Subject: (urth) General Observation on Lupinologists (was Re: Urth before Earth)

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 17:26:04 +0000

I'm not going to try to reply to B's latest  right now -- depression
has drained me of energy -- but I do have a general observation
to make, which was inspired by said post.

On 7/19/06, b sharp <bsharporflat at hotmail.com> wrote:
>... the Armstrong painting is one more by Fechin/Inire.

I've come to realize that Wolfe interpreters tend to develop
certain ... for want of a better word (obsession seems a
touch too strong) crochets. I recognize two of my own: a
tendency to see Christian/Catholic themes everywhere,
and a belief that Wolfe is too tricksy for his own good. Others
have harbored crochets about sentient trees, twin planets,
and so on.

One of yours seems to be seeing Father Inire in every
shadow...

-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant
-----
http://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer
"Shovels are essential to the fantasy genre.
However, they are primarily used by the authors rather than the
characters." -- Stephen R. Donaldson

---

From: JWillard <aldenweer at charter.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 17:44:29 +0000

>One of yours seems to be seeing Father Inire in every
If we hadn't developed these 'crochets' I doubt we'd be subscribers to 
this list.  I'd much rather see these possibilities and readings pursued 
(supported in some way, of course) and argued than limited or dismissed.

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 17:53:07 +0000

On 7/20/06, JWillard <aldenweer at charter.net> wrote:
> If we hadn't developed these 'crochets' I doubt we'd be subscribers
> to this list.  I'd much rather see these possibilities and readings
> pursued (supported in some way, of course) and argued than
> limited or dismissed.

I wasn't suggesting that they should be "limited or dismissed."

Rather, that we should take account of them, both in ourselves and
in other posters, as they emerge. Thus, I'm certainly not about to
dismiss B's suggestion that Fechin is Father Inire, but neither am
I simply accepting it; I would want to see it, as you say, supported,
by clear textual evidence (rather than "it fits the overall pattern"
-- _unless_ the pattern is already _overwhelmingly_ established).

---

From: Transentient <transentient at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 19:09:13 +0000

> have harbored crochets about sentient trees, twin planets,

That's pretty funny. I just read Peace and two of the things I am  
really stuck on about it are the fallen tree at the beginning of the  
book, and the part where Alden and Margaret are in the barn looking  
for the egg and Margaret mentions that it has the face of Jesus on  
it, and is Alden worried about it being under a hen because he is  
afraid it might hatch. :)

---

From: b sharp <bsharporflat at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:45:23 +0000

Coming from a scientific background, I agree with both JWillard and Dan'l.  
People should pursue their own theories but temper them with an awareness of 
how personal bias can be misleading.  After you've done your best to make an 
objective analysis, submit your ideas to peer review for further refinement 
or rejection.  I've refined and rejected plenty of my own ideas based on the 
feedback I've received here and I hope to continue the process.

Regarding Father Inire, I've always wondered about him, but if you'd asked 
me a year ago I would have said I thought his only appearance is as the 
cowled servitor who guides Severian to the thiasus.  As I started reading 
critical analyses of BotNS this year,  Robert Borski and a couple others 
seemed to find a bunch of Inire appearances.  Pursuing that line of thought 
myself has finally shed a  light on what I've always thought of as the 
central mystery of this series- Severian's family tree.

Borski seems to view Inire as a Moses-like guide for the people of Urth, 
guiding them to the promised land of Ushas (hmph, some salvation).  I don't 
agree; there are plenty of clues that Father Inire and the Cumaean do not 
have humanity's best interests at heart.  Nor do I agree that Ossipago and 
Palaemon and Ceryx are Inire or that the couple that are landed on Urth on 
Flood Day are Inire and the Cumaean etc. etc.  A lot of disagreement. But if 
Borski had just kept his ideas to himself I would have lost a valuable 
inspiration.

Dan'l says:
>I'm certainly not about to dismiss B's suggestion that Fechin is Father 
>Inire, but neither am
>I simply accepting it; I would want to see it, as you say, supported, by 
>clear textual evidence (rather than "it fits the overall pattern"-- 
>_unless_ the pattern is already _overwhelmingly_ >established).

