Urth Digest, Vol 56, Issue 37
The Urth list — 53 messages, 13 voices, 16 Apr 2009
https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5411
David Stockhoff16 Apr 2009, 18:04
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
14 quoted lines
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net>
Message-ID: <925508.79653.qm at web50710.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
And we didn't need LS to consist entirely of dramatic
scenes, in the sense of "The Cat in the Starfleet's
Attic". I'm glad that in NS and SS, our narrators get to
ruminate occasionally.
↳ in reply to David Stockhoff
Having just read through both LS and SS, one of my favorite aspects, minor though it may be, is that in LS we have Horns voice, which we think is Silk, and in SS we have Silks voice, which we think is Horns. They tell each others stories, and the style of their narrative voice greatly affects the telling. There is something so resonant in this for me. Just a brilliant stroke.
I'm still on the fence about the Nettle/Vadsig/Hide voice of the Whorl narrative in RttW.
Also, I guess in fact in LS we don't JUST have horns voice, but Nettle's too. Which makes here the only common narrative voice between the two works. (Holy spirit?)
27 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>wrote: Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net>
Message-ID: <925508.79653.qm at web50710.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
And we didn't need LS to consist entirely of dramatic
scenes, in the sense of "The Cat in the Starfleet's
Attic". I'm glad that in NS and SS, our narrators get to
ruminate occasionally.
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 090416-0, 04/16/2009
Tested on: 4/16/2009 2:04:27 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
Of course, there's another layer of complexity here.
I'm currently midway through Return to the Whorl, where SilkHorn makes several references to his theory that the Oreb of SS is not the Oreb of LS, despite their apparently identical behavior except when Scylla is acting through Oreb. This bothered me the first time I read it, but I took it as just another layer of uncertainty, melancholy, and alienation--maybe even the beloved pet from the first series is an imposter.
Well, I now think that was wrong. To me, it always comes back to the idea that by imitating someone, you become them--Incus was the first to spell it out, but the Outsider later seems to confirm it to Silk, which indicates to me that Wolfe thinks it's very important--important enough to repeat and important enough to have the One True God say it.
Horn's skill of imitating Silk allowed him to write Silk's story. It also allowed him to almost become Silk without noticing it--SilkHorn's insistence that he is really just Horn acting like Silk convinces no one except, at times, himself.
I think the character I'll call "Oreb(?)" is a reflection of that. In RttW, when SilkHorn first meets Oreb(?), he asks if he "knew" the original Oreb, and then asks "Did he teach you how to talk?" What I think Wolfe is trying to flag in that scene is that, in a sense, it doesn't matter if Oreb(?) is Oreb or not--he's functionally Oreb because by imitating Oreb, he has become him. The soul, in LS/SS, may be almost as simple as diction + habituation.
Obviously this also explains the somewhat lazy use of exaggerated diction (Patera Incus, Patera, that, is, um, augur, hey? Remora, d'yeh remember Pig?
Yeh do!, and all of the Dorp people.) Wolfe is good, but the challenge of writing people's souls into their diction and vice-versa is tough unless characters have idiosyncratic modes of speech.
17 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com> wrote: Having just read through both LS and SS, one of my favorite aspects, minor though it may be, is that in LS we have Horns voice, which we think is Silk, and in SS we have Silks voice, which we think is Horns. They tell each others stories, and the style of their narrative voice greatly affects the telling. There is something so resonant in this for me. Just a brilliant stroke.
I'm still on the fence about the Nettle/Vadsig/Hide voice of the Whorl narrative in RttW.
Also, I guess in fact in LS we don't JUST have horns voice, but Nettle's too. Which makes here the only common narrative voice between the two works. (Holy spirit?)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to John Watkins
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations, I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb. Certainly, there are changes because of Scylla, but it would make very little sense to me that Oreb was another bird imitaing Oreb. As a connecting Avatar between Silk and Silkhorn, he makes a great deal of thematic sense to me.
As an imitation of the orignial Oreb, it has far less resonance to me, even with your good analysis of the siginficance of imitation above.
I've always seen Oreb, like Mucor, to always see the 'soul' of the person he is seeing. His change of seeing Jahlee from Bad Thing to Good Girl being a prime example.
Oreb, like Mucor, is above the trickery and confusion of the multiple identiy crises.
Except, of course, he isn't. Because he's Scylla. WTF?
implodes
30 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote: Of course, there's another layer of complexity here. I'm currently midway through Return to the Whorl, where SilkHorn makes several references to his theory that the Oreb of SS is not the Oreb of LS, despite their apparently identical behavior except when Scylla is acting through Oreb. This bothered me the first time I read it, but I took it as just another layer of uncertainty, melancholy, and alienation--maybe even the beloved pet from the first series is an imposter.
Well, I now think that was wrong. To me, it always comes back to the idea that by imitating someone, you become them--Incus was the first to spell it out, but the Outsider later seems to confirm it to Silk, which indicates to me that Wolfe thinks it's very important--important enough to repeat and important enough to have the One True God say it.
Horn's skill of imitating Silk allowed him to write Silk's story. It also allowed him to almost become Silk without noticing it--SilkHorn's insistence that he is really just Horn acting like Silk convinces no one except, at times, himself.
I think the character I'll call "Oreb(?)" is a reflection of that. In RttW, when SilkHorn first meets Oreb(?), he asks if he "knew" the original Oreb, and then asks "Did he teach you how to talk?" What I think Wolfe is trying to flag in that scene is that, in a sense, it doesn't matter if Oreb(?) is Oreb or not--he's functionally Oreb because by imitating Oreb, he has become him. The soul, in LS/SS, may be almost as simple as diction
+ habituation.
Obviously this also explains the somewhat lazy use of exaggerated diction (Patera Incus, Patera, that, is, um, augur, hey? Remora, d'yeh remember Pig? Yeh do!, and all of the Dorp people.) Wolfe is good, but the challenge of writing people's souls into their diction and vice-versa is tough unless characters have idiosyncratic modes of speech.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
Having just read through both LS and SS, one of my favorite aspects, minor though it may be, is that in LS we have Horns voice, which we think is Silk, and in SS we have Silks voice, which we think is Horns. They tell each others stories, and the style of their narrative voice greatly affects the telling. There is something so resonant in this for me. Just a brilliant stroke.
I'm still on the fence about the Nettle/Vadsig/Hide voice of the Whorl narrative in RttW.
Also, I guess in fact in LS we don't JUST have horns voice, but Nettle's too. Which makes here the only common narrative voice between the two works. (Holy spirit?)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff <
dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. On the level of mere plot, SilkHorn doubts Oreb(?) is Oreb because 1) he's suppressing Silk's memories of the last 20 years, which may have involved continuous association with Oreb, and 2) the Horn side has no idea how old night choughs can get. But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in On Blue's Waters where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his best to imitate him for his entire life. This is wrong, but it's his justification of himself.
