Subject: (urth) Monkey business

From: Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:07:58 +0000

Okay, let's see if we can find some middle ground in all this monkey
business.

That some characters in the Urth Cycle are compared, in some way, with
monkeys is beyond dispute. Since Wolfe wrote it, I think almost everyone
will agree that the simian markers signify *something*. What seems to be at
issue is what that something is.

There are also some appearances of monkey-like creatures, including the
dog-ape hybrid figure who looked in on Severian in the lazaret. Inire,
Rudesind and Fechin are each likened (by Sev or report of another character)
to a monkey, but in different ways.

Inire is rumored to look like a monkey and said to be the oldest man in the
world, so he must look like a very old man. He is said to be a little man,
with a wry neck and bow legs.

Rudesind has a wrinkled neck, long arms and legs, long feet, crooked fingers
and moves up and down his ladder like an aged monkey. His height is
undetermined, but when he led Sev to the Old Autarch in the House Absolute
(in CLAW) he was leaning on Sev's arm and had to cock his head up to look
Sev in the face. That implies that he is not very tall. He has brown eyes
that are "rheumy" and the hairs on his face are white with age.

Fechin is said by the old man at Casdoe's cabin (hereafter I will call him
"Old Man", since his name is not given**) to be tall and have red hair on
his hands and arms. His arms, but for their size, are said to have looked
like a monkey's. His face, however, was unlike a monkey's; it was handsome.

(** That his name is not given may or may not be important.)

Old Man and Rudesind both knew or met Fechin when they were boys, and the
old men were thought by Sev to be about the same age. Each had their picture
drawn or painted by Fechin when they were boys.

I don't think there is much to argue about in the above. Maybe having all
these basic facts in one place will suggest a theory other than Inire
somehow being some or all of these characters.

It should also be remembered that Sev's first manuscript was written ten
years after he became autarch, and that he had full access to the Old
Autarch's memories. The significance of that is that he had decades of
familiarity with Inire, which means most of the normal human lifespans of
the above men except, of course, Inire. If Rudesind, an acknowledged agent
of the Old Autarch (and of Inire), had not aged like a normal human being
during the Old Autarch's tenure, then Sev should have and would have known
it.

-Roy

---

From: Mr Thalassocrat <thalassocrat08 at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:31:04 +0000

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net> wrote:

> dog-ape hybrid figure who looked in on Severian in the lazaret.

** Not very important, but I don't think a dog/ape hybrid is
intended. "Cynecephalus" (dog-headed) is a term which seems to get applied
to baboons - eg *Papio cynocephalus **
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Baboon*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Baboon>
* *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20100709/10cb2028/attachment-0001.htm>

---

From: brunians at brunians.org <brunians at brunians.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:35:05 +0000

Ook ook?

.

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

---

From: Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:09:45 +0000

> drawn or painted by Fechin when they were boys.

Sev may be poor at judging the ages of the very old, given his 
infrequent contact with them other than Master Malrubius.  Casdoe's 
father Old Man seems to have been close to Fechin's age (though not a 
classmate, or he could have given him the paper much sooner), while 
Rudesind was a boy of 13 or so when Fechin was already an established 
artist. But Rudesind was also a boy artist, so maybe Old Man is telling 
a story about his boyhood friend _Rudesind_, but mis-calling him Fechin 
due to old age, like he calls Severian "Becan".

And like you said, Old Man is is not given a personal name, and the 
children duplicate the narrator's name, so *some* kind of onomastic 
slight of hand is at work there.

-- 
Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com
IEEE Student Chapter Blog at
< http://ieeetamut.org >

---

From: Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:11:20 +0000

On 7/8/2010 11:31 PM, Mr Thalassocrat wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Roy C. Lackey <rclackey at stic.net
> <mailto:rclackey at stic.net>> wrote:
>
> ** Not very important, but I don't think a dog/ape hybrid is intended.
> "Cynecephalus" (dog-headed) is a term which seems to get applied to
> baboons - eg /Papio cynocephalus
> //http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_Baboon// /

Yes, but the translator says that animal names are given by role rather 
than by taxonomy.

