Inhumi and devils

The Urth list — 2 messages, 2 voices, 30 Nov 2010
https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5787

Andrew Mason30 Nov 2010, 18:52
3 quoted lines
James Wynn wrote: A daemon, note the spelling, is merely a disembodied spirit. Inhumi contain the spirits of others, living and dead. Mucor, at times, meets this criteria. Also, an important theme is in the book is that if a demon imitates a god, he becomes, in some sense, a god. Quetzal becomes a holy man, sacrificing his life for his flock. Horn becomes Silk. Inhumi become, in a metaphysical sense, Horn's son and Silk's sister.
OK, so there's a thematic similarity between inhumi and devils, which makes it appropriate that Pike called them that. But if I am reading you rightly, the inhumi as Pike knows them - creatures which fly in through windows and suck blood - don't possess people; rather they are themselves in a sense possessed by the spirits of others whom they have absorbed. (Bear in mind I haven't read Short Sun yet, so don't know the details.) I still think it's unlikely the chrasmologic writers has inhumi in mind.
James Wynn30 Nov 2010, 19:30

↳ in reply to Andrew Mason

2 quoted lines
Andrew Mason- OK, so there's a thematic similarity between inhumi and devils, which makes it appropriate that Pike called them that. But if I am reading you rightly, the inhumi as Pike knows them - creatures which fly in through windows and suck blood - don't possess people; rather they are themselves in a sense possessed by the spirits of others whom they have absorbed. (Bear in mind I haven't read_Short Sun_ yet, so don't know the details.) I still think it's unlikely the chrasmologic writers has inhumi in mind.
Well, the inhumi are "demonic" but the C. writings are an accumulation of mythology, the Odyssey, the Gospels, Islamic tradition, and other writings. So, I agree that it is unnecessary to ascribe inhumi as the original source of demons. They merely fit the Type. ᚹ

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.