45 quoted lines · 1–4 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com> wrote: Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations, I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb. Certainly, there are changes because of Scylla, but it would make very little sense to me that Oreb was another bird imitaing Oreb. As a connecting Avatar between Silk and Silkhorn, he makes a great deal of thematic sense to me.
As an imitation of the orignial Oreb, it has far less resonance to me, even with your good analysis of the siginficance of imitation above.
I've always seen Oreb, like Mucor, to always see the 'soul' of the person
he is seeing. His change of seeing Jahlee from Bad Thing to Good Girl being a prime example.
Oreb, like Mucor, is above the trickery and confusion of the multiple identiy crises.
Except, of course, he isn't. Because he's Scylla. WTF?
implodes
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote:
Of course, there's another layer of complexity here.
I'm currently midway through Return to the Whorl, where SilkHorn makes several references to his theory that the Oreb of SS is not the Oreb of LS, despite their apparently identical behavior except when Scylla is acting through Oreb. This bothered me the first time I read it, but I took it as just another layer of uncertainty, melancholy, and alienation--maybe even the beloved pet from the first series is an imposter.
Well, I now think that was wrong. To me, it always comes back to the idea that by imitating someone, you become them--Incus was the first to spell it out, but the Outsider later seems to confirm it to Silk, which indicates to me that Wolfe thinks it's very important--important enough to repeat and important enough to have the One True God say it.
Horn's skill of imitating Silk allowed him to write Silk's story. It also allowed him to almost become Silk without noticing it--SilkHorn's insistence that he is really just Horn acting like Silk convinces no one except, at times, himself.
I think the character I'll call "Oreb(?)" is a reflection of that. In RttW, when SilkHorn first meets Oreb(?), he asks if he "knew" the original Oreb, and then asks "Did he teach you how to talk?" What I think Wolfe is trying to flag in that scene is that, in a sense, it doesn't matter if Oreb(?) is Oreb or not--he's functionally Oreb because by imitating Oreb, he has become him. The soul, in LS/SS, may be almost as simple as diction + habituation.
Obviously this also explains the somewhat lazy use of exaggerated diction (Patera Incus, Patera, that, is, um, augur, hey? Remora, d'yeh remember Pig? Yeh do!, and all of the Dorp people.) Wolfe is good, but the challenge of writing people's souls into their diction and vice-versa is tough unless characters have idiosyncratic modes of speech.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
Having just read through both LS and SS, one of my favorite aspects,
minor though it may be, is that in LS we have Horns voice, which we think is Silk, and in SS we have Silks voice, which we think is Horns. They tell each others stories, and the style of their narrative voice greatly affects the telling. There is something so resonant in this for me. Just a brilliant stroke.
I'm still on the fence about the Nettle/Vadsig/Hide voice of the Whorl narrative in RttW.
Also, I guess in fact in LS we don't JUST have horns voice, but Nettle's too. Which makes here the only common narrative voice between the two works. (Holy spirit?)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff <
dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to John Watkins
I see. Yes, that is a good reading of it.
49 quoted lines · 1–5 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:37 AM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote: Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. On the level of mere plot, SilkHorn doubts Oreb(?) is Oreb because 1) he's suppressing Silk's memories of the last 20 years, which may have involved continuous association with Oreb, and 2) the Horn side has no idea how old night choughs can get. But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in On Blue's Waters where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his best to imitate him for his entire life. This is wrong, but it's his justification of himself.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations, I can't see any evidence at all
that Oreb would not be Oreb. Certainly, there are changes because of Scylla, but it would make very little sense to me that Oreb was another bird imitaing Oreb. As a connecting Avatar between Silk and Silkhorn, he makes a great deal of thematic sense to me.
As an imitation of the orignial Oreb, it has far less resonance to me, even with your good analysis of the siginficance of imitation above.
I've always seen Oreb, like Mucor, to always see the 'soul' of the person
he is seeing. His change of seeing Jahlee from Bad Thing to Good Girl being a prime example.
Oreb, like Mucor, is above the trickery and confusion of the multiple identiy crises.
Except, of course, he isn't. Because he's Scylla. WTF?
implodes
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote:
Of course, there's another layer of complexity here.
I'm currently midway through Return to the Whorl, where SilkHorn makes several references to his theory that the Oreb of SS is not the Oreb of LS, despite their apparently identical behavior except when Scylla is acting through Oreb. This bothered me the first time I read it, but I took it as just another layer of uncertainty, melancholy, and alienation--maybe even the beloved pet from the first series is an imposter.
Well, I now think that was wrong. To me, it always comes back to the idea that by imitating someone, you become them--Incus was the first to spell it out, but the Outsider later seems to confirm it to Silk, which indicates to me that Wolfe thinks it's very important--important enough to repeat and important enough to have the One True God say it.
Horn's skill of imitating Silk allowed him to write Silk's story. It also allowed him to almost become Silk without noticing it--SilkHorn's insistence that he is really just Horn acting like Silk convinces no one except, at times, himself.
I think the character I'll call "Oreb(?)" is a reflection of that. In RttW, when SilkHorn first meets Oreb(?), he asks if he "knew" the original Oreb, and then asks "Did he teach you how to talk?" What I think Wolfe is trying to flag in that scene is that, in a sense, it doesn't matter if Oreb(?) is Oreb or not--he's functionally Oreb because by imitating Oreb, he has become him. The soul, in LS/SS, may be almost as simple as diction + habituation.
Obviously this also explains the somewhat lazy use of exaggerated diction (Patera Incus, Patera, that, is, um, augur, hey? Remora, d'yeh remember Pig? Yeh do!, and all of the Dorp people.) Wolfe is good, but the challenge of writing people's souls into their diction and vice-versa is tough unless characters have idiosyncratic modes of speech.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
Having just read through both LS and SS, one of my favorite aspects,
minor though it may be, is that in LS we have Horns voice, which we think is Silk, and in SS we have Silks voice, which we think is Horns. They tell each others stories, and the style of their narrative voice greatly affects the telling. There is something so resonant in this for me. Just a brilliant stroke.
I'm still on the fence about the Nettle/Vadsig/Hide voice of the Whorl narrative in RttW.
Also, I guess in fact in LS we don't JUST have horns voice, but Nettle's too. Which makes here the only common narrative voice between the two works. (Holy spirit?)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff <
dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to David Stockhoff
Quick question for you guys:
Which short story of Wolfe's do you think would be the easiest to film, where some of the moral ambiguity and complexity of Wolfe could show through on screen?