---

From: Ryan Dunn <ryan at liftingfaces.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:19:46 +0000

Adding some passages to this centralization of monkeydom...

RUDESIND:

"When I admitted I did not, he scrambled down from the ladder like an aged monkey, seeming all arms and legs and wrinkled neck; his hands were as long as my feet, the crooked fingers laced with blue veins."

THE CYNOCEPHALUS:

"An ape with the head of a dog ran down the aisle, paused at my bed to look at me, then ran on. That seemed no stranger to me than the light that, passing through a window I could not see, fell upon my blanket."

This guy, but with a dog head:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Dschelada_cynocephalus-gelada.png

RED MONKEY:

"Birds unknown to me called overhead, and once a monkey who might, save for his four hands, have been a wizened, red-bearded man in fur, spied on me from a fork as high as a spire."

FATHER INIRE:

"More fantastic still were the tales of his vizier, the famous Father Inire, who looked like a monkey and was the oldest man in the world."

FECHIN:

"He was the worst of us all, that Fechin. A tall, wild boy with red hair on his hands, on his arms. Like a monkey's arms, so that if you saw them reaching around the corner to take something, you'd think, except for the size, that it was a monkey taking it."

SHAMAN IN JUNGLE (INIRE):

"The old man had a staff as crooked as himself, topped with the dried head of a monkey."

...ryan

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 14:41:34 +0000

> Yes, but the translator says that animal names are given by role 
> rather than by taxonomy. 

There are smilodons and giant sloths. I presume these are generally 
indistinguishable for the ancient extinct varieties. I really did assume 
when I first read this that we were talking about a mandrill or baboon.

u+16b9

---

From: Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 15:55:36 +0000

Roy I appreciate your efforts to ground all discussion in direct
references from the text. I certainly welcome the generation of
a theory which explains all these monkey references better than 
mine, which struggles and strains to hold together.
 
I must add that it isn't only the monkey aspect that I see as 
marking the appearances of Father Inire, it is a constellation
of traits. The best illustration of that is the old boatman. It is
from him that we hear the confirming description that Inire is small
and bent. But we are told, without acknowledgement by Severian, that
the boatman himself fits that very description. If we are looking for 
a mysterious Inire and we find a guy who looks like him and spends 
large amounts of time in a place built by Inire and frequented by 
Inire and his brethren, a red flag goes up for me. Severian is 
always comparing things to other things and people to other people
so I am suspicious when he doesn't make an obvious comparison like this.
 
Another suspicious scene occurs in regard to the old person in 
Casdoe's house. The red flag goes up for me because, over a long sequence 
of events,  nobody (except Severian's narration) acknowledges this person.
Nobody says, "hey Little Severian, tell grandpa its time to eat" or "hey,
grandpa, a monster just ate two of our family, we have to leave". Only 
Severian interacts with that old person.
 
My guess is that was done to avoid the use of any revealing pronouns. 
My guess is that Severian has misjudged the gender of this person. I 
think this person's description of Fechin is so adoring and admiring
that it must come from a woman, not a man. And thus perhaps we have
two unreliable narrators. I suspect Fechin is not really tall nor 
handsome but just perceived that way through loving eyes. I detect some
jealousy as the old person discusses how she(?) has to wait for Fechin
while he has his liaison with a beautiful girl (Dorcas?). 
Wait for her turn, I think.

All this is the sort of speculation piled upon speculation that Roy hopes
to avoid. And I apologize. The only reason I indulge in it is because it
provides (for me) answers to one of the deepest mysteries of the story
Who are Severian's family members?
 
If I am right about the boatman, then Inire is Severian's grandfather. If
I am right about the old person in Casdoe's house then Little Severian is
Severian's cousin. If I am right about Rudesind, his dead wife and
two daughters, then Dorcas is his grandmother, Catherine is his mother and
Cyriaca (who has a suspiciously knowledgeable "uncle") is his aunt. I see 
other clues which suggest Agia and Agilus are cousins and Jolenta is his 
sister. The source of all the incestuous desires in the family is from the
patriarch, Father Inire, a benign but corrupting alien influence on humanity
(and Severian's cursed family) which must be cleansed.
 
