Hut in the Jungle The Urth list — 57 messages, 13 voices, 18 Mar 2009 https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5370 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. ============================================================================== Son of Witz — 18 Mar 2009, 20:08 Ok, so I'm rereading NewSun again. what the hell is going on in the Hut in the Jungle. I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into Urth's past as Earth. Others have pointed out that the text the Preceptress is reading is from the Old Testament (or was that NT?). During that scene Agia uses the term Theoanthropos, God-Man, which is usually applied to Christ (any others?) Is this to tell us that belief in Christ is part of the world. I understand that, as the translation device goes, Theoanthropos could apply to other God-men we haven't met, so it's not a necessary reading, but is that the intent? Insangoma appears to be refering to the New Sun when he chants: "He comes when the sun is setting, See his feet upon the water! Tracks of flame across the water" and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary Earth's doing, somehow? and what is Insagoma's story about the nephew fishing? /confused ~witz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Adam Thornton — 18 Mar 2009, 20:14 in reply to Son of Witz > On Mar 18, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Son of Witz wrote: > > I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, > without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that > are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into > Urth's past as Earth. Are we sure it's the past? Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Wynn — 18 Mar 2009, 20:42 in reply to Adam Thornton > > I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, > > without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that > > are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert > > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into > > Urth's past as Earth. > Are we sure it's the past? If you believe, as I do, that they are the missionaries Robert and Mary Moffat (Robert was a former gardener), then I would say it was in the past. This would mean that the Time that Sev is in when he sees the plane is not the Time where he encountered the missionaries. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Adam Thornton — 18 Mar 2009, 21:11 in reply to James Wynn > > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 3:42 PM, James Wynn wrote: > > > I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, > > > without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that > > > are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert > > > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into > > > Urth's past as Earth. > > Are we sure it's the past? > If you believe, as I do, that they are the missionaries Robert and > Mary Moffat (Robert was a former gardener), then I would say it was > in the past. This would mean that the Time that Sev is in when he > sees the plane is not the Time where he encountered the missionaries. What I meant was, can we conclude that Urth is the future of Earth, and not its past? (yeah, I guess we probably can) Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 18 Mar 2009, 21:27 follows, by subject match Adam Thornton > -----Original Message----- > From: James Wynn [mailto:crushtv at gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 01:42 PM > To: 'The Urth Mailing List' > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, > > > without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that > > > are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert > > > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into > > > Urth's past as Earth. > > Are we sure it's the past? I am. it seems abundantly clear, and even GW's translator note says as much. I dismiss outright the suggestion that GW may not = Gene Wolfe. > If you believe, as I do, that they are the missionaries Robert and Mary > Moffat (Robert was a former gardener), then I would say it was in the past. > This would mean that the Time that Sev is in when he sees the plane is not > the Time where he encountered the missionaries. Now that's interesting. I should read up on that I suppose. my wife's boss was a Christian missionary in the Panamanian jungle for many years. I should ask him if he knows of them. Dude is awesome. He goes around SF giving out soap and socks to the homeless. ~witz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 18 Mar 2009, 22:41 follows, by subject match Son of Witz That scene is disorienting, isn't it? I completely overlooked it during the various X discussions. Yes, this is our world and our past. My guess is that Wolfe is partly just telling/reminding us that his story is a play enacted on a stage. The intrusion indicates a relationship between worlds. Our lives are real; Severian's is shadow-play. It's a clue that the NS is not the OTC, in other words. BTW, the woman is reading from Deuteronomy 34:1. No version I know. > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:08:33 +0000 > From: "Son of Witz" > Subject: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Ok, so I'm rereading NewSun again. > > what the hell is going on in the Hut in the Jungle. > > I understand that it serves to show us that one can time travel, without knowing it, by merely walking through certain spaces that are somehow set up for this. This makes that very clear. Robert mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, it's a window into Urth's past as Earth. > > Others have pointed out that the text the Preceptress is reading is from the Old Testament (or was that NT?). During that scene Agia uses the term Theoanthropos, God-Man, which is usually applied to Christ (any others?) > Is this to tell us that belief in Christ is part of the world. > I understand that, as the translation device goes, Theoanthropos could apply to other God-men we haven't met, so it's not a necessary reading, but is that the intent? > > Insangoma appears to be refering to the New Sun when he chants: > "He comes when the sun is setting, > See his feet upon the water! > Tracks of flame across the water" > > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary Earth's doing, somehow? > > and what is Insagoma's story about the nephew fishing? > > > /confused > ~witz > > > > > ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 18 Mar 2009, 22:46 follows, by subject match David Stockhoff Wow, that sounds right. But they hear the mail-plane and know what it is, even though it's from 50 years after their time. ??? > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:42:32 -0500 > From: "James Wynn" > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > Message-ID: <546F8E4F5A224456A6CD4E91FFAEFD6E at eMachinePC> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > > > If you believe, as I do, that they are the missionaries Robert and Mary > Moffat (Robert was a former gardener), then I would say it was in the past. > This would mean that the Time that Sev is in when he sees the plane is not > the Time where he encountered the missionaries. > > > > ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ James Wynn — 18 Mar 2009, 23:11 in reply to David Stockhoff > I said: If you believe, as I do, that they are the missionaries Robert and > Mary Moffat (Robert was a former gardener), then I would say it was in the > past. This would mean that the Time that Sev is in when he sees the plane > is not the Time where he encountered the missionaries. > David Stockhoff: Wow, that sounds right. But they hear the mail-plane > and know what it is, even though it's from 50 years after their time. Yeah, that is a problem. They actually intend to catch a ride on that plane and get Robert to medical care. Perhaps they are only inspired by the Moffats. There is simply no way this could be prior to the 1930s. But not later, I think, than the 1960s. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jerry Friedman — 18 Mar 2009, 23:23 in reply to Son of Witz > > > > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz wrote: > > > > I understand that it serves to show us that > > > > one can time travel, > > > > without knowing it, by merely walking through > > > > certain spaces that > > > > are somehow set up for this. This makes that > > > > very clear. Robert > > > > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, > > > > it's a window into > > > > Urth's past as Earth. > > > Are we sure it's the past? > I am. > it seems abundantly clear, and even GW's translator > note says as much. > I dismiss outright the suggestion that GW may not = Gene > Wolfe. I should remind you of this quotation from James Jordan's interview with that same person, whoever he is (or maybe I shouldn't, because I'd like to forget it): "JJ: This universe that you set in Briah, or part of it--is that our universe? Or is that a universe that resurrected saints have set up in the world to come as part of the cities that they made? "GW: No. I thought of it as a long past universe. Something that we are repeating rather than something that we are." http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html How "the era's few extant buildings" fits into that I can't imagine. But if Severian's universe is like ours with small differences, it would explain the odd dislocations--"Isangoma" and "tokoloshe" from South Africa but "uakari" and "margay" from South America and "hesperorn" (Cretaceous) and "oreodont" (Oligocene and Miocene) from North America, and the slightly off translation from the Bible. On the other hand, Agia's claim that the people in the hut are enchanted people of her time would also explain it if the enchantment didn't create a perfect imitation. Jerry Friedman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gwern Branwen — 18 Mar 2009, 23:27 in reply to Son of Witz On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz wrote: ... > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary Earth's doing, somehow? ... > /confused > ~witz I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword of the Lictor_: 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you don't you recognize this? It is just as he says!" "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble mankind's dreams." "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to trouble mankind's dreams." The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the original? Neither, perhaps. -- gwern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 18 Mar 2009, 23:33 follows, by subject match Gwern Branwen > -----Original Message----- > From: Jerry Friedman [mailto:jerry_friedman at yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 04:23 PM > To: 'The Urth Mailing List' > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz wrote: > > > > > I understand that it serves to show us that > > > > > one can time travel, > > > > > without knowing it, by merely walking through > > > > > certain spaces that > > > > > are somehow set up for this. This makes that > > > > > very clear. Robert > > > > > mentions Paris, and we see a propeller plane, > > > > > it's a window into > > > > > Urth's past as Earth. > > > > Are we sure it's the past? > > I am. > > it