{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/5821", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 5821, "subject": "(no subject)", "messages": 61, "voices": 12, "first": "2010-12-15T02:07:49+00:00", "last": "2010-12-16T19:03:12+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T02:07:49+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jeff Wilson: There is a possibility that the Green Man is meant to suggest this happens\nin the distant future of Ushas. If his people are fed internally by their symbiotic algae and \nno longer must rely on the yearly success of crops or catch, they no longer must sacrifice to the \nfour gods, and may live directly from the light of the Sun, with likewise no intercessors between\nthemselves and God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Son o' Witz- Yes, I agree that is is essentially what The Green Man symbolizes. He says nearly as much \nquite plainly. They are a humanity of non-torturers." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nI lean in this interpretive direction also. But The Green Man is a significant alternate name for the pagan\nhorned god, Great God Pan, etc. Is Wolfe suggesting this is the ultimate and true, unified god of Briah? Or\nof all universes, including ours?\n \nIf the latter it might cause the Pope an uncomfortable turn or two at night....should I start my \"Wolfe as\nHeretic\" thread again? \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D08277A.9040607@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-15T02:27:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think that, for a universe apparently without a Christ, Pan is as \nclose to the true religion as one can get.\n\nSince the Pope is lucky enough to live in OUR universe, he can sleep \nsoundly." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/14/2010 9:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Jeff Wilson: There is a possibility that the Green Man is meant to suggest this happens\nin the distant future of Ushas. If his people are fed internally by their symbiotic algae and\nno longer must rely on the yearly success of crops or catch, they no longer must sacrifice to the\nfour gods, and may live directly from the light of the Sun, with likewise no intercessors between\nthemselves and God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Son o' Witz- Yes, I agree that is is essentially what The Green Man symbolizes. He says nearly as much\nquite plainly. They are a humanity of non-torturers." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I lean in this interpretive direction also. But The Green Man is a significant alternate name for the pagan\nhorned god, Great God Pan, etc. Is Wolfe suggesting this is the ultimate and true, unified god of Briah? Or\nof all universes, including ours?\n\nIf the latter it might cause the Pope an uncomfortable turn or two at night....should I start my \"Wolfe as\nHeretic\" thread again? \t\t \t \t\t\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T03:52:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:\n\nI lean in this interpretive direction also. But The Green Man is a\nsignificant alternate name for the pagan\nhorned god, Great God Pan, etc. Is Wolfe suggesting this is the ultimate\nand true, unified god of Briah? Or\nof all universes, including ours?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I really can't see how the text is suggesting such a thing any more than\nit's suggesting that Jonas is the ultimate and true, unified god of Briah.\n Happy to reconsider if I'm missing something, of course." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\n\nThe contact with manners then is education; and this Thucydides appears to\nassert when he says history is philosophy learned from examples.\n Dionysius of Halicarnassus (c. 54-c. 7 B.C.), Ars Rhetorica, XI, 2" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D087BDE.9020609@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T08:27:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/14/2010 8:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Jeff Wilson: There is a possibility that the Green Man is meant to suggest this happens\nin the distant future of Ushas. If his people are fed internally by their symbiotic algae and\nno longer must rely on the yearly success of crops or catch, they no longer must sacrifice to the\nfour gods, and may live directly from the light of the Sun, with likewise no intercessors between\nthemselves and God." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Son o' Witz- Yes, I agree that is is essentially what The Green Man symbolizes. He says nearly as much\nquite plainly. They are a humanity of non-torturers." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I lean in this interpretive direction also. But The Green Man is a significant alternate name for the pagan\nhorned god, Great God Pan, etc. Is Wolfe suggesting this is the ultimate and true, unified god of Briah?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No. Or at least, only in the sense that that is as far as pagans have \ngotten to the true godhead, at least in Wolfe's opinion. I'm sorry that \nI slipped up and capitalized him, I usually leave the green man lower \ncase to empahsize that he's not a unique being, just the only one of his \nkind that appears in the story. There are many green men in the Ushas \nfuture, perhaps even everyone at some point is green.\n\nThis pagan-y future rapproachment with the godhead may also suggest that \nWolfe believes that Catholicism itself can usefully evolve toward \ngreater conformity with God's wishes in ways that celtic paganry has \nalready. What those ways might be, I couldn't guess atm." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com\nComputational Intelligence Laboratory - Texas A&M Texarkana\n< http://www.tamut.edu/CIL >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<284F43155C81438F9937EEA7977CA987@jill>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerryq at indigo.ie" }, "date": "2010-12-15T18:17:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D08277A.9040607@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"David Stockhoff\" \nI think that, for a universe apparently without a Christ, Pan is as close \nto the true religion as one can get.\n\nSince the Pope is lucky enough to live in OUR universe, he can sleep \nsoundly." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think there's any special reason to think Severian's universe is \nwithout a Christ. There is substantial evidence that it's history is \nsimilar to ours. In BotLS there are notable religious references, including \nsome to Christ.\n\nOne *can* argue that these references somehow come from another universe, \nbut it seems a bit of a stretch.