Naturally there are text citations I can make to support each of the 
possibilities I suggest above.  If somebody wants to hear them that's
fine. Finding mistakes and inconsistencies is also welcome.  Otherwise
that's my nutshell theory on Father Inire which, for the most part, works
for me.
 
(I'll remention that I think the positive model for this ubiquitous, chimeric
being is the non-fallen Tzadkiel, who can simultaneously be as big as an
island, small as tinkerbell, exist as a hairy blob, a caveman, an adonis and a
female. How all this relates to Severian's mating with Apheta is an interesting 
question)
  		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3

---

From: Ryan Dunn <ryan at liftingfaces.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:12:59 +0000

On Jul 9, 2010, at 11:55 AM, Lee Berman wrote:

> two unreliable narrators.

Could the elderly person in Casdoe's house be an aquastor?

...ryan

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:35:58 +0000

> Could the elderly person in Casdoe's house be an aquastor?

Sure. But anyone...probably any living thing...could be an aquastor. Why 
would being an aquastor help things along?

u+16b9

---

From: Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:53:37 +0000

Oh, some further thoughts on monkeys and Inire- I agree
that "dog-faced baboon" is the likely reference for the
cynocephalus. I think it might tie in with the Egyptian
god Thoth who had an ibis head while in heaven but a
baboon head while in the underworld. Snips from Wikipedia
say:
 
>The ancient Egyptians regarded Thoth as One, self-begotten,
>and self-produced. They credited him as the author of all works
>of science, religion, philosophy, and magic.The Greeks
>further declared him the inventor of astronomy, astrology,
>the science of numbers, mathematics, geometry, land surveying,
>medicine, botany, theology, civilized government, the alphabet,
>reading, writing, and oratory.Further, the Greeks related Thoth
>to their god Hermes due to his similar attributes and functions.

>Displaying his role as arbitrator, he had overseen the three
>epic battles between good and evil. All three battles are 
>fundamentally the same and belong to different periods. The 
>first battle took place between Ra and Apep, the second 
>between Heru-Bekhutet and Set, and the third between Horus, 
>the son of Osiris, and Set. In each instance, the former god
>represented order while the latter represented chaos. If one
>god was seriously injured, Thoth would heal them to prevent
>either from overtaking the other. Thoth was also prominent in
>the Osiris myth, being of great aid to Isis. After Isis gathered
>together the pieces of Osiris' dismembered body, he gave her the
>words to resurrect him so she could be impregnated and bring forth
>Horus. When Horus was slain, Thoth gave the magic to resurrect him
>as well
 
>In the underworld, Duat, he appeared as a dog-faced baboon or an ape,
>A'an, the god of equilibrium, who reported when the scales weighing 
>the deceased's heart against a feather, was exactly even.
 
With the arts and sciences, resurrections and advocacy for the dead
references, I see possible whiffs of Father Inire, Severian and Rudesind. 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1

---

From: António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:59:57 +0000

> would being an aquastor help things along?

Hey!

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:26:45 +0000

> On 7/9/2010 12:59 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> Hey!

Bait the hook, then reel them in. You still haven't delineated the 
relevant differences between "Inire is Rudesind" and "Dorcas is 
Severian's grandmother". So this gives me a chance to show the value of 
wild speculation.

There's no reason to get Talmudic on the difference between your 
proposed standard and my question. I am only asking "How does viewing 
the old man as an aquastor resolve the apparent connection between him 
and Rudesind?" Also, "How does the old man being an aquastor resolve the 
issue posed by Mr Berman that the old man might be  female?"

What I am not asking is "What difference would it make if the old man 
and Rudesind were connected?" or "If the old man is an aquastor, then 
what?" Because in these instances the question is the answer: "The old 
man and Rudesind might be connected" and "The old man might be an aquastor".

u+169b

---

From: António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 19:27:35 +0000

James Wynn wrote (09-07-2010 19:26):
> Severian's grandmother".

It's not my fault if you can't read.