seems abundantly clear, and even GW's translator > > note says as much. > > I dismiss outright the suggestion that GW may not = Gene > > Wolfe. > I should remind you of this quotation from James Jordan's > interview with that same person, whoever he is (or maybe I > shouldn't, because I'd like to forget it): > > "JJ: This universe that you set in Briah, or part of it--is that our universe? Or is that a universe that resurrected saints have set up in the world to come as part of the cities that they made? > > "GW: No. I thought of it as a long past universe. Something that we are repeating rather than something that we are." > > http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html > > How "the era's few extant buildings" fits into that I can't > imagine. But if Severian's universe is like ours with small > differences, it would explain the odd dislocations--"Isangoma" > and "tokoloshe" from South Africa but "uakari" and "margay" > from South America and "hesperorn" (Cretaceous) and > "oreodont" (Oligocene and Miocene) from North America, and the > slightly off translation from the Bible. On the other hand, > Agia's claim that the people in the hut are enchanted people > of her time would also explain it if the enchantment didn't > create a perfect imitation. > > Jerry Friedman That's interesting. the enchantment idea actually works pretty well, though it can't account for the plan. and Long Past works pretty much just as well for me. I think part of the point is what Gwern said in the next post: "The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the original? Neither, perhaps. -- gwern" I'm down with Neither, as it resonates with the Amphisbaena symbol and general time loop intractability. ~witz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Craig Brewer — 19 Mar 2009, 04:54 in reply to Gwern Branwen Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent of myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices on the one hand and myth/story on the other. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be different ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and future. ----- Original Message ---- From: Gwern Branwen To: The Urth Mailing List Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:27:57 PM Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz wrote: ... > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary Earth's doing, somehow? ... > /confused > ~witz I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword of the Lictor_: 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you don't you recognize this? It is just as he says!" "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble mankind's dreams." "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to trouble mankind's dreams." The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the original? Neither, perhaps. -- gwern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 05:02 in reply to Craig Brewer No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. . > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent of > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices on > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be different > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and future. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Gwern Branwen > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:27:57 PM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz > wrote: > ... > > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the > > spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary > > Earth's doing, somehow? > ... > > /confused > > ~witz > I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword > of the Lictor_: > > 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you???don't you recognize this? It > is just as he says!" > "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. > "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought > of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past > cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing > toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble > mankind's dreams." > "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." > "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies > of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us > barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' > > I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to > trouble > mankind's dreams." > > The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the > present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the > original? Neither, perhaps. > > -- > gwern > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Craig Brewer — 19 Mar 2009, 05:06 in reply to brunians at brunians.org Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just something "cute" to throw in there.) Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that moment? heh... ----- Original Message ---- From: "brunians at brunians.org" To: The Urth Mailing List Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. . > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent of > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices on > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be different > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and future. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Gwern Branwen > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:27:57 PM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz > wrote: > ... > > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the > > spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary > > Earth's doing, somehow? > ... > > /confused > > ~witz > I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword > of the Lictor_: > > 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you???don't you recognize this? It > is just as he says!" > "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. > "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought > of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past > cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing > toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble > mankind's dreams." > "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." > "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies > of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us > barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' > > I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to > trouble > mankind's dreams." > > The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the > present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the > original? Neither, perhaps. > > -- > gwern > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 05:24 in reply to Craig Brewer Events along your future timeline can throw echos into the past. For me, I had hallucinations from a very early age (many years before reading TBOTNS) that aliens would take me off the planet, and test me somehow, and if I failed the test I would be castrated. So you can imagine that when I read this theme in TBOTNS I was sort of blown away, and from that point was looking for an opportunity to talk to Wolfe. Also our ideas about parallel worlds are very similar, and also similar to Borges, who I had not heard of at that time (Gene Wolfe was the first person who mentioned the name Jorge Luis Borges to me). Anyway, it's late and I don't have huge amounts of energy right now. . > Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just > something "cute" to throw in there.) > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that > Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps > both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that moment? > heh... > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: "brunians at brunians.org" > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > > > > > > . > > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same > > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: > > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point > > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent > > of > > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that > > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices > > on > > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be > > different > > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and > > future. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Gwern Branwen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 19 Mar 2009, 05:31 in reply to Craig Brewer no no. It's not just "cute". it's fairly profound. it's literal, and it's a good example of why I've been saying the time loop is intractable. Things in this story's past have their roots in it's temporal future. I know it's a steady refrain from me, but Amphisbaena, Amphisbaena Amphisbaena. He's suggesting they ARE Frankensein, and the "particular past event that Talos is referring to" is the writing of Frankenstein and other Promethean stories. Dizzyingly awesome idea. ~witz > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:06 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just > something "cute" to throw in there.) > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event > that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is > affecting? Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing > _Frankenstein_ at that moment? heh... > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: "brunians at brunians.org" > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this > when > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene > and I > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes > future > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > > > > > > . > > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the > > same > > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and > > stories: > > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the > > point > > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original > > intent of > > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing > > that > > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: > > choices on > > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be > > different > > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and > > future. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Gwern Branwen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Craig Brewer — 19 Mar 2009, 05:37 in reply to Son of Witz Dizzying from one perspective. Underwhelming from another. Or I suppose both at once. If you're right, then the upshot of this would be that myth (Prometheus) is a retelling "from the future" of a very worldly event, Baldanders creating Talos and eventually destroying himself, which comes to have "mythic" proportions by being "projected" through a past lens darkly. Is that right? But why does it have to be "from the future"? What does that add to the idea that real events can be blown up into myths that resonate with meaning far from their original context? What's different about a myth's origin being in the future than in the past? (Apart from the coolness factor, I agree.) ----- Original Message ---- From: Son of Witz To: The Urth Mailing List Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:31:05 AM Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle no no. It's not just "cute". it's fairly profound. it's literal, and it's a good example of why I've been saying the time loop is intractable. Things in this story's past have their roots in it's temporal future. I know it's a steady refrain from me, but Amphisbaena, Amphisbaena Amphisbaena. He's suggesting they ARE Frankensein, and the "particular past event that Talos is referring to" is the writing of Frankenstein and other Promethean stories. Dizzyingly awesome idea. ~witz > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:06 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just something "cute" to throw in there.) > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that moment? heh... > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: "brunians at brunians.org" > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > > > > > > . > > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same > > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: > > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point > > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent of > > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that > > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices on > > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be different > > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and future. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Gwern Branwen > > To: The Urth Mailing List > > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:27:57 PM > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz > > wrote: > > ... > > > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > > > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the > > > spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > > > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary > > > Earth's doing, somehow? > > ... > > > /confused > > > ~witz > > I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword > > of the Lictor_: > > > > 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you???don't you recognize this? It > > is just as he says!" > > "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. > > "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought > > of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past > > cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing > > toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble > > mankind's dreams." > > "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." > > "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies > > of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us > > barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' > > > > I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to > > trouble > > mankind's dreams." > > > > The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the > > present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the > > original? Neither, perhaps. > > > > -- > > gwern > > _______________________________________________ > > Urth Mailing List > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Urth Mailing List > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 19 Mar 2009, 05:44 in reply to Craig Brewer > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:37 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Dizzying from one perspective. Underwhelming from another. Or I > suppose both at once. that's interesting considering your and my first exchange where you argued that the flattening of a hierarchy of the 3 meanings was what you found interesting, and what I found interesting was the depth and hierarchy of those 3 meanings. > If you're right, then the upshot of this would be that myth > (Prometheus) is a retelling "from the future" of a very worldly > event, Baldanders creating Talos and eventually destroying himself, > which comes to have "mythic" proportions by being "projected" > through a past lens darkly. Is that right? Yes, that's what I think is going on. > But why does it have to be "from the future"? What does that add to > the idea that real events can be blown up into myths that resonate > with meaning far from their original context? What's different about > a myth's origin being in the future than in the past? (Apart from > the coolness factor, I agree.) It might be Gee Whiz to realize that time isn't uni-directional. but, it does elaborate on that idea to some degree. ie: take Jesus. Is the second coming a myth that made from "real events" blown out up into Myth, or is the actual fact of the second coming resonating back through time to create the Myth. this is why I found so much Christic resonance in Severian, as this is exactly what's happened to him. He became the new sun, and by crazy circumstances went back and planted the seed of hope for the New Sun. dunnoh, I find that concept pretty badass and not mundane at all. ~witz > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Son of Witz > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:31:05 AM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > no no. > It's not just "cute". it's fairly profound. it's literal, and it's a > good example of why I've been saying the time loop is intractable. > Things in this story's past have their roots in it's temporal future. > I know it's a steady refrain from me, but Amphisbaena, Amphisbaena > Amphisbaena. > > He's suggesting they ARE Frankensein, and the "particular past event > that Talos is referring to" is the writing of Frankenstein and other > Promethean stories. > Dizzyingly awesome idea. > ~witz > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:06 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just > > something "cute" to throw in there.) > > > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event > > that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is > > affecting? Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing > > _Frankenstein_ at that moment? heh... > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: "brunians at brunians.org" > > To: The Urth Mailing List > > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this > > when > > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene > > and I > > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes > > future > > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the > > > same > > > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > > > > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and > > > stories: > > > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the > > > point > > > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original > > > intent of > > > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > > > > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > > > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also > > > realizing that > > > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > > > > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an > > > "original" > > > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: > > > choices on > > > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > > > > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be > > > different > > > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and > > > future. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Gwern Branwen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jerry Friedman — 19 Mar 2009, 05:44 in reply to Son of Witz > > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz wrote: > > From: Jerry Friedman [mailto:jerry_friedman at yahoo.com] > > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz > > wrote: ... > > > > > Are we sure it's the past? > > > I am. > > > it seems abundantly clear, and even GW's translator > > > note says as much. > > > I dismiss outright the suggestion that GW may not > > > = Gene Wolfe. > > I should remind you of this quotation from James > > Jordan's > > interview with that same person, whoever he is (or > > maybe I shouldn't, because I'd like to forget it): > > > > "JJ: This universe that you set in Briah, or part > > of it--is that our universe? Or is that a universe that > > resurrected saints have set up in the world to come as part > > of the cities that they made? > > > > "GW: No. I thought of it as a long past universe. > Something that we are repeating rather than something that > we are." > > http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html > > > > How "the era's few extant buildings" fits > > into that I can't imagine. ... > That's interesting. > the enchantment idea actually works pretty well, though it > can't account for the plan. What plan? > and Long Past works pretty much just as well for me. ... But I also can't fit the Long Past picture in with "a tongue that has not yet achieved existence" or "yet undiscovered concepts". Could this mean that we haven't yet reached the time in our universe that corresponds with Severian's time in his earlier universe? On the subject of one time influencing an earlier time, I think Christian thinkers have said or speculated that the Incarnation had consequences in its past. And it's no harder, possibly easier to accept than time travel. Jerry Friedman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 19 Mar 2009, 05:51 in reply to Jerry Friedman > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:44 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote: > On the subject of one time influencing an earlier time, > I think Christian thinkers have said or speculated that > the Incarnation had consequences in its past. And it's > no harder, possibly easier to accept than time travel. See Baldandars/Frankenstein discussion in this thread. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Craig Brewer — 19 Mar 2009, 05:52 in reply to Son of Witz Or another way to put it would be that some myths are true only in the future. They make themselves true by projecting pseudo-false stories about themselves in the past which help bring about their realization. That would be Severian, yes? And on that reading, Talos realizing that his situation is what Prometheus was really all about is significant in the text because it's a smaller example of your Amphisbaena where the REAL meaningful Amphisbaena's are the cosmic myths which are lies (in the past) that make themselves become true (in the future). Is that right? If so, then I can retract my underwhelming. Oh, and: Gee Whiz. Gene Wolfe. Coincidence? ----- Original Message ---- From: Son of Witz To: The Urth Mailing List Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:44:41 AM Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:37 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Dizzying from one perspective. Underwhelming from another. Or I suppose both at once. that's interesting considering your and my first exchange where you argued that the flattening of a hierarchy of the 3 meanings was what you found interesting, and what I found interesting was the depth and hierarchy of those 3 meanings. > If you're right, then the upshot of this would be that myth (Prometheus) is a retelling "from the future" of a very worldly event, Baldanders creating Talos and eventually destroying himself, which comes to have "mythic" proportions by being "projected" through a past lens darkly. Is that right? Yes, that's what I think is going on. > But why does it have to be "from the future"? What does that add to the idea that real events can be blown up into myths that resonate with meaning far from their original context? What's different about a myth's origin being in the future than in the past? (Apart from the coolness factor, I agree.) It might be Gee Whiz to realize that time isn't uni-directional. but, it does elaborate on that idea to some degree. ie: take Jesus. Is the second coming a myth that made from "real events" blown out up into Myth, or is the actual fact of the second coming resonating back through time to create the Myth. this is why I found so much Christic resonance in Severian, as this is exactly what's happened to him. He became the new sun, and by crazy circumstances went back and planted the seed of hope for the New Sun. dunnoh, I find that concept pretty badass and not mundane at all. ~witz > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Son of Witz > To: The Urth Mailing List > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:31:05 AM > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > no no. > It's not just "cute". it's fairly profound. it's literal, and it's a good example of why I've been saying the time loop is intractable. > Things in this story's past have their roots in it's temporal future. > I know it's a steady refrain from me, but Amphisbaena, Amphisbaena Amphisbaena. > > He's suggesting they ARE Frankensein, and the "particular past event that Talos is referring to" is the writing of Frankenstein and other Promethean stories. > Dizzyingly awesome idea. > ~witz > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:06 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Fair enough. (Although it leaves the Frankenstein reference as just something "cute" to throw in there.) > > > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that moment? heh... > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: "brunians at brunians.org" > > To: The Urth Mailing List > > Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 12:02:39 AM > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when > > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I > > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future > > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > Gwern, I see what you mean about those being two directions of the same > > > issue. But there's something else going on there, as well. > > > > > > I always thought that Talos was really talking about myth and stories: > > > he's saying, "Hey, this is _Frankenstein_, but backwards!" And the point > > > is that myth shapes us, but we also move away from the original intent of > > > myths so that they are changed and distorted over time. > > > > > > What happens in the hut seems less about myth and story than about > > > reflecting on the consequences of one's actions, but also realizing that > > > who we are may be the consequence of someone else's actions. > > > > > > Both are about how, you're right, it's hard to pin down an "original" > > > cause or action. But they're dealing with different mechanisms: choices on > > > the one hand and myth/story on the other. > > > > > > I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying that there may be different > > > ways that they're thinking about the relationship between past and future. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > > From: Gwern Branwen > > > To: The Urth Mailing List > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:27:57 PM > > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Son of Witz > > > wrote: > > > ... > > > > and they feel the Tokoloshe, spirits from the future. > > > > "Don't you see they are only the results of what we do? They are the > > > > spiritis of the future, and we make them ourselves?" > > > > Is this just saying that the fallen state of Urth is contemporary > > > > Earth's doing, somehow? > > > ... > > > > /confused > > > > ~witz > > > I've always taken this as being the opposite of what is said in _Sword > > > of the Lictor_: > > > > > > 'Dr. Talos whispered, "Look about you???don't you recognize this? It > > > is just as he says!" > > > "What do you mean?" I whispered in return. > > > "The castle? The monster? The man of learning? I only just thought > > > of it. Surely you know that just as the momentous events of the past > > > cast their shadows down the ages, so now, when the sun is drawing > > > toward the dark, our own shadows race into the past to trouble > > > mankind's dreams." > > > "You're mad," I said. "Or joking." > > > "Mad?" Baldanders rumbled. "You are mad. You with your fantasies > > > of theurgy. How they must be laughing at us. They think all of us > > > barbarians... I, who have labored three lifetimes."' > > > > > > I've always loved that line: "our own shadows race into the past to > > > trouble > > > mankind's dreams." > > > > > > The spirits of the future trouble the dreams of the present, and the > > > present make the results that lie in the future. Which was the > > > original? Neither, perhaps. > > > > > > -- > > > gwern > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Urth Mailing List > > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Urth Mailing List > > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > _______________________________________________ > > Urth Mailing List > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Urth Mailing List > > To post, write urth at urth.net > > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Urth Mailing List > To post, write urth at urth.net > Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jerry Friedman — 19 Mar 2009, 05:57 in reply to Son of Witz > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz wrote: > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:44 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote: > > On the subject of one time influencing an earlier > > time, > > I think Christian thinkers have said or speculated > > that > > the Incarnation had consequences in its past. And > > it's > > no harder, possibly easier to accept than time travel. > See Baldandars/Frankenstein discussion in this thread. That's what I was talking about. My comment on Jesus caused you to make a similar comment a little earlier. Jerry Friedman ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 19 Mar 2009, 06:16 in reply to Jerry Friedman > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:57 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote: > > --- On Wed, 3/18/09, Son of Witz wrote: > > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:44 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote: > > > On the subject of one time influencing an earlier time, > > > I think Christian thinkers have said or speculated that > > > the Incarnation had consequences in its past. And it's > > > no harder, possibly easier to accept than time travel. > > See Baldandars/Frankenstein discussion in this thread. > That's what I was talking about. My comment on Jesus > caused you to make a similar comment a little earlier. > > Jerry Friedman laughing out loud. good work Jerry. > On Mar 18, 2009, at 10:52 PM, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Or another way to put it would be that some myths are true only in > the future. They make themselves true by projecting pseudo-false > stories about themselves in the past which help bring about their > realization. That would be Severian, yes? > > And on that reading, Talos realizing that his situation is what > Prometheus was really all about is significant in the text because > it's a smaller example of your Amphisbaena where the REAL meaningful > Amphisbaena's are the cosmic myths which are lies (in the past) that > make themselves become true (in the future). > > Is that right? If so, then I can retract my underwhelming. > > Oh, and: Gee Whiz. Gene Wolfe. Coincidence? Yes on the first paragraph. absolutely. Not Sure on the second paragraph about the "real meaningful Amphisbaena" I haven't completely grokked the explanation about the dead head eating the living head and the sustenance, or was it the other way around. Whichever it was, I would probably weight them equally. On the third, retract away. On the fourth, LOL. ~witz ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 06:19 in reply to Jerry Friedman > On the subject of one time influencing an earlier time, > I think Christian thinkers have said or speculated that > the Incarnation had consequences in its past. And it's > no harder, possibly easier to accept than time travel. There are multiple time dimensions. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Duffy — 19 Mar 2009, 07:26 in reply to Craig Brewer > On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Craig Brewer wrote: > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that > Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps > both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that > moment? heh... I read it as a nod to _Childhood's End_ And I thought the missionaries are "modern day" individuals who are "chant-caught" reenactors. David Duffy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 19 Mar 2009, 11:44 in reply to Son of Witz > Son of Witz wrote: > no no. > It's not just "cute". it's fairly profound. it's literal, and it's a > good example of why I've been saying the time loop is intractable. > Things in this story's past have their roots in it's temporal future. > I know it's a steady refrain from me, but Amphisbaena, Amphisbaena > Amphisbaena. And Clarke and Teilhard De Chardin are riding it. > He's suggesting they ARE Frankensein, and the "particular past event > that Talos is referring to" is the writing of Frankenstein and other > Promethean stories. > Dizzyingly awesome idea. To me it is most interesting for the implication that some adaptation of _FRANKENSTEIN_ survives to be popular enough that Dr Talos expects Severian to be familiar with it. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 19 Mar 2009, 11:46 in reply to David Duffy > David Duffy wrote: > On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event > > that Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? > > Perhaps both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at > > that moment? heh... > I read it as a nod to _Childhood's End_ > > And I thought the missionaries are "modern day" individuals who are > "chant-caught" reenactors. Then what is the airplane? -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 19 Mar 2009, 11:56 follows, by subject match Jeff Wilson As I see it, the idea flows logically from the concept that all time exists, or that there is a no-time or over-time (Eternity, Akal, Empyrean) from which all time can be accessed. This is a basic aspect of the Catholic God, usually expressed less mechanically of course. You could perhaps say the Increate is the medium through which large or iconic events send their ripples and echoes and eddies forward and backward. As long as there is no actual time travel, it doesn't pose problems---and in BotNS there is also time travel anyway. > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:37:14 -0700 (PDT) > From: Craig Brewer > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: The Urth Mailing List > Message-ID: <810925.3733.qm at web37602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > Dizzying from one perspective. Underwhelming from another. Or I suppose both at once. > > If you're right, then the upshot of this would be that myth (Prometheus) is a retelling "from the future" of a very worldly event, Baldanders creating Talos and eventually destroying himself, which comes to have "mythic" proportions by being "projected" through a past lens darkly. Is that right? > > But why does it have to be "from the future"? What does that add to the idea that real events can be blown up into myths that resonate with meaning far from their original context? What's different about a myth's origin being in the future than in the past? (Apart from the coolness factor, I agree.