\n\n\nAs for the green man, I think he needs no more symbolic overloading than the \ntwo obvious meanings: the most significant being that he comes from a future \nwith lots of sunshine, and a possible second is that in this ideal future \nMan may not need to kill, or till the ground, to eat. Which is good, I \nsuippose, although I'm not sure to what extent. I guess it depends what you \nget up to in the time saved, and how you feel about carnivory.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "<888E105C-BAE9-471E-83BF-A35DAB2B4B32@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T19:33:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) christ, again", "in_reply_to": "<284F43155C81438F9937EEA7977CA987@jill>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 10:17 AM, \"Gerry Quinn\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I think that, for a universe apparently without a Christ, Pan is as close to the true religion as one can get.\n\nSince the Pope is lucky enough to live in OUR universe, he can sleep soundly." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think there's any special reason to think Severian's universe is without a Christ. There is substantial evidence that it's history is similar to ours. In BotLS there are notable religious references, including some to Christ." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Come on already!\nThis all goes away if you understand Jesus of Nazareth as an instantiation of Christ which theologians name Logos, and you avoid understanding the logos only through the lens of Jesus.\nSeverian seems, to me, an instantiation of the Logos in BotNS.\nBut even without going that far, the only way you can deny Christ in Briah is if you deny that the Outsider is a real diety. I don't remember anything that bursts the idea that the Outsider is a real god. He is clearly meant to be Logos, and clearly Jesus of Nazareth stories have been attributed to him.\n~witz" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T19:41:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) christ, again", "in_reply_to": "<888E105C-BAE9-471E-83BF-A35DAB2B4B32@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Son of Witz\n wrote:\nCome on already!\nThis all goes away if you understand Jesus of Nazareth as an instantiation of Christ which theologians name Logos, and you avoid understanding the logos only through the lens of Jesus." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is extremely poor (Catholic) theology. The Person named Jesus,\nthe Christ, is and must be unique across all Universes. The birth of\nJesus is the origin-point of the eternal Logos, the Theanthropos and\nson of the Theotokos." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Severian seems, to me, an instantiation of the Logos in BotNS." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Wolfe is very firm that this is NOT the case." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From the James Jordan interview" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "(http://mysite.verizon.net/~vze2tmhh/wolfejbj.html): \"I don't think of\nSeverian as being a Christ figure; I think of Severian as being a\nChristian figure. He is a man who has been born into a very perverse\nbackground, who is gradually trying to become better.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But even without going that far, the only way you can deny Christ in Briah is if you deny that the Outsider is a real diety. I don't remember anything that bursts the idea that the Outsider is a real god. He is clearly meant to be Logos, and clearly Jesus of Nazareth stories have been attributed to him." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The Outsider is the Christian God, to be sure, and the stories\nanalogous to those of Jesus are attributed to \"a fortunate man whom\nthe Outsider had both enlightened and possessed\" -- an Jesus-analogue\nin the Briahtic Universe." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T19:52:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) christ, again", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Son o' Witz: But even without going that far, the only way you can deny Christ in Briah is \nif you deny that the Outsider is a real diety." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nSorry, I'm not knowledgable enough to discuss the Logos stuff. Maybe I can later.\n \nBut in saying we must deny The Outsider as a real deity it would seem you are saying that we\nmust deny Dionysus as a real deity. I'm not sure Gene Wolfe does. \n \nWhat do you think regarding this? \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T19:55:56+00:00", "subject": "(urth) christ, again", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Lee Berman wrote:\nBut in saying we must deny The Outsider as a real deity it would seem you are saying that we\nmust deny Dionysus as a real deity. I'm not sure Gene Wolfe does.\n\nWhat do you think regarding this?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think Wolfe would say that Dionysus was real, but not a \"deity\" in\nthe sense that God is a Deity." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<841968.36473.qm@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-15T20:07:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<284F43155C81438F9937EEA7977CA987@jill>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I admit I can't make up my mind about \"which\" universe Severian lives in. Sometimes I think it's ours, but often I think it's the future of a very close parallel---so close that the term \"parallel universe\" doesn't quite cover it.\nBut we've been through all this before.\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Gerry Quinn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Gerry Quinn \nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 1:17 PM\nFrom: \"David Stockhoff\" \nI think that, for a universe apparently without a Christ, Pan is as close to the true religion as one can get.\n\nSince the Pope is lucky enough to live in OUR universe, he can sleep soundly." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think there's any special reason to think Severian's universe is without a Christ. There is substantial evidence that it's history is similar to ours. In BotLS there are notable religious references, including some to Christ.\n\nOne *can* argue that these references somehow come from another universe, but it seems a bit of a stretch.\n\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:05:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) christ, again", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 11:52 AM, Lee Berman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Son o' Witz: But even without going that far, the only way you can deny Christ in Briah is \nif you deny that the Outsider is a real diety." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sorry, I'm not knowledgable enough to discuss the Logos stuff. Maybe I can later.\n\nBut in saying we must deny The Outsider as a real deity it would seem you are saying that we\nmust deny Dionysus as a real deity. I'm not sure Gene Wolfe does. \n\nWhat do you think regarding this? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, no.\nI think that if you say there is no Christ in Briah, then you deny that the Outsider is a real deity, which I think is a mistake." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4B47F3EB-68E2-41FE-B12F-26E6ABEB5B15@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:10:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<841968.36473.qm@web84101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 12:07 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\nI admit I can't make up my mind about \"which\" universe Severian lives in. Sometimes I think it's ours, but often I think it's the future of a very close parallel---so close that the term \"parallel universe\" doesn't quite cover it.\n\nBut we've been through all this before." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think it matters. \nEarth is in the future or past of this creation, or even perhaps in a previous or suceeding instance of this cyclical repeating universe. Meaning, our Eath is subject to the same cosmic realities as Urth. These realities take different names, such as Jesus or the Outsider, but they are the same underlying reality. If there is a Logos that stands beyond our realm, there is a logos outside Severian and Silk's realm. It's really not that confusing." } ] }, { "message_id": "<982879.47908.qm@web84103.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:19:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4B47F3EB-68E2-41FE-B12F-26E6ABEB5B15@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What's the point in creating a parallel universe that is fundamentally identical to our own?\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nFrom: Son of Witz \nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 4:10 PM" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 12:07 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\nI admit I can't make up my mind about \"which\" universe Severian lives in. Sometimes I think it's ours, but often I think it's the future of a very close parallel---so close that the term \"parallel universe\" doesn't quite cover it.\n\nBut we've been through all this before." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think it matters. \nEarth is in the future or past of this creation, or even perhaps in a previous or suceeding instance of this cyclical repeating universe. Meaning, our Eath is subject to the same cosmic realities as Urth. These realities take different names, such as Jesus or the Outsider, but they are the same underlying reality. If there is a Logos that stands beyond our realm, there is a logos outside Severian and Silk's realm. It's really not that confusing." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:33:22+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<982879.47908.qm@web84103.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Which universe are you calling \"parallel\"?\nWhat should we call our universe in this discussion?\nIf you mean ours and Briah are parallel, they are not. Our universe and Briah are cyclical iterations of the same creation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern. The text, and Wolfe interviews are clear about this.\n\n (There were several matrixes before Neo, there are Christs beyond Jesus.)\n\nIf you mean Yesod is parallel to Briah, then I would say that Yessod is clearly a metaphor for the realm of enlightened beings who have graduated Samsara and exist outside the Wheel of Time. These beings who come back and help those in samsara are bodhisattvas, and the heirodules play this role." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 1:19 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\nWhat's the point in creating a parallel universe that is fundamentally identical to our own?\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nFrom: Son of Witz \nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 4:10 PM\n\n\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 12:07 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I admit I can't make up my mind about \"which\" universe Severian lives in. Sometimes I think it's ours, but often I think it's the future of a very close parallel---so close that the term \"parallel universe\" doesn't quite cover it.\n\nBut we've been through all this before." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think it matters. \nEarth is in the future or past of this creation, or even perhaps in a previous or suceeding instance of this cyclical repeating universe. Meaning, our Eath is subject to the same cosmic realities as Urth. These realities take different names, such as Jesus or the Outsider, but they are the same underlying reality. If there is a Logos that stands beyond our realm, there is a logos outside Severian and Silk's realm. It's really not that confusing.\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<590010.75633.qm@web84108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:46:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nFrom: Son of Witz \nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 4:33 PM\n\nWhich universe are you calling \"parallel\"?What should we call our universe in this discussion?If you mean ours and Briah are parallel, they are not. Our universe and Briah are cyclical iterations of the same creation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern. The text, and Wolfe interviews are clear about this.\n?(There were several matrixes before Neo, there are Christs beyond Jesus.)\nIf you mean Yesod is parallel to Briah, then I would say that Yessod is clearly a metaphor for the realm of enlightened beings who have graduated Samsara and exist outside the Wheel of Time. ?These beings who come back and help those in samsara are bodhisattvas, and the heirodules play this role.\n\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:19 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\n\nWhat's the point in creating a parallel universe that is fundamentally identical to our own?\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T21:50:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<590010.75633.qm@web84108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\nI mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That is, in\nthe usual sci-fi sense that most people understand." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "H'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of\n\"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving\nalong in time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic\nexample.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term\n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T22:28:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<590010.75633.qm@web84108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, the point seems to be that things are endlessly cyclical.\nIt is a major point of the books cosmology though, and one of the other huge themes is a cyclicality of creation, the future of which affects the past as much as it's past affects it's future." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:\nI mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nFrom: Son of Witz \nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 4:33 PM\n\nWhich universe are you calling \"parallel\"?\nWhat should we call our universe in this discussion?\nIf you mean ours and Briah are parallel, they are not. Our universe and Briah are cyclical iterations of the same creation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern. The text, and Wolfe interviews are clear about this.\n\n (There were several matrixes before Neo, there are Christs beyond Jesus.)\n\nIf you mean Yesod is parallel to Briah, then I would say that Yessod is clearly a metaphor for the realm of enlightened beings who have graduated Samsara and exist outside the Wheel of Time. These beings who come back and help those in samsara are bodhisattvas, and the heirodules play this role.\n\n\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:19 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "What's the point in creating a parallel universe that is fundamentally identical to our own?\n\n--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Son of Witz wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<2824B484-6B51-46ED-80B8-28C3F2DC2D2A@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T22:31:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Why is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T22:36:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "<2824B484-6B51-46ED-80B8-28C3F2DC2D2A@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \"Frisco\"." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black\nSabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as\n\"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \nwrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term\n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T22:37:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "<2824B484-6B51-46ED-80B8-28C3F2DC2D2A@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction.\n\nOkay, it isn't like \"Nigger,\" \"Wop,\" Chink,\" etc., but it's offensive." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1D125AAD-D475-49A3-AFB9-7583575DDE85@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T22:57:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Unfortunately, too many San Franciscan's DO call it Frisco, though I find they tend to be over 50, so they'll go away sooner or later." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Matthew Weber wrote:\nIt's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \"Frisco\".\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:04:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I feel you.\nIt's sorta how many cartoonists won't call themselves \"cartoonists\", or their output as \"comics\", instead calling them \"comix\" or \"graphic novels\" or \"Bande Dessin?e\" because so many comics are peurile trash.\n\nI had this discussion with a famous cartoonist who said the problem was resolved with \"Bande Dessin?e\", and then I showed her my comic book TROG which was made with stop motion puppets and photography, but no drawings. Doesn't quite fit, it's a comic book, pure and simple.\n\nI wonder if anyone on this list ever bumped into my very obscure self published comic book, \"TROG, In the Bacta-Tank Botch-Up\". A weird little gem of toilet reading, if I do say so myself. \n\n~witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 2:37 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:\n\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction.\n\nOkay, it isn't like \"Nigger,\" \"Wop,\" Chink,\" etc., but it's offensive.\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Why is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:05:08+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not to mention \"graphic novel\" and \"serial art.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\nI feel you.\nIt's sorta how many cartoonists won't call themselves \"cartoonists\", or their output as \"comics\", instead calling them \"comix\" or \"graphic novels\" or \"Bande Dessin?e\" because so many comics are peurile trash.\n\nI had this discussion with a famous cartoonist who said the problem was resolved with \"Bande Dessin?e\", and then I showed her my comic book TROG which was made with stop motion puppets and photography, but no drawings. ?Doesn't quite fit, it's a comic book, pure and simple.\n\nI wonder if anyone on this list ever bumped into my very obscure self published comic book, \"TROG, In the Bacta-Tank Botch-Up\". ?A weird little gem of toilet reading, if I do say so myself.\n\n~witz\n\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 2:37 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction.\n\nOkay, it isn't like \"Nigger,\" \"Wop,\" Chink,\" etc., but it's offensive.\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Why is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D094DE2.5030407@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:23:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same \ncreation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" \nfictional universe if it's fundamentally the same as ours?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\n\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF \n> wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense \nof \"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense \nmoving along in time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek \nis a classic example.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the \nterm \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4924C448-C6A7-4C62-8C16-4EE9BCD4BBB8@liftingfaces.com>", "from": { "name": "Ryan Dunn", "address": "ryan at liftingfaces.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:31:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "<1D125AAD-D475-49A3-AFB9-7583575DDE85@butcherbaker.org>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I lived there for 2 years and never called it -- or heard it called -- 'Frisco.