> So this gives me a chance to show the value of
> wild speculation.
>

If X then X?

Way to go about not saying anything.

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 19:35:07 +0000

> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:

Read what? Still no citation? Tsk tsk.
Five dodges now.

> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> If X then X?

Irrelevant question in this case. No speculated advantage. See what I 
did above? I used specific instances and showed how they were different. 
Try that.

> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:

Self-congratulation is unseemly, Antonio.

u+16b9

---

From: António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 20:03:48 +0000

> Read what? Still no citation? Tsk tsk.

Citation of what, James? I've said which two things are wrong with your 
question and given a further explanation. Since your attention span seems 
not be be having the best of days, I'll repeat them, which is something I abhor.

1. Why your first question made no sense at all:
On 7/7/2010 4:18 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: I'm not talking about
narrative advantage. I'm talking about speculative advantage. And as a
side note I'm against the idea of narrative advantage. I don't see that
real life employs it, why should fiction?

2. Once you had corrected it, the information you ask for is in the archives 
and I have better things to do than reenact the whole discussion:
On 7/7/2010 6:05 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: That has been
discussed to death.

3. If you're really interested to know what's different instead of simply 
trying to sound clever, you can start with this:
On 7/9/2010 5:56 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: One key difference is that 
Dorcas being Severian's grandmother tells us
something about a character we knew nothing about (Dorcas as Severian's
grandmother) and Severian's family tree, i.e. the level of data increases.
Whereas Rudesind being Inire actually decreases the amount of data by
dropping one character.
And again, the identity of Dorcas is all but spelled out. When discussing 
whether or not she was Severian's grandmother, it's more of a debate between 
'she obviously is' and 'it's so obvious maybe it's wrong'.

It would be quite nice if you'd keep track of what people say and didn't 
mangle the quotation system. It's not hard, you know. On the top of every 
quotation, there is a line saying who said what when. Then the text is 
indented by a greater-then sign. This can be nested. If people don't mess 
with it, as you do by trimming, then it's easy to follow the conversation. 
Plus, if you actually take the time to read what the other person says, you 
won't have to keep asking when did they say what.

You want me to replay the discussions from the archives? How stupid would I 
have to be to do your bidding? You don't get any rhetorical edge by making 
preposterous challenges.

> did above? I used specific instances and showed how they were different.

You showed no such thing.

---

From: James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 21:09:32 +0000

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> Citation of what, James? I've said which two things are wrong with 
> your question and given a further explanation. Since your attention 
> span seems not be be having the best of days, I'll repeat them, which 
> is something I abhor.
>

No. This does not explain why the first question made no sense or was 
beside the point. It only shows that you preferred another term. You 
could have opted to answer the question in those terms instead. You 
chose not to. Which is why I followed up your response by rephrasing the 
same question.
Only a fool would think what you wrote here explains how the following 
is true:

-----"Is Dorcas Severian's grandmother" = useful question
------(i.e. advantageous speculation)

-----"Is Rudesind Inire in disguise?" = pointless question
------(i.e. unadvantageous speculation)

If you are saying "Well, one is true and we don't know if the other is 
true" then your logic is entirely circular. The purpose of speculation 
in this instance to attempt to ascertain whether something is true. I 
hate to use the word "obvious" but....

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> 2. Once you had corrected it, the information you ask for is in the 
> archives and I have better things to do than reenact the whole 
> discussion:

Note that less than 1.5 hours had passed between your last post and this 
one. Do you really think that merely declaring your preference for 
'speculative advantage' over 'narrative advantage' has Drained the Well 
on this question? Really? Really???? I laughed when you posted this, but 
my sense of humor is wearing thin.

Secondly, all  I've done here is rephrase the question in terms you say 
you prefer. In this instance, I gave you another chance at showing how 
the question of Sev's lineage is superior to questions of the identity 
of other characters. But you didn't take it. For some reason, you though 
you had *proven* something at this point. I don't understand why.

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> 3. If you're really interested to know what's different instead of 
> simply trying to sound clever, you can start with this:
> On 7/9/2010 5:56 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: One key difference 
> is that Dorcas being Severian's grandmother tells us

So today, you attempt to prove you case. Sort of.

