{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5333", "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": 5333, "subject": "Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "messages": 5, "voices": 3, "first": "2009-02-05T21:08:56+00:00", "last": "2009-02-05T22:31:36+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<498B5568.2010403@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2009-02-05T21:08:56+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks for the links, Stanislaus. \n\nThat was in fact the distinction that I assumed in reading the books---that there is the Increate, and then there is everything else. None of those other terms are used, of course---merely hinted at, so some posters here have had to use them. Nothing even tells us what entity possessed Severian. One assumes the Increate, but Witz has proposed the New Sun itself.\n\nI don't follow that this rule alone keeps Severian from being \"a Christ,\" since that depends on the degree to which Severian is divine and for that matter whether the OTC is divine. If neither is divine, then there is no forced inequivalence on these grounds alone. If both are---well, that was the reason for my original question.\n\nI'll let someone else ask how filioque fits into this scheme. ;)\n\nBTW, did you derive the Long Sunshade mechanism yourself, or from reading someone else? I only read LS once, but the Pylon made so little sense to me I just blotted it out. \n\nYour explanation is perfect in every way---it explains how shadeup could seem fast or slow, and how light moves from east to west along the Long Sun.\n\nIs the Long Sun itself then an uncontained energy beam or flame rather than a large fluorescent tube? What material does the Shade consist of?\n\nHow big an asteroid would this require? Any candidates?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "------------------------------\n\nMessage: 7\nDate: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 20:44:05 +0100\nFrom: \"Stanislaus B.\" \nSubject: Re: (urth) Wolfean theologies\nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nMessage-ID: <1661202702.20090204204405 at poczta.fm>\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250\n\nHello!\n\nOn 4 lutego 2009, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Yes, you are saying exactly what I think. As only a semiliterate\nperson in these areas, as well as being an atheist, I am naturally\nleery of a too-theological interpretation." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \n..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "However, outside the work, I personally don't see much difference,\nbecause to me they are all characters, and the world is plainly big\nenough for infinite variations. Christ himself was partly derived\nfrom characters who preceded him. I would identify a character with\nstigmata and a spear wound who carries the Divine Spark as one with\na much more *specific* relation to the Christ than Frodo would have. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \n..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Second, I asked, if Severian experiences in TUotNS, as he relates\nhe does, at least a glimpse of what it's like to be God/a god/a\ngodling/whatever (I don't see support in the text for useful\ndistinctions between these), then what does that mean for the work?\nTo this question, I got John's suggestion that Severian's divinity\nmight have been temporary, and Brunian's. It's still open. Is this\npassage part of TUotNS's New-Sun-for-Dummies role, or does it tell\nus something specific, like Severian is divine? is he divine\ntemporarily or inherently? Or am I jumping to conclusions? Perhaps,\nread properly, it tells us Severian is NOT divine?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \n...\n\nSince you yourself said that your knowledge of theology is limited, I\nwill try to explain some basic conceptions of that science. They are\nnot exclusive to Christianity BTW, in fact they have been discovered\nby the Greek philosophy.\n\nGod is categorically different from all other things which exists\n(including gods/divinities/godlings/angels/saints). God is the\nfundamental ground of all existence, outside the world, space and\ntime. Whatever exists, exists because of God. Moreover, no words\nwhich can be used to describe any other things can be rightly used\nabout God. In fact, saying that God exists, is good, wise, powerful\netc is in a sense untrue - all those words do not describe God\ncorrectly.\n\nFor that reason saying that Severian is Christ makes no sense. Even\nsaying that Severian resembles Christ is meaningless if you do not\nunderstand that categorical difference.\n\nHere you can find a good description of the problem by\nPseudo-Dionysios Areopagita. He is my favourite author when\nexplaining Wolfe, since he is heavily influenced by Neoplatonists.\nThe introduction by translator to \"On the Divine Names\" is very\ngood and should explain things.\n\nhttp://www.ccel.org/ccel/rolt/dionysius.iii.ii.html\n\nhttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06614a.htm\n\nThat fundamental difference is quite clearly explained by Wolfe in\nthe Melito's story in \"The Citadel of the Autarch\";\n\n\"\"The eagle looked at the angel when he heard what the cock said,\n and the angel looked at the eagle. 'The Pancreator is infinitely\n far from us,' the angel said. 'And thus infinitely far from me,\n though I fly so much higher than you. I guess at his desires?\n no one can do otherwise.'