I'm not a connoisseur of his short work, and it's often struck me as dryer, but would love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Robin
12 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff
<dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to Robin Dunn
Long Sun would be an interesting set of films or, say, HBO series.
Fifth Head, the original story, would probably be my choice for a discrete movie.
21 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Robin Dunn <bigbadgerjohnny at gmail.com>wrote: Quick question for you guys:
Which short story of Wolfe's do you think would be the easiest to film, where some of the moral ambiguity and complexity of Wolfe could show through on screen?
I'm not a connoisseur of his short work, and it's often struck me as dryer, but would love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Robin
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff
<dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to John Watkins
Fifth head was definitely my first choice, though the robot would require a medium amount of money :)
I was thinking of something that would translate into a good 5 to 15 minute film.
22 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:55 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com> wrote: Long Sun would be an interesting set of films or, say, HBO series. Fifth Head, the original story, would probably be my choice for a discrete movie. On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Robin Dunn <bigbadgerjohnny at gmail.com> wrote:
Quick question for you guys:
Which short story of Wolfe's do you think would be the easiest to film, where some of the moral ambiguity and complexity of Wolfe could show through on screen?
I'm not a connoisseur of his short work, and it's often struck me as dryer, but would love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Robin
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff
<dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to Robin Dunn
1 quoted line
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Robin Dunn <bigbadgerjohnny at gmail.com> wrote: I was thinking of something that would translate into a good 5 to 15 minute film.
While to do it right would take a bit longer than 15 minutes, "The Detective of Dreams" would be fairly inexpensive to film and would (I think) translate fairly well.
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
brunians at brunians.org16 Apr 2009, 20:16
↳ in reply to Robin Dunn
There are people working on The Death Of Dr Island:
http://www.doctorisland.com/
.
21 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
Quick question for you guys:
Which short story of Wolfe's do you think would be the easiest to film, where some of the moral ambiguity and complexity of Wolfe could show through on screen?
I'm not a connoisseur of his short work, and it's often struck me as dryer, but would love to hear your thoughts.
Cheers,
Robin
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, David Stockhoff
<dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
6 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote: I was thinking of something that would translate into a good 5 to 15 minute film.
While to do it right would take a bit longer than 15
minutes, "The
Detective of Dreams" would be fairly inexpensive to
film and
would (I think) translate fairly well.
Speaking of which, "La Befana" would work too, though I
don't like it as well as "The Detective of Dreams".
Hey, how 'bout "The War Beneath the Tree"? I think that one
could have real potential as an animated feature. :-)
Jerry Friedman
brunians at brunians.org16 Apr 2009, 20:23
↳ in reply to Jerry Friedman
2 quoted lines
Hey, how 'bout "The War Beneath the Tree"? I think that one
could have real potential as an animated feature. :-)
That would be excellent for the Christmas market, oh yes.
Show it to every three year old in the world, man.
.
James Wynn16 Apr 2009, 20:27
↳ in reply to Robin Dunn
1 quoted line
Which short story of Wolfe's do you think would be the easiest to film, where some of the moral ambiguity and complexity of Wolfe could show through on screen?
Counting Cats in Zanzibar would receive as little or as much FX as one chose to receive and the story could be told in 15 minutes. The dialog could be converted directly to the adapted screenplay. It utilizes scifi concepts already well understood much of the audience, so very little exposition is necessary.
Perhaps a short scene could be added to dramatize the three laws of robotics.
J.
Rob Thornton16 Apr 2009, 20:28
↳ in reply to brunians at brunians.org
"When I Was Ming the Merciless" would also make a good short. If you do it without shifting perspectives, it can be filmed in one room with two people.
rob t.
10 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
Hey, how 'bout "The War Beneath the Tree"? ?I think that one
could have real potential as an animated feature. :-)
That would be excellent for the Christmas market, oh yes.
Show it to every three year old in the world, man.
.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Rob Thornton
Thanks guys, you rock. :)
14 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Rob Thornton <oblate777 at gmail.com> wrote: "When I Was Ming the Merciless" would also make a good short. If you do it without shifting perspectives, it can be filmed in one room with two people.
rob t.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
Hey, how 'bout "The War Beneath the Tree"? ?I think that one
could have real potential as an animated feature. :-)
That would be excellent for the Christmas market, oh yes.
Show it to every three year old in the world, man.
.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to John Watkins
9 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations,
I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
John Watkins16 Apr 2009, 20:41
↳ in reply to James Wynn
You mean waaaaaaay back in Nightside?
15 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations, I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to John Watkins
James,
In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues, and just don't find anything at all that seems viable. It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention.
Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence? I'd be interested to follow that.
19 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote: You mean waaaaaaay back in Nightside?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations,
I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
24 quoted lines · 1–4 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com> wrote: James, In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues, and just don't find anything at all that seems viable. It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention.
Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence? I'd be interested to follow that.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote:
You mean waaaaaaay back in Nightside?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations,
I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
Oreb faints in Nightside right as Silk is about to sacrifice him to the Outsider. Silk assumes he's dead, discards the body and returns, after his adventure at Blood's, to find Oreb fluttering about. It's a weird scene. Oreb definitely appears to be dead and definitely appears to return, and it's weird that an augur, who kills animals with regularity, would be fooled by a mere faint.
28 quoted lines · 1–5 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com> wrote: And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
James,
In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues, and just don't find anything at all that seems viable. It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention.
Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence? I'd be interested to follow that.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com wrote:
You mean waaaaaaay back in Nightside?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations,
I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
Oreb faints in Nightside right as Silk is about to sacrifice him to the Outsider. Silk assumes he's dead, discards the body and returns, after his adventure at Blood's, to find Oreb fluttering about. It's a weird scene. Oreb definitely appears to be dead and definitely appears to return, and it's weird that an augur, who kills animals with regularity, would be fooled by a mere faint.
28 quoted lines · 1–5 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com> wrote: And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>wrote:
James,
In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues, and just don't find anything at all that seems viable. It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention.
Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence? I'd be interested to follow that.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com wrote:
You mean waaaaaaay back in Nightside?
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Hmmm. Besides Silkhorn's ruminations,
I can't see any evidence at all that Oreb would not be Oreb.
Oh, I agree--I think he's definitely still Oreb. [snip]
But I think his instinct, that Oreb is another bird perfectly
imitating Oreb, is still supposed to tell us something about
the movement of souls in the book and about SilkHorn's
understanding of himself--I think there's a bit in
OBW where SilkHorn says he isn't Silk but has done his
best to imitate him for his entire life.
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
1 quoted line
In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues, and just don't find anything at all that seems viable. It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention. Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence? I'd be interested to follow that.