First of all, you say "one key difference" which implies you have more 
to say. If true that would have justified the weakness of your argument 
here. That is, I *would* have called it "weak" initially. Since this is 
the extent of the "speculative advantage" that you see, it is absolutely 
laughable. The understanding (if determined to be true) that a 
maintenance man that Severian repeatedly encounters is actually an 
important character in the history of Urth whose actions take place 
mostly off-stage...you say all that does is "decreases the amount of 
data by dropping one character". Am I supposed to take this seriously?

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> And again, the identity of Dorcas is all but spelled out. When 
> discussing whether or not she was Severian's grandmother, it's more of 
> a debate between 'she obviously is' and 'it's so obvious maybe it's 
> wrong'.

Oh! So your logic IS circular. Here's another way of saying "All but 
spelled out": "NOT spelled out".
It's not as though you only need to read the end of Citadel to 
understand Severian's paternal lineage. It's more subtle than that. The 
simian references are at least as spelled out, but their weight 
inexplicably passes right over your head.

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> It would be quite nice if you'd keep track of what people say and 
> didn't mangle the quotation system. It's not hard, you know. On the 
> top of every quotation, there is a line saying who said what when. 
> Then the text is indented by a greater-then sign. This can be nested. 
> If people don't mess with it, as you do by trimming, then it's easy to 
> follow the conversation. Plus, if you actually take the time to read 
> what the other person says, you won't have to keep asking when did 
> they say what.

If you have an instance in which I have misrepresented what you have 
said, say so. Otherwise, kiss off.

> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> You want me to replay the discussions from the archives? How stupid 
> would I have to be to do your bidding? You don't get any rhetorical 
> edge by making preposterous challenges.
>
> On 7/9/2010 3:03 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:

Now I understand. You're an idiot.

u+16b9

---

From: David Duffy <davidd at qimr.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 23:13:12 +0000

> baboon head while in the underworld. Snips from Wikipedia
[SNIP]

Only slightly off topic, I was pleased with my keen insight honed 
from reading Wolfe :), when I saw this driving the plot of Evelyn 
Waugh's _Decline and Fall_.

A Google search has just pointed out to me that Waugh's birthday of 
October 28 is the start of the Isia (the holiday of Isis).

Actually, does anyone think Severian could be Pennyfeather?  Sent down in 
disgrace... The Autarch is then Margot Beste-Chetwynde, Philbrick is 
Inire...

Cheers, David Duffy,

---

From: aaron <aaronsingleton at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 23:34:06 +0000

This mutually masturbatory argument is fun and all, but I think perhaps
private emails would be even more fun for those of us scrolling through this
nonsense..

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 5:09 PM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

> beside the point. It only shows that you preferred another term. You could
> have opted to answer the question in those terms instead. You chose not to.
> Which is why I followed up your response by rephrasing the same question.
> Only a fool would think what you wrote here explains how the following is
> true:
>
> true" then your logic is entirely circular. The purpose of speculation in
> this instance to attempt to ascertain whether something is true. I hate to
> use the word "obvious" but....
>
>
>> archives and I have better things to do than reenact the whole discussion:
> 'speculative advantage' over 'narrative advantage' has Drained the Well on
> this question? Really? Really???? I laughed when you posted this, but my
> sense of humor is wearing thin.
>
> Secondly, all  I've done here is rephrase the question in terms you say you
> prefer. In this instance, I gave you another chance at showing how the
> question of Sev's lineage is superior to questions of the identity of other
> characters. But you didn't take it. For some reason, you though you had
> *proven* something at this point. I don't understand why.
>
>
>> On 7/9/2010 5:56 AM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote: One key difference is
>> that Dorcas being Severian's grandmother tells us
> First of all, you say "one key difference" which implies you have more to
> say. If true that would have justified the weakness of your argument here.
> That is, I *would* have called it "weak" initially. Since this is the extent
> of the "speculative advantage" that you see, it is absolutely laughable. The
> understanding (if determined to be true) that a maintenance man that
> Severian repeatedly encounters is actually an important character in the
> history of Urth whose actions take place mostly off-stage...you say all that
> does is "decreases the amount of data by dropping one character". Am I
> supposed to take this seriously?
>
>
> It's not as though you only need to read the end of Citadel to understand
> Severian's paternal lineage. It's more subtle than that. The simian
> references are at least as spelled out, but their weight inexplicably passes
> right over your head.
>
>
> If you have an instance in which I have misrepresented what you have said,
> say so. Otherwise, kiss off.
>
>> You want me to replay the discussions from the archives? How stupid would
>> I have to be to do your bidding? You don't get any rhetorical edge by making
>> preposterous challenges.
>>