Consider Inire, Fechin, Rudesind and the boatman. Fechin and Rudesind are 
connected by art.  Rudesind and Inire are connected through the Curator 
guild. The boatman and Inire are connected by the Botanic Gardens. Rudesind 
and the boatman are connected by similar speech patterns and being widowers. 
  Fechin and the boatman (and Ouen's father) are always losing their 
material possessions. Fechin, the boatman and Inire all show an interest in 
pretty young girls. Fechin, Inire and Rudesind all resemble monkeys.

The pattern may not be overwhelming but I can't ignore that these four guys 
might be related.  Would all these connections appear accidentally in Gene 
Wolfe's work? If the relationship illuminates obscured portions of 
Severian's family tree, I really can't ignore it. Others, especially those 
not so interested in the family tree, probabaly can ignore it and that's 
okay. But to me, the family tree seems so important and I haven't seen any 
good, complete models for it.  Anyone familiar with a Severian family tree 
I'm not aware of?

I have my own model for most of Severian's full family tree (still a couple 
vague spots, I'm afraid), and I think it (along with Eschatology and 
Genesis) explains why the destruction of Urth and creation of Ushas was 
necessary.  I was considering submitting another essay to Ultan's Library on 
this, though my first test attempt at that was such a failure and wasted two 
months. But one way or another I'll get these ideas out eventually.

-bsharp

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 18:19:58 +0000

B writes...

... after some stuff I generally agree with on method ...

> Regarding Father Inire, I've always wondered about him, but if you'd
> asked me a year ago I would have said I thought his only appearance
> is as the cowled servitor who guides Severian to the thiasus.

Now, you see, I'm not even convinced of _that_ (though, as
always, I'm willing to be convinced). I think Father Inire is a
deliberate (on Wolfe's part) _absence_ in the BotNs. Play with
presence/absence seems to me to be part of the Book's overall
thematic. Thecla is the absence who is always present with
Severian (even before the alzabo feast); I suspect that Inire is
the presence who is always absent, someone who always has
influence on every event but is never present at any event.

Robert Borski's theorizing is always fascinating, but there are
times when I think he is deliberately seeing how far he can
push things rather than following any strict textual method.

> .... a light on what I've always thought of as the

Well, certainly _a_ central mystery. We have reasonable certainty
of the identity of his mother and maternal grandparents, but his
paternal line seems pretty obscure. Candidates seem to include
Father (thus the name, hint hint) Inire, the Autarch, one of the
Masters of the Guild, and -- in the "send in the clones" scenario
-- Typhon, or perhaps more accurately Typhon's father, and probably
all sorts of people I haven't named. Vodalus? Why not?

I'd love to see some serious _textual_ evidence for _someone_
as Sev's father! I'd be particularly interested if (as you say) it
helps explain why the eschatus and regenesis were necessary.

Note: I don't put much trust in thematic evidence without a clear
textual basis for it. If I can see a nearly-complete pattern in the
text that supports a theme, and X, though there's no direct
evidence for it, is the only element that fits the pattern, well,
that's a special case.

As, of course, are _my_ thematic theories. 8*)

So anyway, the pattern you establish later in your note -- about
Inire, Fechin, Rudesind and the boatman -- is fine as far as it goes,
but it's all based on a pattern that seems to me to be perceived
before the fact, and the characters assigned to the pattern. I'd need
to see that the pattern was present in the text waiting to be
discovered, and I just don't see that.

I mean -- are they "connected" by these various things? Of course;
but being connected by some thematic link doesn't mean they're
the same person.

> guiding them to the promised land of Ushas (hmph, some salvation).

Keep in mind that the entire generation of Israelites Moses led out
of Egypt died in the desert without so much as a glimpse of the
Promised Land. The cost of Ushas is very like that paid by the
Israelites.

---

From: Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 02:16:20 +0000

Dan'l quoted and wrote:
>as Sev's father!

Are you having some "senior moments" a tad early? <g> Or you just don't
accept Ouen as Sev's father? Dorcas wasn't Sev's grandmother?

-Roy

---

From: b sharp <bsharporflat at hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 05:30:22 +0000

I find this exchange between Dan'l and Roy very interesting:

Dan'l:
>I'd love to see some serious _textual_ evidence for _someone_as Sev's 
>father!