Not yet, but it's on my list of things to do. I'm currently working straight through from FHoC, Peace, Devil in the Forest, etc etc etc. Still, it will be very hard to overcome "I just don't see it".
1) Horn was resurrected from the dead after three days even though Seawrack and Babbie were not in any doubt that he was dead. I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that.
2) Resurrected Horn shakes hands with a Neighbor who declares that he himself is Horn.
3) The Raja flat out denies that he is the fellow (whose name he forgets) that wore a ring and died on Green and was transferred to a body on the Whorl. Yet asserts (a lie) that in fact he is Horn (who died in the pit).
Incidentally, (not that it proves anything, I guess) in interviews Wolfe refers to the narrator of SS as the Raja. Not Horn. Not Silkhorn.
1 quoted line
And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
Chapter 2 of Nightside. Silk bought Oreb to sacrifice him to the Outsider. But just before he could, Oreb dropped dead (a bad sign). And then suddenly
he's alive again! Some people say Oreb was only faking which strikes me as very similar to what some say about dead Horn in the pit.
J.
James Wynn16 Apr 2009, 21:15
↳ follows, by subject match James Wynn
1 quoted line
I said: "I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that."
I meant, "more compelling than those three items."
There is one other that I just remembered. The Raja barely eats. He seems to not really need it. He confesses that he fakes eating a lot. But when Spring comes he is suddenly ravenous. I suppose that does not prove he is a Neighbor, but it does suggest that he's not merely human.
J.
Jordon Flato16 Apr 2009, 21:33
↳ in reply to James Wynn
Yeah, I note all of those points, and just don't find them compelling, sorry. We'll probably just see it differently.
I also just don't see how it adds anything to the thematic content, and to me it also takes away from it, which is one of the tests I usually posit Wolfe Textual theories against.
Again, don't mean you ain't right, just that I don't see it.
For instance, seeing someone unmoving at the bottom of a dimly lit pit from 30 feet, and assuming them dead, does not, to me, seem at all unusual.
And as for the neighbor saying "I am Horn" I can write more on that later. That one line, if taken by itself, may indicate what you mean. To me, you then have to contort yourself into thematic pretzles to indicate how a Neighbor giving permission to a neighbor (horn), is in any way thematically or textually intersesting...to me. What would the point of that be? Oh, hey, you may not know it yet, but you are a sleeper agent, and we'll get you to agree to let us come back to this planet to visit, as a representative of...wink wink...humanity!
Anyway, I'm really not trying to be dismissive. I see your points, just don't feel them in any way.
And Oreb was clearly faking it. Not resurrecting. ;)
23 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:08 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
In this reading of SS I've been looking for NeighberHorn clues,
and just don't find anything at all that seems viable.
It's a nifty theory, but it just seems to be a huge stretch to me, and I've been trying to pay close attention.
Have you gone back and reread it lately to look for more evidence?
I'd be interested to follow that.
Not yet, but it's on my list of things to do. I'm currently working straight through from FHoC, Peace, Devil in the Forest, etc etc etc. Still, it will be very hard to overcome "I just don't see it".
1) Horn was resurrected from the dead after three days even though Seawrack and Babbie were not in any doubt that he was dead. I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that.
2) Resurrected Horn shakes hands with a Neighbor who declares that he himself is Horn.
3) The Raja flat out denies that he is the fellow (whose name he forgets) that wore a ring and died on Green and was transferred to a body on the Whorl. Yet asserts (a lie) that in fact he is Horn (who died in the pit).
Incidentally, (not that it proves anything, I guess) in interviews Wolfe refers to the narrator of SS as the Raja. Not Horn. Not Silkhorn.
And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
Chapter 2 of Nightside. Silk bought Oreb to sacrifice him to the Outsider. But just before he could, Oreb dropped dead (a bad sign). And then suddenly
he's alive again! Some people say Oreb was only faking which strikes me as very similar to what some say about dead Horn in the pit.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
9 quoted lines
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
3) The Raja flat out denies that he is the fellow (whose
name he forgets) that wore a ring and died on Green and was
transferred to a body on the Whorl. Yet asserts (a lie) that
in fact he is Horn (who died in the pit).
Incidentally, (not that it proves anything, I guess) in
interviews Wolfe refers to the narrator of SS as the Raja.
...
Sorry to respond with a spelling correction rather than
something substantive, but it's "Rajan".
Jerry Friedman
John Watkins16 Apr 2009, 21:37
↳ in reply to James Wynn
4 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Not yet, but it's on my list of things to do. I'm currently working straight through from FHoC, Peace, Devil in the Forest, etc etc etc. Still, it will be very hard to overcome "I just don't see it".
1) Horn was resurrected from the dead after three days even though Seawrack and Babbie were not in any doubt that he was dead. I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that.
This is certainly compelling evidence that a Neighbor or more than one did something. I tend to agree that in some sense the being who comes out of the pit is not the same being who fell into it--as I've said before, this new entity has the life/blood/essence of a Neighbor and the will/memory/soul of Horn. Whether he's a different being, the same being resurrected with a new, alien element, or two beings in one is a tougher question.
1 quoted line
2) Resurrected Horn shakes hands with a Neighbor who declares that he himself is Horn.
This could mean a hundred things. My inclination is to believe that the resurrected Horn is still in a very important sense Horn--otherwise the Neighbor's decision to treat with him is pretty dishonest and confusing. Of course, it would be almost as confusing if Horn were merely Horn. It seems to me that his authority to treat on behalf of humanity is derived unique status as part-Neighbor--he is ideally suited to serve as a "greatest bridge" between the peoples.
1 quoted line
3) The Raja flat out denies that he is the fellow (whose name he forgets) that wore a ring and died on Green and was transferred to a body on the Whorl. Yet asserts (a lie) that in fact he is Horn (who died in the pit).
You do this consistently, but isn't it "Rajan"? Regardless, the Rajan is lying when he says that and when he says he can't remember the guy's name--he's trying to avoid confessing that he's been to Green (I think because he's trying to draw out Fava).
1 quoted line
Incidentally, (not that it proves anything, I guess) in interviews Wolfe refers to the narrator of SS as the Raja. Not Horn. Not Silkhorn.
That appears to be Wolfe's name for the gestalt being who writes the books down. Calling him "SilkHorn" might be giving away the store, after all.
Still, it supports the theory that he's a Neighbor in part as well.
Frankly, if there's no Neighbor in him, his astral projection makes no sense to me. Then again, Mora's posession power and dream-walking don't make much sense to me either.