-- 
Aaron Singleton
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20100709/7e2bd1bc/attachment-0001.htm>

---

From: brunians at brunians.org <brunians at brunians.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2010 01:26:02 +0000

The man argues like a protestant.

.

>>>>> On 7/9/2010 12:59 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote:
>>>>> Hey!
>>>>
>>> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote:
> On 7/7/2010 4:18 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote: I'm not talking about
> archives
> On 7/7/2010 6:05 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote: That has been
> discussed to death.
>
> On 7/9/2010 5:56 AM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote: One key difference is
> that
> I
>>> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote:
>>> If X then X?
>>
>>> On 7/9/2010 2:27 PM, Ant??nio Pedro Marques wrote:

---

From: David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 23:29:30 +0000

I agree.

One comment though---I thought Rudesind was tall because of his long 
limbs, but you're right---he's average to short. Severian is tall but 
not that tall.

However, those long limbs and short height do create a problem. He 
doesn't sound human. How is it possible to have long arms/legs/feet and 
yet be short?

Short torso? Slumped posture? Generally smaller size, like an actual 
monkey? Is he a monkeyman, like the dogmen in the armored coach? Is that 
what the "cover story" Inire gave him refers to?

I don't have a theory. I just don't get it.

Roy C. Lackey wrote:
> ---
> avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
> Virus Database (VPS): 100711-1, 07/11/2010
> Tested on: 7/11/2010 7:07:20 PM
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 ALWIL Software.
> http://www.avast.com
>
>
>
>
>

---

From: David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 23:31:59 +0000

That doesn't seem to apply here. What function does a baboon have?

I always assumed "baboon" was meant--- a baboon is a dogheaded ape and 
was thought such by the Egyptians.

---

From: David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 23:53:22 +0000

Could this fit a genetic program carried out by Inire? The problem there 
is that you consider Inire to be corrupting, but in that scenario he 
would be purifying.

Of course incest itself is seen in exactly those terms, which makes this 
logical.

Lee Berman wrote:
> Tested on: 7/11/2010 7:07:51 PM

---

From: Jeff Wilson <jwilson at io.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:16:09 +0000

> doesn't sound human. How is it possible to have long arms/legs/feet and

"When I admitted I did not, he scrambled down from the ladder like an 
aged monkey, seeming all arms and legs and wrinkled neck; his hands were 
as long as my feet, the crooked fingers laced with blue veins."

He may simply have a short torso, by birth, osteoporosis, or both. I've 
seen such an older man around the town where I live who was barely five 
feet tall but still able to ride an adult-sized tricycle. He would come 
in to pay on his account at the Sears where I worked years ago, and when 
he waiting stationary in line I noticed his fingertips nearly reached 
his knees, a common simian detail.

---

From: David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 02:23:31 +0000

And could he climb ladders like a monkey? I suppose we'll never know.

Jeff Wilson wrote:
> aged monkey, seeming all arms and legs and wrinkled neck; his hands 
> were as long as my feet, the crooked fingers laced with blue veins."
>
> He may simply have a short torso, by birth, osteoporosis, or both. 
> I've seen such an older man around the town where I live who was 
> barely five feet tall but still able to ride an adult-sized tricycle. 
> He would come in to pay on his account at the Sears where I worked 
> years ago, and when he waiting stationary in line I noticed his 
> fingertips nearly reached his knees, a common simian detail.
>