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 19 Mar 2009, 12:02 follows, by subject match David Stockhoff Right. Which is why Wolfe is always using mythic material. He doesn't regard it as inadequate in any way, merely limited in its truth vs the real Truth, which is eternal. Myths are fully human responses to a perception of the divine, and thus contain truth. Whether they were once true (Tolkien's approach) or they become true (Wolfe's, apparently) is a matter of perspective. > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:52:43 -0700 (PDT) > From: Craig Brewer > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 19 Mar 2009, 12:08 follows, by subject match David Stockhoff Possibly. It does explain things. But I just can't quite accept it. Severian's realization that he and Agia are seen as ghosts is just too wonderfully creepy and disorienting to not contain truth. Still, since Wolfe gave us clues pointing to the Moffats, we may be forced to assume that he also gave us clues that the missionaries are NOT the Moffats, and work from there. Aaggghhh! > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:26:31 +1000 (EST) > From: David Duffy > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: The Urth Mailing List > Message-ID: > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Craig Brewer wrote: > > Can you explain how it works here? Is there a particular past event that > > Talos is referring to that their present-as-future is affecting? Perhaps > > both? Is he suggesting that they're writing _Frankenstein_ at that > > moment? heh... > > > I read it as a nod to _Childhood's End_ > > And I thought the missionaries are "modern day" individuals who are > "chant-caught" reenactors. > > David Duffy. > > > ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 12:12 in reply to David Stockhoff There are multiple time dimensions. The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level up' which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one of which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension does to us. I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when we discussed it. . > As I see it, the idea flows logically from the concept that all time > exists, or that there is a no-time or over-time (Eternity, Akal, Empyrean) > from which all time can be accessed. This is a basic aspect of the > Catholic God, usually expressed less mechanically of course. > > You could perhaps say the Increate is the medium through which large or > iconic events send their ripples and echoes and eddies forward and > backward. As long as there is no actual time travel, it doesn't pose > problems---and in BotNS there is also time travel anyway. > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 22:37:14 -0700 (PDT) > From: Craig Brewer > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: The Urth Mailing List > Message-ID: <810925.3733.qm at web37602.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > Dizzying from one perspective. Underwhelming from another. Or I suppose > both at once. > > If you're right, then the upshot of this would be that myth (Prometheus) > is a retelling "from the future" of a very worldly event, Baldanders > creating Talos and eventually destroying himself, which comes to have > "mythic" proportions by being "projected" through a past lens darkly. Is > that right? > > But why does it have to be "from the future"? What does that add to the > idea that real events can be blown up into myths that resonate with > meaning far from their original context? What's different about a myth's > origin being in the future than in the past? (Apart from the coolness > factor, I agree.) > > > > --- > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. > Virus Database (VPS): 090318-0, 03/18/2009 > Tested on: 3/19/2009 7:56:09 AM > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. > http://www.avast.com > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gwern Branwen — 19 Mar 2009, 12:33 in reply to brunians at brunians.org > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 1:02 AM, wrote: > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. That's interesting. As pleased as I am to have my reading validated like that, I'm a little disturbed that it had to be by non-public sources! Was this discussion ever written up or summarized? -- gwern ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 19 Mar 2009, 13:09 in reply to brunians at brunians.org > brunians at brunians.org wrote: > There are multiple time dimensions. > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level up' > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one of > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension does > to us. You're missing a closing parenthesis whose placement could drastically influence the way this second sentence would be parsed. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 19 Mar 2009, 14:21 follows, by subject match Jeff Wilson Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily complex for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight uni/multiverse. > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > From: brunians at brunians.org > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > Message-ID: <5114.67.142.130.34.1237464764.squirrel at brunians.org> > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level up' > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one of > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension does > to us. > > I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of > magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when we > discussed it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 14:54 in reply to Gwern Branwen > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 1:02 AM, wrote: > > No, Talos (or Wolfe) meant that pretty literally. We discussed this when > > Wolfe and met in the mid 80's. John Cramer was also present. Gene and I > > found that we agreed that time was a certain way, which includes future > > events affecting the past in certain tricky ways. > That's interesting. As pleased as I am to have my reading validated > like that, I'm a little disturbed that it had to be by non-public > sources! Was this discussion ever written up or summarized? These three guys got together at an SF convention and were hanging around talking. No one realized it was an historic moment (well, I sort of did, but I didn't figure that anyone would ever know about it, and I would not have wanted to try to convince someone else: he would have thought that I was a babbling science fiction fan). I have discussed my encounters with Wolfe on this list on more than one occasion, and I have discussed them in conversation. That's about as written up as it gets so far. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 15:03 in reply to Jeff Wilson > brunians at brunians.org wrote: > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one > > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level > > up' which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions > > (one of which is parallel to 'our' time) and a third timelike dimension > > which stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time > > dimension does to us. > You're missing a closing parenthesis whose placement could drastically > influence the way this second sentence would be parsed. Yes, thank you. I believe I have fixed it above. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 15:14 in reply to David Stockhoff He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with on this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I have watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk he gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively require it). . > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily complex > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > uni/multiverse. > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > From: brunians at brunians.org > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > Message-ID: <5114.67.142.130.34.1237464764.squirrel at brunians.org> > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level up' > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one of > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension does > to us. > > I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of > magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when we > discussed it. > > > > > > > --- > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. > Virus Database (VPS): 090318-0, 03/18/2009 > Tested on: 3/19/2009 10:21:46 AM > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. > http://www.avast.com > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 19 Mar 2009, 16:19 in reply to brunians at brunians.org Brunians, There is a very similar system laid out by G. I. Gurdjieff, an Armenian mystic. He lays out a very cogent and beautiful cosmology which resonates nearly exactly with what you are saying, while relating it to a much arger cosmology as well, relating to the octave, and trinities. You might find it interesting. Ever come across his stuff? > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote: > > He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with on > this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I have > watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk he > gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively require > it). > > > > > . > > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily complex > > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > > uni/multiverse. > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 10 > > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > > From: brunians at brunians.org > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > > Message-ID: <5114.67.142.130.34.1237464764.squirrel at brunians.