6 quoted lines
And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
Chapter 2 of Nightside. Silk bought Oreb to sacrifice him to the Outsider. But just before he could, Oreb dropped dead (a bad sign). And then suddenly
he's alive again! Some people say Oreb was only faking which strikes me as very similar to what some say about dead Horn in the pit.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to John Watkins
I can see evidence for Neighbor blood or something neighborly being given to Horn in the pit. As a matter of fact, I've taken it as a given. A neighbor visits him, and sends his spirt to Nettle (after touching him on the forehead). Something very real happened there, which does connect Horn to the Neighbors directly somehow. However, I don't think there is a transfer of souls.
The dream projection to me is directly related, in part, to the ability of the Inhumu to project an image of themselves into the mind of humans, probably coupled with the ability of the neighbors to project themselves. It's a confusing element, to be sure.
21 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:37 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:08 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Not yet, but it's on my list of things to do. I'm currently working straight through from FHoC, Peace, Devil in the Forest, etc etc etc. Still, it will be very hard to overcome "I just don't see it".
1) Horn was resurrected from the dead after three days even though Seawrack and Babbie were not in any doubt that he was dead. I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that.
This is certainly compelling evidence that a Neighbor or more than one did something. I tend to agree that in some sense the being who comes out of the pit is not the same being who fell into it--as I've said before, this new entity has the life/blood/essence of a Neighbor and the will/memory/soul of Horn. Whether he's a different being, the same being resurrected with a new, alien element, or two beings in one is a tougher question.
2) Resurrected Horn shakes hands with a Neighbor who declares that he himself is Horn.
This could mean a hundred things. My inclination is to believe that the resurrected Horn is still in a very important sense Horn--otherwise the Neighbor's decision to treat with him is pretty dishonest and confusing. Of course, it would be almost as confusing if Horn were merely Horn. It seems to me that his authority to treat on behalf of humanity is derived unique status as part-Neighbor--he is ideally suited to serve as a "greatest bridge" between the peoples.
3) The Raja flat out denies that he is the fellow (whose name he forgets) that wore a ring and died on Green and was transferred to a body on the Whorl. Yet asserts (a lie) that in fact he is Horn (who died in the pit).
You do this consistently, but isn't it "Rajan"? Regardless, the Rajan is lying when he says that and when he says he can't remember the guy's name--he's trying to avoid confessing that he's been to Green (I think because he's trying to draw out Fava).
Incidentally, (not that it proves anything, I guess) in interviews Wolfe refers to the narrator of SS as the Raja. Not Horn. Not Silkhorn.
That appears to be Wolfe's name for the gestalt being who writes the books down. Calling him "SilkHorn" might be giving away the store, after all.
Still, it supports the theory that he's a Neighbor in part as well.
Frankly, if there's no Neighbor in him, his astral projection makes no sense to me. Then again, Mora's posession power and dream-walking don't make much sense to me either.
And wait, why am I not remembering when Oreb died in LS?
Chapter 2 of Nightside. Silk bought Oreb to sacrifice him to the Outsider. But just before he could, Oreb dropped dead (a bad sign). And then suddenly
he's alive again! Some people say Oreb was only faking which strikes me as very similar to what some say about dead Horn in the pit.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to John Watkins
3 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
You do this consistently, but isn't it "Rajan"?
Sorry to respond with a spelling correction rather than
something substantive, but it's "Rajan".
If I understand this properly, "Rajan" is the form of address. "O Rajan, aren't you Silk?" "Raja" is the nominative tense: "The Raja crawled out of the pit.
J.
Jordon Flato16 Apr 2009, 21:48
↳ in reply to James Wynn
Rajan.....
;)
7 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:15 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: I said: "I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that."
I meant, "more compelling than those three items."
There is one other that I just remembered. The Raja barely eats. He seems to not really need it. He confesses that he fakes eating a lot. But when Spring comes he is suddenly ravenous. I suppose that does not prove he is a Neighbor, but it does suggest that he's not merely human.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
I've been keeping an eye out for that eating thing, and it is more or less as you say. That point would be more compelling if Silk hadn't had such a weird relationship with food back in Long Sun. It really could be nothing more than Horn's appetite and tendency to get heavier fighting it out with Silk's habit of fasting, with each having an upper hand at different times. Then again, it could be what you say.
7 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:15 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: I said: "I doubt I'll find more compelling evidence than that."
I meant, "more compelling than those three items."
There is one other that I just remembered. The Raja barely eats. He seems to not really need it. He confesses that he fakes eating a lot. But when Spring comes he is suddenly ravenous. I suppose that does not prove he is a Neighbor, but it does suggest that he's not merely human.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
I don't think so...my OBW character index lists people like "Hoop, one of the RAJAN's scribes" and "Pehla, the RAJAN's principal concubine."
7 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:48 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: You do this consistently, but isn't it "Rajan"?
Sorry to respond with a spelling correction rather than
something substantive, but it's "Rajan".
If I understand this properly, "Rajan" is the form of address. "O Rajan, aren't you Silk?" "Raja" is the nominative tense: "The Raja crawled out of the pit.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to John Watkins
6 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
If I understand this properly, "Rajan" is the form of address.
"O Rajan, aren't you Silk?"
"Raja" is the nominative tense: "The Raja crawled out of the pit."
I don't think so...my OBW character index lists people
like "Hoop, one of the RAJAN's scribes" and "Pehla,
the RAJAN's principal concubine."
eh...okay. I think I'm technically right, but I'll conform to avoid antagonizing the list.
J.
Jordon Flato16 Apr 2009, 22:24
↳ in reply to James Wynn
Well, I don't want you to back down, I just don't remember a single instance of Raja in the books. Seems like if it was a valid conjugate, it would appear at least once.
10 quoted lines · 1–3 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:19 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: If I understand this properly, "Rajan" is the form of address.
"O Rajan, aren't you Silk?"
"Raja" is the nominative tense: "The Raja crawled out of the pit."
I don't think so...my OBW character index lists people
like "Hoop, one of the RAJAN's scribes" and "Pehla,
the RAJAN's principal concubine."
eh...okay. I think I'm technically right, but I'll conform to avoid antagonizing the list.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
4 quoted lines
Well, I don't want you to back down,
I just don't remember a single instance of Raja
in the books. Seems like if it was a valid conjugate,
it would appear at least once.
I don't mind backing down about stuff I don't care much about. In Sanskrit "Raja" is the nominative tense. Just because I'm technically accurate doesn't mean I'm textually accurate. I didn't imagine it would make a difference to anyone but me.
J.
James Wynn16 Apr 2009, 22:50
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
4 quoted lines
I also just don't see how it adds anything
to the thematic content, and to me it also
takes away from it, which is one of the tests
I usually posit Wolfe Textual theories against.
It is loaded with thematic content.
1) Foremost, it is a rationalization of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--the same and yet distinct. In Augustinian theology, the person of the Holy Spirit is the relationship, the love, the connection between the Father and the Son. Of course, it works even better if one accepts that Horn is a clone of Typhon and that Silk is the son of Typhon and Kypris and that Silk is possessed by (or in some other way is) Pas/Typhon. But it is not necessary.