Roy:
>Are you having some "senior moments" a tad early? <g> Or you just 
>don'taccept Ouen as Sev's >father? Dorcas wasn't Sev's grandmother?

First I think the Lupinology world has a enough accepted dogma for most of 
us to conclude Dan'l really was having a "senior moment" and he meant he'd 
like evidence for someone as Sev's maternal grandfather.  The acceptance of 
Ouen as father, Dorcas as paternal grandmother and boatman or "Charon" as 
paternal grandfather are almost articles of faith.

Or could Dan'l really be out-skepticizing Roy here by denying Ouen's 
paternity?         Dan'l?

We often hear demands for clear texual evidence to support a claim, but we 
don't have that for Ouen and Dorcas.  All we have is a fat guy who sees a 
physical resemblance between a dark haired guy, a young blonde woman and an 
old waiter who all chanced to meet at a restaurant.  And let's not forget 
the woman's portrait in a locket...found by Ouen in a pawn shop for crying 
out loud. Can we be sure that picture is really his mother and not a 
surrogate purchased to console him in his loss? (well, yes we can be pretty 
sure, but why?)

In the absence of clear, distinct text evidence, why does EVERYBODY (even my 
brother who only read BotNS once) understand who Ouen and Dorcas are?  I 
think the answer is that BotNS is like a big jigsaw puzzle without a cover 
box.  You start by assembling piece by piece. But you don't really make 
progress until a pattern appears and you can start filling in empty spaces 
intuitively without the text telling you exactly where the next pieces fit.  
Some patterns are easier to see than others and some patterns are seen by 
some and not others.

And it is a near universally understood pattern that when family members are 
missing and physical resemblances are presented for no apparent reason we 
are expected (by the author) to jump to certain conclusions without direct 
evidence.  A physical resemblance and the name Catherine leads many to 
assume an actress that plays Katherine  is Severian's mother. This is an 
even bigger intuitive leap than the Ouen/Dorcas assumption  but I haven't 
seen a lot of argument about that since back when J. Clute suggested the old 
Autarch, Appian in that role.

In the future, sometime I'll be arguing that Catherine and Cyriaca are 
sisters, that Severian's paternal grandfather and Catherine's father are the 
same person and that Thecla's four books and Agia's four weapons help place 
each of them in Severian's family tree.  And I won't be able point to text 
which says exactly those things but I will show a certain pattern these help 
fill and, the intuitive leaps I had to make to fill them.  This pattern 
which ties to what I think is the overarching theme of BotNS (noted below).  
It won't be of much use to many Lupinologists but maybe to some who also 
perceive that same theme.

I would like to propose that knowledge of BotNS has progressed to the point 
where it can be judged sort of scientifically.  By that I mean that (like in 
science) nothing can ever be "proven" (unless Gene Wolfe decides to speak 
candidly before he passes on) so all we have are working theories.  
Competing theories.  The one (or ones) which explain best to the most people 
is accepted.

Naturally there will be divided camps and competing theories but I still 
think constructive criticism of a theory should always explain why a 
competing theory seems better.  It may be that Peter Wright will always view 
the BotNS pattern in terms of Socialist Political Theory.  For Robert Borski 
and others it might be a Moses tale.  For Dan'l and others, Catholic themes 
prevail.  But each framework might speak to many other people and there 
might be enough overlap that theories in one perceived pattern could assist 
those in another.

In recent months my own framework reference has come to agreement with Nick 
Gevers who observes that,
>"Wolfe has a fascination with paganism and the rise of Christianity that 
>eclipsed it, and has worked >this into a series of related epics: The Book 
>of the New Sun".

I'm hoping to discuss how important portions of BotNS relate to this theme 
(including the family tree), if I can find a way to break it into the 
bite-sized chunks this format requires.  Wish me luck!

-bsharp

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 06:48:09 +0000

> Are you having some "senior moments" a tad early? <g>
> Or you just don't accept Ouen as Sev's father? Dorcas
> wasn't Sev's grandmother?

Aaaargh. You're right, I just spaced on that.