Subject: (urth) A Knight question

From: transentient <transentient at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 05:05:46 +0000

Hello, brand new rabid Wolfe fan here (just discovered him last year,  
I've read like 17 of his books  since). I've been browsing the  
archives here for a few months and I'd like to say thanks back  
through time to all for the enlightening posts over the years.

Here's a quick Knight question I don't think I've seen posted before:  
While Grengarm was dying, Able says that he opened his mouth and then  
something about "things which had been hidden were revealed to me."

I am assuming that Grengarm showed him a face inside of his mouth, as  
Setr opening his mouth and speaking to Able with Garceg's face. So  
who was Grengarm's inner face? Did I miss something that was actually  
stated, or was this maybe, something he had forgotten while in  
Aelfrice the first time, but would soon forget again anyways, once he  
was kissed by the Valkyrie?

Thanks!

---

From: Chris <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 22:26:52 +0000

I am pretty sure I am not inventing this idea myself - though I didn't find 
it in a cursory search of the archives - but one semi-obvious way to look at 
the layered worlds in the Knight is as a sort of map of the human mind, a 
sort of psychological theater. I couldn't tell you where to find it, but I 
am pretty sure that I've read someone, somewhere, present this as a way of 
explaining certain myths.

In any event, just looking at the lower realms, you have:
Aelfrice, the level of base desires (as represented by the Aelf)
Muspel, a subconscious level filled with massive, ancient and frightening 
urges (as represented by the dragons)
Niflheim, the layer of the id itself (the Most Low God)

It is more difficult to place the higher realms, especially since I don't 
have any background in psychology. Mythgarthr seems to a layer corresponding 
to the conscious will or ego. Skai seems a layer populated by our higher 
ideals of virtue, and Kleos seems an inherently religious realm. I can't 
even begin to speculate about that.

Certain things become intuitively obvious when you look at the universe of 
the Knight this way. For instance, the problem with "worshipping" in the 
wrong direction - action is led by base desire instead of rationality or the 
higher impulses. Also, the seeming omnipresence of the mother figure, which 
at least one other poster here has commented on.

Able's relationship with Disiri becomes correlated with erotic or courtly 
love, which compels him more than any other type of love in his life. Note 
that there is no question of marriage, offspring, or families when it comes 
to their bond; it is an overly romanticized love, eternal and free of 
consequence. They wander the gardens of Aelfrice as playmates and eternal 
children, in a certain sense. This also puts Able's act at the end of the 
Wizard in a different - and I think better - perspective. It is not that he 
is lifting up or redeeming the woman: in my mind there have already been too 
many stories of "the good man who steps in and redeems the helplessly base 
woman". What he is elevating is his own love from something base and selfish 
to something... well, at least *slightly* higher.

Incorporated as well is a theme of the need for self-restraint that runs all 
the way through the story, in different ways, from beginning to end. Able 
has the power to impose his will on the events of the story - it is not a 
question of whether he CAN (whether he is Able), it is a question of whether 
he MAY. And the difference between the questions of "can" and "may" is 
constantly being brought up by Able throughout both books.

But this does bring up some other questions. First of all why does the 
Valfather demand that Able not use his power, and yet when Able does break 
his promise at the end he does so with the Valfather's blessing? Perhaps 
this is some indication that we cannot tame our baser instincts by force, 
that the issues must be wrestled with at their own level first. I don't know 
whether this counts as an adequate answer or not.

Another question is where the giants (of all levels) fit into this schema. 
It seems an important fact that they can love, but cannot be loved (and thus 
are fundamentally at odds with each other), but I am at a loss as to what to 
make of it. Similarly I find it difficult to place Kullili, even though we 
know quite a bit about her relationship with the Aelf. And, for that matter, 
what is Able's nature? He seems to inhabit Skai, Aelfrice, and Mythgarthr 
equally well. Perhaps this is some reflection of the different roles that 
the knightly ideal has played, from some perspectives being something to 
aspire to and yet also (at least for many on this list) something to look 
down upon. It is interesting that after Able restores Berthold and retires 
to Aelfrice, he sees him again from below; it is Berthold (a more modern 
heroic ideal) and not any knight who slays Schildstarr.

This post is quite scattered, and much of what's in it will be either 
painfully obvious or staunchly denied, but I wanted to throw some of this 
out there and see if anyone else could help elaborate on it.

Regards,
Chris

---

From: Chris <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2005 22:31:57 +0000

When Grengarm opened his mouth, Able saw the faces of his victims - I don't 
think that there was any specific person's face in Grengarm's mouth that 
comprises the revelation Able is talking about.

I think that what Able is talking about there is that he had seen Garsecg's 
face in Setr's mouth earlier, and at that moment realized the implications - 
that if there had been a "real" Garsecg at one time, that sea aelf had been 
consumed and displaced by Setr.

>_______________________________________________
>Urth Mailing List
>To post, write urth at urth.net
>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

---

From: James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 03:31:50 +0000

Chris said:
>it in a cursory search of the archives - but one semi-obvious way to look
>at the layered worlds in the Knight is as a sort of map of the human mind,
>a sort of psychological theater. I couldn't tell you where to find it, but
>I am pretty sure that I've read someone, somewhere, present this as a
>way of explaining certain myths.