2) Also, the ability for the Ring Bearer Horn to receive the rights to Blue is analogous to the right of Jesus Christ to have redeem humanity and to be the Mediator between God and man: He must be 100% human and 100% Neighbor.
3) It also fits with concepts that Wolfe has tinkered with elsewhere, such as the alien VRT becoming a "perfect" imitation of Marsch and Mani the cat being neither a cat nor an elemental spirit.
5 quoted lines
For instance, seeing someone unmoving at the bottom
of a dimly lit pit from 30 feet, and assuming them dead,
does not, to me, seem at all unusual.
[snip]
And Oreb was clearly faking it. Not resurrecting. ;)
(sigh)
Maybe you're just tweaking my ear. But, there are readers who believe
this so I'll act like you aren't:
An ability to perfectly feign death well enough to fool four expert witnesses is a power I was not aware night choughs possessed. I'm sure you've held birds in your hand before. An avian heartbeat is not something that one would fail to detect. But maybe Horn learned it from Oreb.
2 quoted lines
And as for the neighbor saying "I am Horn" I can write more
on that later. That one line, if taken by itself, may indicate what you mean.
This would mean nothing to me except when combined with the other stuff. Sure, you can individually dispense each of these in turn. Seawrack could not be as sure Horn was dead as she claimed. The Neighbor identifying himself as Horn could mean many things (even if the Rajan is Horn, it's not absolutely clear what it means). Horn's denial that he was on Green was to draw out Fava (then why tell the story?). Silk is a an anorexic masochist. Oh yeah, then there is the Rajan saying that he killed Hide and Hoof's father.
But you pile all these together and they point to something else. They do to me, anyway. I could be wrong in the particular explanation, I guess, but there is something more than Horn-->SilkHorn going on, and I don't know what resolves all these better than what I've presented.
Of course, I'm right but Wolfe's stories are big enough for the both of us. ;-)
J.
Robin Dunn16 Apr 2009, 22:51
↳ in reply to James Wynn
You know we Wolfe fiends, we'll analyze every last word like it was from the holy mouth of Joyce ;)
5 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:42 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: Well, I don't want you to back down, I just don't remember a single instance of Raja in the books. ?Seems like if it was a valid conjugate, it would appear at least once.
I don't mind backing down about stuff I don't care much about. In Sanskrit "Raja" is the nominative tense. Just because I'm technically accurate doesn't mean I'm textually accurate. I didn't imagine it would make a difference to anyone but me.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
Yes, it's possible that this subtlety escaped Wolfe.
5 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 6:42 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: Well, I don't want you to back down, I just don't remember a single instance of Raja in the books. Seems like if it was a valid conjugate, it would appear at least once.
I don't mind backing down about stuff I don't care much about. In Sanskrit "Raja" is the nominative tense. Just because I'm technically accurate doesn't mean I'm textually accurate. I didn't imagine it would make a difference to anyone but me.
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
I just have equally compelling arguments in my head for each of those instances that point to other things, that's all.
It is a big book indeed.
And no, I'm not tweaking your ear about Oreb. Maybe Wolfe didn't do as good of a job in thinking about the inability to distinguish between alive and dead birds as you, but to me, it seems ridiculous to posit a resurrected Oreb. By whom? Is Silk Severian now, and Oreb Triskele? Was Oreb Scylla the entire time? Can Mainframe gods ressurect dead animals? What point would ressurecting a character have when that character was just introduced.
If you could answer any of those questions (maybe you can) then I might entertain the thought. I can't think of possible expliantions for any of them, though.
30 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:50 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: I also just don't see how it adds anything to the thematic content, and to me it also takes away from it, which is one of the tests I usually posit Wolfe Textual theories against.
It is loaded with thematic content.
1) Foremost, it is a rationalization of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--the same and yet distinct. In Augustinian theology, the person of the Holy Spirit is the relationship, the love, the connection between the Father and the Son. Of course, it works even better if one accepts that Horn is a clone of Typhon and that Silk is the son of Typhon and Kypris and that Silk is possessed by (or in some other way is) Pas/Typhon. But it is not necessary.
2) Also, the ability for the Ring Bearer Horn to receive the rights to Blue is analogous to the right of Jesus Christ to have redeem humanity and to be the Mediator between God and man: He must be 100% human and 100% Neighbor.
3) It also fits with concepts that Wolfe has tinkered with elsewhere, such as the alien VRT becoming a "perfect" imitation of Marsch and Mani the cat being neither a cat nor an elemental spirit.
For instance, seeing someone unmoving at the bottom
of a dimly lit pit from 30 feet, and assuming them dead,
does not, to me, seem at all unusual.
[snip]
And Oreb was clearly faking it. Not resurrecting. ;)
(sigh)
Maybe you're just tweaking my ear. But, there are readers who believe
this so I'll act like you aren't:
An ability to perfectly feign death well enough to fool four expert witnesses is a power I was not aware night choughs possessed. I'm sure you've held birds in your hand before. An avian heartbeat is not something that one would fail to detect. But maybe Horn learned it from Oreb.
And as for the neighbor saying "I am Horn" I can write more
on that later. That one line, if taken by itself, may indicate what you mean.
This would mean nothing to me except when combined with the other stuff. Sure, you can individually dispense each of these in turn. Seawrack could not be as sure Horn was dead as she claimed. The Neighbor identifying himself as Horn could mean many things (even if the Rajan is Horn, it's not absolutely clear what it means). Horn's denial that he was on Green was to draw out Fava (then why tell the story?). Silk is a an anorexic masochist. Oh yeah, then there is the Rajan saying that he killed Hide and Hoof's father.
But you pile all these together and they point to something else. They do
to me, anyway. I could be wrong in the particular explanation, I guess, but there is something more than Horn-->SilkHorn going on, and I don't know what resolves all these better than what I've presented.
Of course, I'm right but Wolfe's stories are big enough for the both of us. ;-)
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
I mostly agree with you, but I want to take some points in turn.
1 quoted line
This would mean nothing to me except when combined with the other stuff. Sure, you can individually dispense each of these in turn. Seawrack could not be as sure Horn was dead as she claimed. The Neighbor identifying himself as Horn could mean many things (even if the Rajan is Horn, it's not absolutely clear what it means). Horn's denial that he was on Green was to draw out Fava (then why tell the story?).
He told the story with the intent of the inhuma present revealing herself to him. The whole goal was to accurately describe Green so that the inhuma would react with surprise to the fact that he had already been there. He strongly suspected Fava already and so watched her. His intent was not to reinforce the belief that he was a witch, and so he did not want to suggest that he had had those adventures on Green.