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and one > > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level > > up' > > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one of > > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension does > > to us. > > > > I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of > > magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when we > > discussed it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. > > Virus Database (VPS): 090318-0, 03/18/2009 > > Tested on: 3/19/2009 10:21:46 AM > > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. > > http://www.avast.com > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 17:23 in reply to Jordon Flato I don't know much about Gurdjieff's system. I am aware of it, I haven't done any work with it, I don't remember too many details. I have been meaning to read "Beelzebub's Tales" for some time. . > There is a very similar system laid out by G. I. Gurdjieff, an Armenian > mystic. He lays out a very cogent and beautiful cosmology which resonates > nearly exactly with what you are saying, while relating it to a much arger > cosmology as well, relating to the octave, and trinities. You might find > it > interesting. Ever come across his stuff? > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote: > > He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with on > > this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I > > have > > watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk he > > gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively > > require > > it). > > > > > > > > > > . > > > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > > > > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily > > > complex > > > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > > > uni/multiverse. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > Message: 10 > > > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > > > From: brunians at brunians.org > > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > > > Message-ID: <5114.67.142.130.34.1237464764.squirrel at brunians.org> > > > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > > > > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and > > > one > > > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level > > > up' > > > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one > > > of > > > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > > > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension > > > does > > > to us. > > > > > > I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of > > > magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when > > > we > > > discussed it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. > > > Virus Database (VPS): 090318-0, 03/18/2009 > > > Tested on: 3/19/2009 10:21:46 AM > > > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. > > > http://www.avast.com > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 19 Mar 2009, 17:26 in reply to brunians at brunians.org Beelzebub's Tales is a true Golden Book, though not necessarily the best place to start. I think "In Search of the Miraculous" is a good place to start and ponder, and then dive into the hyper-density of Beelzebub's Tales. If Book of the New Sun hides it's meanings for future readings, Beelzebub's tales buries it's meanings for future generations. It is so fraking dense, and astutely profound. > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > I don't know much about Gurdjieff's system. I am aware of it, I haven't > done any work with it, I don't remember too many details. > > I have been meaning to read "Beelzebub's Tales" for some time. > > > > > . > > There is a very similar system laid out by G. I. Gurdjieff, an Armenian > > mystic. He lays out a very cogent and beautiful cosmology which > > resonates > > nearly exactly with what you are saying, while relating it to a much > > arger > > cosmology as well, relating to the octave, and trinities. You might find > > it > > interesting. Ever come across his stuff? > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote: > > > He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with on > > > this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I > > > have > > > watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk he > > > gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively > > > require > > > it). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > > > > > > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily > > > > complex > > > > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > > > > uni/multiverse. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > Message: 10 > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > > > > From: brunians at brunians.org > > > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > > > > To: "The Urth Mailing List" > > > > Message-ID: <5114.67.142.130.34.1237464764.squirrel at brunians.org> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 > > > > > > > > There are multiple time dimensions. > > > > > > > > The level of the World that we inhabit includes three spacelike and > > > > one > > > > timelike dimension. This is a selection (sort of) from the 'next level > > > > up' > > > > which includes four spacelike dimensions, two timelike dimensions (one > > > > of > > > > which is parallel to 'our' time and a third timelike dimension which > > > > stands to the creatures of the 'next level up' as our time dimension > > > > does > > > > to us. > > > > > > > > I derive this from my work with the well known 'Enochian' system of > > > > magick, and as I recall Wolfe expressed general agreement with it when > > > > we > > > > discussed it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. > > > > Virus Database (VPS): 090318-0, 03/18/2009 > > > > Tested on: 3/19/2009 10:21:46 AM > > > > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. > > > > http://www.avast.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 17:34 in reply to Jordon Flato > Beelzebub's Tales is a true Golden Book, though not necessarily the best > place to start. I think "In Search of the Miraculous" is a good place to > start and ponder, and then dive into the hyper-density of Beelzebub's > Tales. > If Book of the New Sun hides it's meanings for future readings, > Beelzebub's tales buries it's meanings for future generations. It is so > fraking dense, and astutely profound. May be. You are not selling it well. . > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > > I don't know much about Gurdjieff's system. I am aware of it, I haven't > > done any work with it, I don't remember too many details. > > > > I have been meaning to read "Beelzebub's Tales" for some time. > > > > > > > > > > . > > > There is a very similar system laid out by G. I. Gurdjieff, an > > > Armenian > > > mystic. He lays out a very cogent and beautiful cosmology which > > > resonates > > > nearly exactly with what you are saying, while relating it to a much > > > arger > > > cosmology as well, relating to the octave, and trinities. You might > > > find > > > it > > > interesting. Ever come across his stuff? > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote: > > > > He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with > > > > on > > > > this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I > > > > have > > > > watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk > > > > he > > > > gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively > > > > require > > > > it). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > > > > > > > > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily > > > > > complex > > > > > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > > > > > uni/multiverse. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > Message: 10 > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > From: brunians at brunians.org > > > > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 19 Mar 2009, 17:38 in reply to brunians at brunians.org Ah. Well, my intent is not to sell anything. I saw something you said that made me think you might find it of interest. That's all. You can forget I mentioned it for all that it matters to me. Have a blessed day. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:34 AM, wrote: > > Beelzebub's Tales is a true Golden Book, though not necessarily the best > > place to start. I think "In Search of the Miraculous" is a good place to > > start and ponder, and then dive into the hyper-density of Beelzebub's > > Tales. > > If Book of the New Sun hides it's meanings for future readings, > > Beelzebub's tales buries it's meanings for future generations. It is so > > fraking dense, and astutely profound. > May be. > > You are not selling it well. > > > > > . > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM, wrote: > > > I don't know much about Gurdjieff's system. I am aware of it, I haven't > > > done any work with it, I don't remember too many details. > > > > > > I have been meaning to read "Beelzebub's Tales" for some time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > There is a very similar system laid out by G. I. Gurdjieff, an > > > > Armenian > > > > mystic. He lays out a very cogent and beautiful cosmology which > > > > resonates > > > > nearly exactly with what you are saying, while relating it to a much > > > > arger > > > > cosmology as well, relating to the octave, and trinities. You might > > > > find > > > > it > > > > interesting. Ever come across his stuff? > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM, wrote: > > > > > He is one of three or four people who I can have a conversation with > > > > > on > > > > > this level. The idea that he was humoring me never crossed my mind. I > > > > > have > > > > > watched him humor people (and you can too, if you show up at any talk > > > > > he > > > > > gives, there are always one or two in the audience who positively > > > > > require > > > > > it). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > Are you sure he wasn't humoring you? > > > > > > > > > > > > I kid. Sure, that's plausible. I tend to think it's unnecessarily > > > > > > complex > > > > > > for NS/LS/SS, but then see Wolfe's diagram of the Wizard Knight > > > > > > uni/multiverse. > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > Message: 10 > > > > > > Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:12:44 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > > From: brunians at brunians.org > > > > > > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ brunians at brunians.org — 19 Mar 2009, 18:16 in reply to Jordon Flato > > > If Book of the New Sun hides it's meanings for future readings, > > > Beelzebub's tales buries it's meanings for future generations. It is > > > so fraking dense, and astutely profound. > > May be. > > You are not selling it well. > Ah. Well, my intent is not to sell anything. I feel I might have offended you, and I feel bad about this. I certainly did not mean to do so. > I saw something you said > that made me think you might find it of interest. You are probably absolutely right. I do intend to check it out, and it is because you recommend it now that I am intending to check it out now. Otherwise it may have taken years more. > That's all. I think it is enough, and since I was not apparently clear earlier, thank you very much for your recommendation. The thing is, truth be told, that I have always had an irrational - I admit that it is totally irrational and also mostly based upon ignorance - aversion to GI Gurdjieff. I have been aware that it is irrational for some time, and meaning to get over it, but haven't so far. Gurus leave me cold. My teachers have mostly emphasized their ignorance and untrustworthiness, as I myself try to do, if I have ever felt that people are treating me as a guru which has (God help me) happened from time to time. It so happens that I will be near a big bookstore later today and I will see what they have. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ b sharp — 31 Mar 2009, 04:05 follows, by subject match brunians at brunians.org FWIW- I see the Jungle Hut as a clear example of a time travel device as most specifically described for the Last House: a labyrinthine entranceway leading to a vertical structure. We see this pattern repeated in the towers around the Atrium of Time, Ultan's Library and probably in the Naviscaput's lair. Higher levels are in the future and lower levels are in the past (this helps explain Valeria and the Path of Air). Thus, the earth that we see at the top of the ladder of the Jungle Hut is in Urth's future. This is supported by the textual and Wolfe interview clues which suggest Urth is the analog of Earth which exists in a previous universal iteration. And why Urth has Severian while Earth has Christ, etc. And I think Isangoma is a Father Inire incarnation, like most of the twisted old monkey-like guys we find; Hephaestus analog that he is. Jungle Hut allows Inire access to some earth artifacts which make it to Urth like a picture of the moon landing, Frankenstein story, etc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 31 Mar 2009, 06:11 in reply to b sharp > On Mar 30, 2009, at 9:05 PM, b sharp wrote: > > FWIW- > > I see the Jungle Hut as a clear example of a time travel device as > most specifically described for the Last House: a labyrinthine > entranceway leading to a vertical structure. We see this pattern > repeated in the towers around the Atrium of Time, Ultan's Library > and probably in the Naviscaput's lair. Higher levels are in the > future and lower levels are in the past (this helps explain Valeria > and the Path of Air). > > Thus, the earth that we see at the top of the ladder of the Jungle > Hut is in Urth's future. This is supported by the textual and Wolfe > interview clues which suggest Urth is the analog of Earth which > exists in a previous universal iteration. And why Urth has Severian > while Earth has Christ, etc. > > And I think Isangoma is a Father Inire incarnation, like most of the > twisted old monkey-like guys we find; Hephaestus analog that he is. > Jungle Hut allows Inire access to some earth artifacts which make it > to Urth like a picture of the moon landing, Frankenstein story, etc. > _________________________________________________________________ Now that's pretty interesting. would the Sorcerers underground pits list among those examples? Is there any reason to infer that the time travel device in the vertical structure is forward only? Unless there is, I'd guess Earth as past is still the best answer in terms of resolving plot and thematics and authors note in Shadow. (and if it is in the future, the Baldanders/Frankenstein trip loses its punch) Isangoma / Inire — hmmmm.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ b sharp — 31 Mar 2009, 18:35 follows, by subject match Son of Witz Son o'Witz asks- > would the Sorcerers underground pits list among those examples? Good question. The entranceway is a bit labyrinthine but I don't see any time travel elements involved as seen in the other examples. > Is there any reason to infer that the time travel device in the > vertical structure is forward only? No. Severian moves from future to present in the Last House by going down flights of stairs. Living in a tower near the Atrium of Time, Valeria and her home have antique qualities. She and her family live in the lower levels of her tower, below ground level. Thus I deduce she comes from Severian's past. I think Ultan's Library is hidden in the past; twisted, old monkey-like Rudesind, wise in the ways of Inire, directs Severian to a shortcut to the Library and he has to descend to get there. Cyriaca's uncle's (a suspiciously knowlegeable character worth investigting) story jibes with this idea of the library hidden in the past (as does the J.L.Borges allusion). Regarding Urth's relationship to Earth I'll note that in Norse mythology, the three Norns are Urth (past), Verthandi (present) and Skuld (future). Wolfe won't speak on a lot of the mysteries of his books but I think on this one he is clear and open.Here is a quote from Gene Wolfe in an interview with James Jordan regarding Severian and Urth's place in regard to our world: > JJ: This universe that you set in Briah, or part of it--is that our universe? > Or is that a universe that resurrected saints have set up in the world to come > as part of the cities that they made? > GW: No. I thought of it as a long past universe. Something that we are repeating > rather than something that we are. I think there is a similar quote like this in another interview or two. > Isangoma / Inire — hmmmm.... Well when Inire is first mentioned we are told he is very old, bent and twisted and looks like a monkey. Why would such an important character never be openly shown? Using this physical description I think we can find him appearing many times, but never openly. Recognizing that (like Hephaestus) in addition to being bent he is adept at creating stuff helps the identification sometimes. Also, like so many Greek Gods, he seems to have a thing for young, human women. Sometimes he can be spotted that way. I'll mention that toward the end of UotNS, Severian sees a woman being escorted by soldiers along the Path of Air. This woman is surely related to the Contessa in Dr. Talos' play but other hints tie her to Catherine AND to the dead woman in the grave at the very beginning of Severian's story. Leaving other implications to dangle, I'll conjecture that the Path of Air leads to the top of a tower in the Citadel. Going from top to the bottom of this tower brings a person back in time from Flood Day to the time just before Severian becomes Captain of Apprentices. Anyway, here is the link to the James Jordan interview. http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html#urth2 Jordan's questions are so intensely religious I think Wolfe lets his guard down a little more than usual. Fine with me! -bsharp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 31 Mar 2009, 19:07 in reply to b sharp > b sharp wrote: > FWIW- > > I see the Jungle Hut as a clear example of a time travel device as > most specifically described for the Last House: a labyrinthine > entranceway leading to a vertical structure. We see this pattern > repeated in the towers around the Atrium of Time, Ultan's Library and > probably in the Naviscaput's lair. Higher levels are in the future > and lower levels are in the past (this helps explain Valeria and the > Path of Air). What's the example for Ultan? IIRC, during his sighted days he was fond of reading by a window on the 49th floor of the library, overlooking the Upholsterer's Garden. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 01 Apr 2009, 14:08 in reply to b sharp Sharp, I think you've got some good stuff here. I can't dig in right now but I didn't want to leave you hanging. the idea of the library hidden in the past, while cumbersome and perhaps not necessary to the plot, (or really even hinted at that I can think of ), is still a neat little gem of an idea. I see a lot of spiritual metaphor in Severian's vertical movement, and *northernly* quest. I'll try to post something about that soon. I'm gonna think it over and see if your idea affects that in any way. ~o'Witz > On Mar 31, 2009, at 11:35 AM, b sharp wrote: > > > > Son o'Witz asks- > > would the Sorcerers underground pits list among those examples? > Good question. The entranceway is a bit labyrinthine but I don't > see any time travel elements involved as seen in the other examples. > > Is there any reason to infer that the time travel device in the > > vertical structure is forward only? > No. Severian moves from future to present in the Last House by going > down flights of stairs. Living in a tower near the Atrium of Time, > Valeria and her home have antique qualities. She and her family live > in the lower levels of her tower, below ground level. Thus I deduce > she > comes from Severian's past. > > I think Ultan's Library is hidden in the past; twisted, old > monkey-like Rudesind, wise in the ways of Inire, directs Severian > to a shortcut to the Library and he has to descend to get there. > Cyriaca's > uncle's (a suspiciously knowlegeable character worth investigting) > story > jibes with this idea of the library hidden in the past (as does the > J.L.Borges > allusion). > > > Regarding Urth's relationship to Earth I'll note that in Norse > mythology, > the three Norns are Urth (past), Verthandi (present) and Skuld > (future). > > Wolfe won't speak on a lot of the mysteries of his books but I think > on this > one he is clear and open.Here is a quote from Gene Wolfe in an > interview with James > Jordan regarding Severian and Urth's place in regard to our world: > > JJ: This universe that you set in Briah, or part of it--is that our > > universe? > > Or is that a universe that resurrected saints have set up in the > > world to come > > as part of the cities that they made? > > GW: No. I thought of it as a long past universe. Something that we > > are repeating > > rather than something that we are. > I think there is a similar quote like this in another interview or > two. > > Isangoma / Inire — hmmmm.... > Well when Inire is first mentioned we are told he is very old, bent > and twisted and > looks like a monkey. Why would such an important character never be > openly shown? > Using this physical description I think we can find him appearing > many times, but never > openly. Recognizing that (like Hephaestus) in addition to being bent > he is adept at > creating stuff helps the identification sometimes. Also, like so > many Greek Gods, he > seems to have a thing for young, human women. Sometimes he can be > spotted that way. > > > > I'll mention that toward the end of UotNS, Severian sees a woman > being escorted by soldiers > along the Path of Air. This woman is surely related to the Contessa > in Dr. Talos' play but > other hints tie her to Catherine AND to the dead woman in the grave > at the very beginning of > Severian's story. Leaving other implications to dangle, I'll > conjecture that the Path of Air > leads to the top of a tower in the Citadel. Going from top to the > bottom of this tower brings > a person back in time from Flood Day to the time just before > Severian becomes Captain of > Apprentices. > > > Anyway, here is the link to the James Jordan interview. http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html#urth2 > Jordan's questions are so intensely religious I think Wolfe lets his > guard down a little more > than usual. Fine with me! > > -bsharp > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail? is up to 70% faster. Now good news travels really fast. > http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_70faster_032009 > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ b sharp — 03 Apr 2009, 13:35 follows, by subject match Son of Witz Jeff Wilson writes: > What's the example for Ultan? IIRC, during his sighted days