\"\n\n Note that this is NOT an orthodox position. It a Neoplatonic, not\n Christian idea (as is most of the New Sun, of course),\n but it clearly shows the difference between the True\n God and all other divinities, of which there is so many in the\n series.\n\n\n-- Best regards, Stanislaus B. \n---------------------------------------------------------------------- \nPokieruj psem-bohaterem i uratuj Penny! Skaczesz i gryziesz >> zagraj >> \nhttp://link.interia.pl/f204f ------------------------------" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2009-02-05T21:19:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "in_reply_to": "<498B5568.2010403@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:08 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nThanks for the links, Stanislaus.\nThat was in fact the distinction that I assumed in reading the books---that\nthere is the Increate, and then there is everything else. None of those\nother terms are used, of course---merely hinted at, so some posters here\nhave had to use them. Nothing even tells us what entity possessed Severian.\nOne assumes the Increate, but Witz has proposed the New Sun itself.\n\nI don't follow that this rule alone keeps Severian from being \"a Christ,\"\nsince that depends on the degree to which Severian is divine and for that\nmatter whether the OTC is divine. If neither is divine, then there is no\nforced inequivalence on these grounds alone. If both are---well, that was\nthe reason for my original question." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Christ of traditional christology is divine as the incarnation of the\nSon (one of the three Persons of the Trinity). Since the Trinity is not a\nhierarchy, and since its Persons are co-eternal, Christ is not a created\nbeing; the begetter/begotten language bespeaks a relationship and not a\ntemporal order (in the Creed's language, Christ is genitum, non factum, and\nconsubstantialem Patris--begotten, not made, and of the same substance as\nthe Father). Orthodox Christianity does not understand the Incarnation as a\nkind of possession or adoption. It is the unity of two natures (the divine\nand the human) in one person, often called the hypostatic union.\n\nIt is difficult for this Christian priest to see how Severian could be a\nChrist; he is unaware of his Godhead in any meaningful way, and is far from\nsinless. His trajectory is, however, fairly close to that of a Christian\nwho strives to imitate Christ and grows (oh, how slowly!) in faith and\nvirtue.\n\nHaving said this, though, I'm sure that other interpretations will offer\nmuch of value. Wolfe's work is very complex, after all!" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\n\nOligarchy : a government resting on a valuation of property, in which the\nrich have power and the poor man is deprived of it.\nPlato (c. 428-348 B.C.), The Republic, bk. VIII, 550-C" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2009-02-05T22:00:59+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Matthew Weber [mailto:palaeologos at gmail.com]\nSent: Thursday, February 5, 2009 01:19 PM\nTo: 'The Urth Mailing List'\nSubject: Re: (urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It is difficult for this Christian priest to see how Severian could be a\nChrist; he is unaware of his Godhead in any meaningful way, and is far from\nsinless. His trajectory is, however, fairly close to that of a Christian\nwho strives to imitate Christ and grows (oh, how slowly!) in faith and\nvirtue.\n\nHaving said this, though, I'm sure that other interpretations will offer\nmuch of value. Wolfe's work is very complex, after all!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "-- \nMatt +" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Cool. A priest. I love the internet for grouping unlike minds together.\nVery sorry if anything I've said has offended you, good sir. I like that you directly knocked down my arguments with solid arguments, rather than suggest I shouldn't be speaking about this, as some here have.\n\nThe discussions here have made me back off on the idea of Severian as an instantiation of the Logos. I based that on the idea that he, as Conciliator and New Sun, forged a peace between God and Man, and that he fulfilled both the Redeemer role, in bringing the sword, and the Prophet role - his stint as Conciliator, instilling hope in a \"Second coming\" To me, the \"miracles\" of resurrection are less important, though telling. I'm now not sure that Severian actually \"forged a peace\". That lies on the assumption that the schemes of the Hierodudes were God's work. I think that what he did was good, and was God's work, but I can perfectly see how the text casts that into doubt.\n\nI suppose though, that a lot of the argument against Severian as Christ rests in the Morality question, one in which I've thoroughly ignored. I feel that he's not hugely immoral though. He's usually supposed to be cruel, but he almost always chooses mercy, unless he's fulfilling his carnificial role. One is reminded of The Last Temptation of Christ, where Jesus is building crucifixes. (I don't really know how heretical that story is.) I find it massively compelling, the idea of Man as torturer, who must better himself to mercy. Severian's Carnificial role is justified by Paleamon's moral rationalization, that it is crucial that Good Men do the torture, and not bad men. In light of that, Severian still chooses, or says he will, to abolish torture all together.