Do you really think he had momentarily forgotten Horn's name?
1 quoted line
Silk is a an anorexic masochist.
Silk does fast, whether this makes him these things or not. It's mentioned at least twice in Nightside.
1 quoted line
Oh yeah, then there is the Rajan saying that he killed Hide and Hoof's father.
Not sure much can be made of this. The entity known as "Horn" has ceased to exist in any meaningful sense by the time that comment is made (unless he's in Babbie, which the Rajan might not be aware of).
8 quoted lines
But you pile all these together and they point to something else. They do
to me, anyway. I could be wrong in the particular explanation, I guess, but there is something more than Horn-->SilkHorn going on, and I don't know what resolves all these better than what I've presented.
Of course, I'm right but Wolfe's stories are big enough for the both of us. ;-)
J.
_______________________________________________
↳ in reply to James Wynn
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
...
3 quoted lines · depth 2
Well, I don't want you to back down,
I just don't remember a single instance of Raja
in the books. Seems like if it was a valid conjugate,
Declension?
4 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
it would appear at least once.
I don't mind backing down about stuff I don't care
much about. In Sanskrit
"Raja" is the nominative tense.
Case?
4 quoted lines
Just because I'm technically accurate
doesn't mean I'm textually accurate. I didn't
imagine it would make a
difference to anyone but me.
Apparently I was part of one of those Zeitgeist things that
caused people to have the same reaction all at once.
Strange.
Anyway, I'm impressed that you know about the vocative
case in Sanskrit, as I know nothing about Sanskrit. But
"cald?" must be deliberately inaccurate Spanish for
"alcalde", maybe suggesting linguistic change over the
millennia, so "the Rajan" could easily be something
similar. Or just that we can't possibly decline anything
in English--having a different form for "Kill the Rajan"
or "I gave the Rajan permission"--so Wolfe picked one.
Jerry Friedman
James Wynn17 Apr 2009, 00:04
↳ in reply to Jerry Friedman
3 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
In Sanskrit
"Raja" is the nominative tense.
Case?
Sure.
2 quoted lines
Anyway, I'm impressed that you know about the vocative
case in Sanskrit, as I know nothing about Sanskrit.
I don't speak Sanskrit. I looked it up (Thanks for that, Mr. Wolfe). Actually, I don' think there IS a modern term "rajan". Rajan is the term from which we get "raja" and the nominative case is "ray-jay".
J.
Matthew Groves17 Apr 2009, 00:23
↳ in reply to James Wynn
Do we know when Oreb(?) became Scylla? He was no ordinary talking night chough in Long Sun. Is there any reason to think he wasn't possessed by Scylla from the beginning?
8 quoted lines
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:37 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:
Well, he's not the same Oreb because he's Scylla.
No one else seems to wonder that Oreb was able to die and resurrect himself. It makes me believe that someone was possessing him at that time. But that's just me. But that would doubly make the Oreb of most of SS different from the Oreb of most of LS.
FWIW I think the whole speech is pointing to the fact that the Neighbor has been imitating Horn who imitated Silk. The whole thing harkens back to VRT of "The Fifth Head of Cerberus".
J.
↳ in reply to John Watkins
Blasphemer!
1 quoted line
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 5:51 PM, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com> wrote: Yes, it's possible that this subtlety escaped Wolfe.
↳ in reply to Jordon Flato
3 quoted lines
Jordan Flato:
Maybe Wolfe didn't do as good of a job in thinking about
the inability to distinguish between alive and dead birds as you,
Ehh....<shrug>
2 quoted lines
Jordan Flato:
but to me, it seems ridiculous to posit a resurrected Oreb. Is Silk Severian now, and Oreb Triskele?
Ha ha! Don't be silly. Quite the opposite since Oreb died when Silk touched him with his Claw. ;-)
2 quoted lines
Jordan Flato:
By whom? Was Oreb Scylla the entire time?
Could be, I guess, but I don't think so. I believe it was Pas who had fled to Oreb among other places when he was purged by Echidna and Co. Hierax, Tartaros or even the Outsider himself are reasonable candidates as well, I suppose.
5 quoted lines
Matthew Groves:
Do we know when Oreb(?) became Scylla?
He was no ordinary talking night chough in Long Sun.
Is there any reason to think he wasn't possessed by
Scylla from the beginning?
Well, the Rajan postulates that he was possessed by Scylla during the sacrifice just before they returned to Blue, but that doesn't mean anything really. The reason I doubt it is because she would have no reason to possess a night chough during the whole of the LS story rather than re-integrate and punish Silk for trying to kill her. Also, Oreb is a great aid to Silk and Awk in resurrecting Pas. I would have expected some interference in their mission if it were Scylla in there. That's how I would have written it.
2 quoted lines
Jordan Flato:
Can Mainframe gods resurrect dead animals?
The Mainframe gods can dramatically extend the lives of people they possess as Pas did with Jerboa. They can summon every snake in the area at a whim as Echidna did. They can heighten the senses of their vessels to perform feats otherwise impossible as Kypris did allowing Chenille to throw a knife and have it hit the same hole twice. Whenever anyone dies, bio or chem, their identities are instantly recorded in Mainframe.
All bets are off on what the Mainframe gods are incapable of. In fact, all this is probably only conceivable if one presumes that the entire Cargo was genetically modified to allow the gods to use them as puppets. So, yeah, I think a Mainframe god could probably kill and resurrect a vessel at will, at least temporarily. It is also possible that the god made Oreb all but dead...slowing his heart-rate undetectably.
I suppose there are limits, though. A possessed person probably can't flap his arms and fly to Mainframe. Oreb is capable of speaking only two words at a time no matter who possesses him.
3 quoted lines
Jordan Flato:
What point would resurrecting a character have when
that character was just introduced.
Umm...to bring him back to life? Anyway, if you were Pas hiding out or any other god for that matter, this is a reasonable method to prevent your vessel from being destroyed before you could return to Mainframe. And having Silk buy Oreb to sacrifice him is a good way to get them introduced.
There is one other thing, but I doubt anyone would be converted by it but me. Pas is New Testament Greek for "all". Another Greek word for "all" is "pan", and Pan is the only god to have died in historical time (Plutarch's lives) just before the birth of Christ. Finally, Pas is the demonic equivalent of Zeus who is also famously said to have died (his tomb was honored by the Cretans). Oreb dying is supposed to be a flag that Pas is in him, because (although we don't know it yet) Pas is "dead" at this point in the book.
I can't imagine that Wolfe really thought that Oreb inexplicably dying and reanimating would not raise an eye-brow among his readers to whom he has taught Textual Paranoia. For me, the fact that Silk supposed Oreb had just fainted and not died is evidence enough that that supposition is wrong. In Wolfe stories, the initial rationalization of a weird event is never the right one.