Perhaps, maybe, this was me.
here:
http://lists.urth.net/htdig.cgi/urth-urth.net/2005-January/000298.html
I said:
>The ambulance? That's Arthur Ormsby being taken to the hospital
>of course! They found him in a coma possibly near death from
>hypothermia in that valley where the Moss Aelf took him.
>Presumably, when he reaches the Most High God, he will awake.

I'm not convinced one can map the entire story upon a theory of the human
psyche. Maybe it can be done. I don't know.

But I think that two things are surely true about this story.

1) The first is that lower worlds represent lower human desires (gods).
Aelfrice is Romantic love. I'm not sure what else. Muspel is lust..for sex
and power. Nifelheim...I don't know. Physical hunger? The Most Low God is
anybody's guess. What is the most basic human desire after all other desires
are stripped away? To continue to live regardless of the consequences?
Mythgarthr is a tough one, I think. The desire to create? For Wolfe of
course this means storytelling, so that would explain why Mythgarthr means
"the place where story's are told." Skai is the desire for honor. Who knows
what Michael's realm represents, but he tells Able that as a knight, he must
command his lower gods just has *he* causes, by simple will, Valfather to
bow before him. When Able learns to do that, Disiri transcends her world to
become something more. He can enjoy his relationship with her, in Aelfrice,
without being debilitated by her or being dominated. He can even take her
with him to Skai.

Unless, I don't know this list at all. Not a few people will be revolted by
this interpretation.

2) The second thing I'm sure of is that Able and his family...his brother
and his mother...perhaps Ben's girlfriend too have aspects (natures) in all
of the worlds; multiple aspects probably. (Heck! Perhaps they all are
*wink*) Valfather and Michael are higher aspects of Able (there is a
mythological and archeological connection between Odin and St. Michael).
Arnthor is a lower aspect. I wanted Garcecg (Arnthor's dragon brother) and
Setr to be lower aspects of Able but there is no denying the naming
convention. Anyway, if Garsecg is a lower aspect of Able, why doesn't Able
kill him or rule him? (But what of the Thor/Arnthor connection?) Arnthor is
what Able would become if he did not succeed in dominating his lower gods.
Able eventually rules Arnthor's house and thus doing what Arnthor failed to
do, because Arnthor is the slave of his lusts. Setr and his siblings were
each "consumed" by their lower natures (lust for power and glory) which in
turn were consuming Arnthor and Morcaine.

I can't defend this interpretation by showing that every event and person
conforms to it in every way. And don't that is possible because I don't
think Wolfe writes that way. But I think these things are true as far as
they go.

J

---

From: Bob Miller <bob_bageera at hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 02:50:12 +0000

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20051105/dfaec8bd/attachment.htm

---

From: James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:14:33 +0000

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20051106/2a2804d3/attachment.htm

---

From: James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:18:15 +0000

Bob,

You ought to send your posts in Plain Text format. 
The body of your posts is currently being scrubbed on the online verion.

http://listserver.dreamhost.com/pipermail/urth-urth.net/2005-November/001486.html

J

---

From: aramini1 at cox.net <aramini1 at cox.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 04:08:12 +0000

I rather liked Chris grafting of a psychological frame for WK - Dante framed the universe as a thing inside God's mind, and this was used by Wolfe in Peace.  It also makes, I think, a bit of interesting play on Andrew Bollen's earlier analysis (forgive me if I am incorrect, it was some time ago) of "the dream [Able's] mother had" as an explanation for how Mag could both be and not be his mother at the same time.  For the realm of dream is a rather special place in our subconscious that actually "takes over" our awareness when we pass into slumber (at least, that's how it seems to us).  

I'm still not certain that the boy who fights off highjackers is necessarily Able, just as the girl who goes into childbirth is certainly NOT Able.  They are just more dwellers in the string of Parka.  Able could just as easily be the boy who loses his dog and chokes on a rabbit (although that particular vision accompanies the scene of Toug losing his voice until Arthur/Able retrieves the sword).  

Good job, Chris.

> 
> From: "Chris" <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
> Date: 2005/11/02 Wed PM 05:26:52 EST
> To: urth at lists.urth.net
> Subject: (urth)  WK psychological cosmology
>

---

From: Chris <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 23:09:07 +0000

I may be imagining things, but I got the impression that the bow string was 
not full of entire lives, but only certain pieces of the lives of various 
people. Heroic moments, to be particular. So I don't see any reason to think 
that Art Ormsby is any one of them, though you might say they're all Able.

>I'm still not certain that the boy who fights off highjackers is 
>necessarily Able, just as the girl who goes into childbirth is certainly 
>NOT Able.  They are just more dwellers in the string of Parka.  Able could 
>just as easily be the boy who loses his dog and chokes on a rabbit 
>(although that particular vision accompanies the scene of Toug losing his 
>voice until Arthur/Able retrieves the sword).
>
>
>
>Good job, Chris.
>
>
> >

---

From: James Wynn <thewynns at earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 03:03:42 +0000

Chris said:
>people. Heroic moments, to be particular. So I don't see any reason to
>think that Art Ormsby is any one of them, though you might say they're
>all Able.

Well, he get's the string and bow from Parka. Since Parka's name identifies
her indirectly with the Greek Fates and since that association (and the fact
that she also gives Able a stave) identifies her with the Norns, I'd say the
string *does* contain all those lives in their entirity.

The existance of that string, btw, -- containing the story of all those
different lives -- is the biggest argument IMO against the events of The
Wizard Knight being somehow internal to Arthur Ormsby (as I believe they
are).

J