\n\nI think what's most interesting to me, is not whether he is or is not a Christ, but the idea of becoming the myth that shaped you. I'm in the middle of Green's Jungles, and Horn seems to be experiencing this dynamic in a very different way. This is the \"Becoming like Christ\", and that's what's important, I think, to the storys' messages. [SHORT SPOILERS] Horn seems to have become Silk, just as he always strove to think like Silk, and how he was known to otherwise imitate Silk. Can't wait to see where that goes. \nSeverian not only becomes The New Sun, the myth he's longed for his entire life, but he goes onto become the Conciliator the first time. The idea is just preposterously hilarious and awesome.\n\nit was just commented that I linked Severian to the New Sun, rather than the Increate. I meant sort of the opposite. My point was that Stars have no consciousness that we can speak of. I meant that he was connected to the Increate, and that it is that energy acting through him. I can't speak to whether that makes him divine, or temporarily divine, or what.\n\n~sonOfWitz" } ] }, { "message_id": "<498B64E4.8040404@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2009-02-05T22:15:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "These 2 points are especially of interest:\n\n---Orthodox Christianity does not understand the Incarnation as a kind of possession or adoption. \n\nMakes sense ...\n\n---he is unaware of his Godhead in any meaningful way\n\neven though Severian is a liar, or at least doesn't tell us everything. But I agree that the brief moment in which Severian \"is\" or \"writes as\" the Increate is not best taken as a tiny revelation of a huge truth. How exactly it should be taken, I'm not sure. What was Wolfe saying? Simply that Severian's healing powers are the real deal, not derived from Heirogrammatic manipulations?\n\nI wonder about Severian's striving to become good. I am not sure I see much evidence of a *conscious* striving. Mostly, he makes mistakes and tries to avoid repeating them. Which may be enough." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "------------------------------\n\nMessage: 2\nDate: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 13:19:10 -0800\nFrom: Matthew Weber \nSubject: Re: (urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun\nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nMessage-ID:\n\t\nContent-Type: text/plain; charset=\"iso-8859-1\"\n\nOn Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:08 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Thanks for the links, Stanislaus.\nThat was in fact the distinction that I assumed in reading the books---that\nthere is the Increate, and then there is everything else. None of those\nother terms are used, of course---merely hinted at, so some posters here\nhave had to use them. Nothing even tells us what entity possessed Severian.\nOne assumes the Increate, but Witz has proposed the New Sun itself.\n\nI don't follow that this rule alone keeps Severian from being \"a Christ,\"\nsince that depends on the degree to which Severian is divine and for that\nmatter whether the OTC is divine. If neither is divine, then there is no\nforced inequivalence on these grounds alone. If both are---well, that was\nthe reason for my original question." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " \nThe Christ of traditional christology is divine as the incarnation of the\nSon (one of the three Persons of the Trinity). Since the Trinity is not a\nhierarchy, and since its Persons are co-eternal, Christ is not a created\nbeing; the begetter/begotten language bespeaks a relationship and not a\ntemporal order (in the Creed's language, Christ is genitum, non factum, and\nconsubstantialem Patris--begotten, not made, and of the same substance as\nthe Father). *Orthodox Christianity does not understand the Incarnation as a\nkind of possession or adoption. It is the unity of two natures (the divine\nand the human) in one person, often called the hypostatic union.*\n\nIt is difficult for this Christian priest to see how Severian could be a\nChrist; \"he is unaware of his Godhead in any meaningful way,* and is far from\nsinless. His trajectory is, however, fairly close to that of a Christian\nwho strives to imitate Christ and grows (oh, how slowly!) in faith and\nvirtue.\n\nHaving said this, though, I'm sure that other interpretations will offer\nmuch of value. Wolfe's work is very complex, after all!\n\n\n\n-- Matt + Oligarchy : a government resting on a valuation of property, \nin which the rich have power and the poor man is deprived of it. Plato \n(c. 428-348 B.C.), The Republic, bk. VIII, 550-C -------------- next \npart -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: \n \n------------------------------" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2009-02-05T22:31:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wolfean theologies and the Long Sun", "in_reply_to": "<498B64E4.8040404@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n\nI wonder about Severian's striving to become good. I am not sure I see much\nevidence of a *conscious* striving. Mostly, he makes mistakes and tries to\navoid repeating them. Which may be enough." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In my experience, that's what many of us do most of the time (make a\nmistake, realize it's a mistake, try not to make it again). Most people\naren't capable of sustained striving over a lifetime--we only manage it in\nbursts. \"The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak\"." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\n\nOligarchy : a government resting on a valuation of property, in which the\nrich have power and the poor man is deprived of it.\nPlato (c. 428-348 B.C.), The Republic, bk. VIII, 550-C" } ] } ] }