J.
David Stockhoff17 Apr 2009, 01:14
↳ follows, by subject match Matthew Groves
One should always be skeptical of resurrections in fiction. ;)
But remember, Severian was resurrected about half a dozen times. Why not an analog of the familiar of Apollo?
[Incidentally, I am sure "Raja(h)" never appears in SS. I would have noticed if it did.]
17 quoted lines
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:57:53 -0700
From: Jordon Flato <jordonflato at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Urth Digest, Vol 56, Issue 37
To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net>
Message-ID:
<273409710904161557j4c975f83oec02fbc987bdb3f8 at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I just have equally compelling arguments in my head for each of those instances that point to other things, that's all.
It is a big book indeed.
And no, I'm not tweaking your ear about Oreb. Maybe Wolfe didn't do as good of a job in thinking about the inability to distinguish between alive and dead birds as you, but to me, it seems ridiculous to posit a resurrected Oreb. By whom? Is Silk Severian now, and Oreb Triskele? Was Oreb Scylla the entire time? Can Mainframe gods ressurect dead animals? What point would ressurecting a character have when that character was just introduced.
If you could answer any of those questions (maybe you can) then I might entertain the thought. I can't think of possible expliantions for any of them, though.
↳ in reply to John Watkins
1 quoted line
I mostly agree with you, but I want to take some points in turn.
I hereby pick up the gauntlet.
1 quoted line
Do you really think he had momentarily forgotten Horn's name?
**************************
IGJ (HB) pg 122
"Was this you for real Incanto? Were you on Green? By Echidna's babies, I think you were!"
I shook my head and told him it had been someone else, a man whose name I have forgotten, a man who wore a ring with a white stone. My own name is Horn, no matter what Oreb may say.
***********************
This is disassociation. Horn lives on only in the Rajan's memories of Horn's memories from when he and Horn were one. He is focused on being and imitating Horn, not the creature named Horn who was created in the pit from a Neighbor and a human corpse. That creature has ceased to exist as well, just as Mani would cease to exist when the cat died. He also lives only in the Rajan's memories. But the Rajan has so many alternate memories now, he's confused. But it is clear (to me) from this statement that the Rajan sees a distinction between "Horn" and the man who died on Green.
2 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
Silk is a an anorexic masochist.
Silk does fast, whether this makes him these things or not. It's mentioned at least twice in Nightside.
Granted, but when it is combined with the onset of ravenous hunger in the Spring, we know more is going on here (incidentally, this is more of that Tree-Neighbor connection that I still don't understand). I do not recall an instance of LS Silk pretending to eat food set before him. He fasts, but when there is not a lot of food available anyway, it is easy to be holy in that way. Not the same thing as what happens in SS, I think.
3 quoted lines
Oh yeah, then there is the Rajan saying that he killed Hide and Hoof's father.
Not sure much can be made of this.
The entity known as "Horn" has ceased to exist in any meaningful sense by the time that comment is made (unless he's in Babbie, which the Rajan might not be aware of).
Yes, Horn had died, and the Horn-Neighbor had ceased to exist, but the entity who had accidentally killed the father of Hoof and Hide lived on, just as Mani's elemental spirit would live on after the cat died. Other than this explanation, however, nothing much can be made of this statement that satisfies me.
J.
Jerry Friedman17 Apr 2009, 04:14
↳ in reply to David Stockhoff
There are other possibilities. For instance, the narrators
could have added their comments, perhaps overtly raising
the question of who they are. That is, Wolfe could have
made them the kind of characters who would do that and who
would have interesting things to say.
They could have quoted Silk's letters, written-out sermons,
or other documents, maybe with an explanation of how they
got hold of them. ("Take these with you. There may be
something in them you can use for your book.")
They could have just inserted extended thoughts for Silk
into the narrative, as they did brief thoughts and
feelings. If necessary, at the end they could have said
something like, "What we showed Silk thinking about the
soul and body is mostly what he told us sprats in the
palaestra one day."
No doubt there are more options a writer like Wolfe
could have come up, and I think it would have been to
the book's benefit if he'd chosen one.
Jerry Friedman
12 quoted lines
--- On Thu, 4/16/09, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote: Doesn't the style of narration depend entirely on the narrator and his/her circumstances? That is, how else should the narrator of LS have narrated?
That scene-by scene style, without introspection, was
certainly a shift after Severian's many-layered and
discursive account. But Silk doesn't narrate LS.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:26:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: (urth) Weekly blog links
↳ in reply to James Wynn
2 quoted lines
At 01:04 17/04/2009, James Wynn wrote:
I don't speak Sanskrit. I looked it up (Thanks for that, Mr. Wolfe). Actually, I don' think there IS a modern term "rajan". Rajan is the term from which we get "raja" and the nominative case is "ray-jay".
There are quite a few modern languages descended from Sanskrit. In at least one of them -- Nepali -- "Rajan" is the ordinary nominative case that corresponds to Hindi "Raja".
best,
Mo
# ~ # ~ #
WolfeWiki -- a wiki about Gene Wolfe
http://www.wolfewiki.com/pmwiki/↳ follows, by subject match Jerry Friedman
2 quoted lines
The Raja barely eats. He seems to
not really need it. He confesses that he fakes eating a lot.
Reminds me of Dr. Talos, a construct, who doesn't need to sleep but fakes gratitude when Severian offers to relieve him on night watch.
-bsharp
James Wynn17 Apr 2009, 16:40
↳ in reply to Mo Holkar / UKG
1 quoted line
There are quite a few modern languages descended from Sanskrit. In at least one of them -- Nepali -- "Rajan" is the ordinary nominative case that corresponds to Hindi "Raja".
Ah! Then perhaps the culture of Gaon is Napalese.
J.
James Wynn17 Apr 2009, 18:11
↳ follows, by subject match James Wynn
2 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
There are quite a few modern languages descended from Sanskrit. In at least one of them -- Nepali -- "Rajan" is the ordinary nominative case that corresponds to Hindi "Raja".
Ah! Then perhaps the culture of Gaon is Napalese.
According to wikipedia, "gaon" means "village" in Hindi, Marathi (central-east India), Assamese (west India). Is it a term in Nepalese as well?
J.
Jeff Wilson18 Apr 2009, 09:05
↳ in reply to b sharp
5 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
b sharp wrote:
The Raja barely eats. He seems to
not really need it. He confesses that he fakes eating a lot.
Reminds me of Dr. Talos, a construct, who doesn't need to sleep but fakes gratitude when Severian offers to relieve him on night watch.
Is it really fake? He might have other things to do than watch out for antagonists.
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.