Alexandria), and Uluj Ali (dey of Algiers). After about four hours of fighting, the allies were victorious, capturing 117 galleys and thousands of men. Of little practical value (Venice surrendered Cyprus to the Turks in 1573), the battle had a great impact on European morale and was the subject of paintings by Titian, Tintoretto, and Veronese.
--
Stanislaus Bocian
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.10 - Release Date: 05-01-10
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Startuj z INTERIA.PL!!! >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1837
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 23:24:13 +0000
From: "Chris" <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) SciFi politics
To: thewynns at earthlink.net, urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net Message-ID: <BAY102-F377D6FA48E9CF4094E5AF286880 at phx.gbl> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
I am undecided on the supply-side economics bit, but I did not think that the gun-ownership bit was clumsily inserted either; it's quite to the point and a real concern in the particular political situation Silk found himself in. And ultimately it seemed to me like Silk's position on guns, at that point, was largely a matter of political pragmatism rather than universal principle. To me, the issue there wasn't "gun control" but rather the distribution of power to individuals in an unstable, revolutionary atmosphere.
I am not sure that Wolfe could even have realistically avoided the subject.
I wouldn't go so far as to endorse this point of view whole-heartedly, but I was struck by how jarring the paeans to supply-side economics and universal gun ownership were in Exodus from the Long Sun. At the time they seemed so clumsily inserted that I wasn't sure if they were satire or GW's views.... Now I assume the latter?
I didn't think they were clumsily inserted. I think they were jarring because the plurality of SciFi writers are politically liberal.
Thus, placing favorable views to gun-ownership and supply-side economics in the mouth of a very simpathic and (presented as) wise character might have caught you unaware if you did not previously know of Wolfe's conservative politics.
~ Crush
_______________________________________________
Urth Mailing List
To post, write urth at urth.net
Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:33:11 -0500
From: "James Wynn" <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) silver glass
To: <urth-urth.net at lists.urth.net>
Message-ID: <014401c4f835$ea6be070$4c1e4b0a at vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Narrator or not) that Horn will succeed in taking Silk to Blue. He will take Silk's body and all his memories (the Narrator makes several errors in memory while on the Whorl that prove he still retains Silk's memories as well as Horn's).
I more or less agree, but now that you've got my interest piqued can you give an example? I don't remember seeing any occasions that made it drop dead certain to me that he had Silk's memories, but then it has been a little while.
Oh that's a fine thing. I can't remember a mistake at this moment but I remember NOTING them as I read RTTW. Also, I don't have my books with me. A cursory search in Amazon's book search does offer this, however, although it is not an error and it is not unequivocal:
Narrator talking to the godling (who refers to him as "holy one"):
"It was as if there were shooting stars in his hands, like the stars at the bottom of the grave to which Silk and Hyacinth had driven Orpine's body in a dream he recalled with uncanny clarity." RTTW 138
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 18:39:51 -0500
From: "Gregg" <gwbest328 at RCN.COM>
Subject: Re: (urth) Ending of The Knight
To: <urth at urth.net>
Message-ID: <002401c4f836$d8948130$55fcaccf@GWB>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:05:05 -0500
From: "James Wynn" <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) Ending of The Knight