he was fond > of reading by a window on the 49th floor of the library, overlooking the > Upholsterer's Garden. Thanks for bringing up that scene, I had forgotten it. I'm not sure if it is negative or positive evidence for the library extending back (and forward) into time. We are told it extends in space as far as the House Absolute; too far to be a "natural" extension I'll guess. I re-read the passage and I'll note that the Upholsterer's Garden serves the purpose of drying rosemary to stuff into pillows (reminds me a bit of the cushions from Severian's tryst with Jolenta). If the Library extends down to the past but also rises up 49 floors, perhaps it extends far enough into the future to reach Earth, as does the Jungle Hut. With regards to Gene Wolfe's Earth, I think it is safe to say that Rosemary (Wolfe's wife) is an important part of it. Also, wolfe was 49 years old when Shadow of the Torturer was published. I'll also note that Ultan (and Cyby) tell the story of his reading and looking out the window of the 49th floor to mark when Ultan first started to realize he was going blind. I'll further note that Jorge Luis Borges became fully blind in his 50's (he was 81 when SotT was published). FWIW -bsharp ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ John Watkins — 03 Apr 2009, 13:49 in reply to b sharp > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM, b sharp wrote: > > Jeff Wilson writes: > > What's the example for Ultan? IIRC, during his sighted days he was fond > > of reading by a window on the 49th floor of the library, overlooking the > > Upholsterer's Garden. > Thanks for bringing up that scene, I had forgotten it. I'm not sure if it > is negative or positive evidence for the library extending back (and > forward) > into time. We are told it extends in space as far as the House Absolute; > too far to be a "natural" extension I'll guess. We've been operating on that assumption, I know, but rereading Short Sun, I'm no longer certain of it. Check out Duko Rigoglio's rant: "Nessus is our city...A city larger than the whorl on which it stands...A whorl, any whorl, is only flat...we beheld Nessus, the undying city. But we did not see Nessus...There were many buildings there, countless houses of one and two and three and even four stories, and countless towers of twenty and thirty and three hundred. Of three thousand. Do you graps it? Why, no one ever succeeded in counting the towers in the Citadel alone....one could have walked all around the Citadel in three days, or four...It was only a small area, really so small that people from distant parts of the city, of which there were many thousands, actually doubted that it existed at all. Then underneath all our buildings were cellars and sub-cellars, dungeons and caverns and tunnels without end." He continues for a bit. If Nessus is truly that vast, and has "caverns and tunnels without end" below it, I think we're meant to consider the possibility that the Library is at least physically connect to the House Absolute. This doesn't mean, of course, that it isn't also connected via some kind of magic mirror/Father Inire mechanism. I think that's more or less certain. > FWIW > > > -bsharp > _________________________________________________________________ > Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync. > http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_042009 > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 04 Apr 2009, 17:08 in reply to b sharp > On Apr 3, 2009, at 6:35 AM, b sharp wrote: > > Jeff Wilson writes: > > What's the example for Ultan? IIRC, during his sighted days he was > > fond > > of reading by a window on the 49th floor of the library, > > overlooking the > > Upholsterer's Garden. > Thanks for bringing up that scene, I had forgotten it. I'm not sure > if it > is negative or positive evidence for the library extending back (and > forward) > into time. We are told it extends in space as far as the House > Absolute; > too far to be a "natural" extension I'll guess. > > I re-read the passage and I'll note that the Upholsterer's Garden > serves the purpose > of drying rosemary to stuff into pillows (reminds me a bit of the > cushions from > Severian's tryst with Jolenta). If the Library extends down to the > past but > also rises up 49 floors, perhaps it extends far enough into the > future to > reach Earth, as does the Jungle Hut. > > With regards to Gene Wolfe's Earth, I think it is safe to say that > Rosemary > (Wolfe's wife) is an important part of it. Also, wolfe was 49 years > old when > Shadow of the Torturer was published. > > I'll also note that Ultan (and Cyby) tell the story of his reading > and looking > out the window of the 49th floor to mark when Ultan first started to > realize he > was going blind. I'll further note that Jorge Luis Borges became > fully blind in > his 50's (he was 81 when SotT was published). > > FWIW > > > -bsharp > _________________________________________________________________ nice parsing. I love that 49 bit. in the realm of Sci-Fi, has anyone else done this sort of embedded casual time travel structure before? I've always considered our timelines to be wrapped up in a spiral, so a vertical structure would have the opportunity to exist in the different layers. reminds one of a archeological documentary where the narrator says, as you descend into the canyon, "And now we walk further back in time with each strata in the crust" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 05 Apr 2009, 00:46 in reply to Son of Witz > Son of Witz wrote: > in the realm of Sci-Fi, has anyone else done this sort of embedded > casual time travel structure before? Zelazny has some of it in his Amber books, and David Gerrold put some into the original "Land of the Lost" TV series. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ David Stockhoff — 05 Apr 2009, 13:37 follows, by subject match Jeff Wilson Along these lines, there's another "miracle" (more of a trick) of Severian's that might follow this pattern: when he tosses the craquemarte in the air from the deck of the ship upon Gyoll and catches it. Once I got that Severian's healing power might be a power over time, I assumed that he simply reversed time so that the cutlass flew back into his hand. It seems like the kind of thing he would do. If so, you could also look at it, I suppose, as time travel into the future while moving upward, and travel into the past on the return path downward. The problem, of course, is that the past is also the future, since the catch follows the release in time. But the return path is only a ripple in local spacetime while Urth moves forward. Thus, a paradox, but a neat one. > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 10:08:21 -0700 > From: Son of Witz > Subject: Re: (urth) Hut in the Jungle > To: The Urth Mailing List > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > > On Apr 3, 2009, at 6:35 AM, b sharp wrote: > > Jeff Wilson writes: > > > > What's the example for Ultan? IIRC, during his sighted days he was > > > > fond > > > > of reading by a window on the 49th floor of the library, > > > > overlooking the > > > > Upholsterer's Garden. > > > > > > Thanks for bringing up that scene, I had forgotten it. I'm not sure > > if it > > is negative or positive evidence for the library extending back (and > > forward) > > into time. We are told it extends in space as far as the House > > Absolute; > > too far to be a "natural" extension I'll guess. > > > > I re-read the passage and I'll note that the Upholsterer's Garden > > serves the purpose > > of drying rosemary to stuff into pillows (reminds me a bit of the > > cushions from > > Severian's tryst with Jolenta). If the Library extends down to the > > past but > > also rises up 49 floors, perhaps it extends far enough into the > > future to > > reach Earth, as does the Jungle Hut. > > > > With regards to Gene Wolfe's Earth, I think it is safe to say that > > Rosemary > > (Wolfe's wife) is an important part of it. Also, wolfe was 49 years > > old when > > Shadow of the Torturer was published. > > > > I'll also note that Ultan (and Cyby) tell the story of his reading > > and looking > > out the window of the 49th floor to mark when Ultan first started to > > realize he > > was going blind. I'll further note that Jorge Luis Borges became > > fully blind in > > his 50's (he was 81 when SotT was published). > > > > FWIW > > > > > > -bsharp > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > nice parsing. I love that 49 bit. > > in the realm of Sci-Fi, has anyone else done this sort of embedded > casual time travel structure before? > I've always considered our timelines to be wrapped up in a spiral, so > a vertical structure would have the opportunity to exist in the > different layers. > reminds one of a archeological documentary where the narrator says, as > you descend into the canyon, "And now we walk further back in time > with each strata in the crust" > > > > ------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 07 Apr 2009, 13:57 in reply to Jeff Wilson getting dim memories of Land of the Lost now. SLEESTAKS!!! > On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote: > Son of Witz wrote: > > in the realm of Sci-Fi, has anyone else done this sort of embedded > > casual time travel structure before? > Zelazny has some of it in his Amber books, and David Gerrold put > some into the original "Land of the Lost" TV series. > > -- > Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com > < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jordon Flato — 07 Apr 2009, 16:13 in reply to Son of Witz It must be obvious to everyone that the inspiration for Zak on Tzadkiels ship was little Chaka from Land of the Lost. Am I right? Am I right? > On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Son of Witz wrote: > getting dim memories of Land of the Lost now. > SLEESTAKS!!! > > > > On Apr 4, 2009, at 5:46 PM, Jeff Wilson wrote: > > Son of Witz wrote: > > > in the realm of Sci-Fi, has anyone else done this sort of embedded casual > > > time travel structure before? > > Zelazny has some of it in his Amber books, and David Gerrold put some into > > the original "Land of the Lost" TV series. > > > > -- > > Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com > > < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > > > _______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Son of Witz — 07 Apr 2009, 16:33 follows, by subject match Jordon Flato > It must be obvious to everyone that the inspiration for Zak on Tzadkiels > ship was little Chaka from Land of the Lost. Am I right? Am I right? yuk yuk! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jeff Wilson — 08 Apr 2009, 08:30 in reply to Son of Witz > Son of Witz wrote: > getting dim memories of Land of the Lost now. > SLEESTAKS!!! Exactly, some of the scariest monsters on TV - they're not fast or clever, but there's always more of them waiting in the dark and they have these HUGE mouths. Enik's tragic discovery that they are not his primitive ancestors but instead are his race's debased descendants was moving - and perhaps sheds some light on the roughly contemporaneous 5HC "abos". -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com < http://www.io.com/~jwilson > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------