\n\nSan Fran was more often heard if anything. Or just Ess Eff.\n\n...ryan" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 5:57 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nUnfortunately, too many San Franciscan's DO call it Frisco, though I find they tend to be over 50, so they'll go away sooner or later.\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Matthew Weber wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \"Frisco\".\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<49FEF956-8E87-46B3-8A25-5581B9DC99F0@liftingfaces.com>", "from": { "name": "Ryan Dunn", "address": "ryan at liftingfaces.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:33:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Scifi works as a film genre, but SF is more PC as Science Fantasy falls under the umbrella.\n\nOr do I have it all bass ackwards?\n\n...ryan" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Matthew Weber wrote:\nIt's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \"Frisco\".\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1fd11bfcb8cf17548db97110bed1176c.squirrel@webmail.prismnet.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeff Wilson", "address": "jwilson at io.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:34:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Forry Ackerman might have been a publicity hack and a schlockmeister, but\nthat hardly sets him apart from early fandom, not to mention authordom.\nSci-Fi was and remians a popular self-adpoted term for fans of fantastic\nnon-book media. It's offense is more in the sense of not-Americans calling\nAmericans \"yanks\" or yankees, which aggravates southerners but is proudly\nowned by plenty in the north." } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D09509F.6030502@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:34:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/15/2010 4:37 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\n\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction.\n\nOkay, it isn't like \"Nigger,\" \"Wop,\" Chink,\" etc., but it's offensive." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I wish I didn't know this about the term \"sci-fi\". Knowing someone might \nbe very, very offended at the use of the word \"sci-fi\", it will be very \nhard for me to avoid using the term \"sci-fi\".\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-15T23:44:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D094DE2.5030407@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Why create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern again and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in Christ with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and temporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against the modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape humanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it means another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that seems very much like what he's given us.\n~Witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nYes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same creation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional universe if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF > wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along in time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic example.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<254238.95661.qm@web37604.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T00:03:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "So, Witz, are you saying that, fundamentally, you don't think that BotNS is \nfiction? I mean, sure the story's made up, but are you saying that you find \nBotNS to actually be a working-out of an actual theory-of-the-world/cosmos?\n\nI ask because that seems to be a point that comes up among fans of Wolfe a lot \nof times. (Hi, there, brunians, if you're still listening.) It seems like \nthere's definitely a tendency among some Wolfe readers to see him working out a \n*real* cosmology at some level rather than just writing speculative fiction. \n(Maybe David's PKD/Valis reference was prescient on this point, speaking of a \ndude who believed his own sci-f...uh...SF. heh) It's just very different from \nhow I read him: writing speculative fictions that play with different, even \ncontradictory ideas, rather than developing a consistent cosmology.\n\nI would be curious if you could find that interview quote. I recall a number of \ntimes where Wolfe has mentioned in interviews that the world is stranger than we \nmight think, but I haven't actually seen a place where he crosses the line of \nsaying \"this aspect of 'genre' writing/thinking is just plain realism.\" It \nusually seems to me that he's much more cagey about such issues in a way that \nleaves possibilities open rather than explicitly stating his belief in a set of \nparticular ideas. (Even in interviews where he talks about his religion, he'll \nsay things like \"I'm Catholic, but that may not mean what you think it means.\")\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 5:44:19 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern \nagain and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea \nthat he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in \nChrist with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and \ntemporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against \nthe modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape \nhumanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it \nmeans another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that seems \nvery much like what he's given us.\n~Witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nYes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same \ncreation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional \nuniverse if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF > wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \n\"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along \nin time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic example.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-16T00:15:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<254238.95661.qm@web37604.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, I am not saying that BotNS is not fiction. Not at all.\nI'm saying that I think Wolfe mashed up a lot of his beliefs which might seem to a simpler mind to be incompatible, and he inserted a Christ-like redeemer into it. I'm saying that the metaphors probably DO go far to explain Wolfe's feelings about the universe though, but it is all done within a fictional metaphor. I don't think he is doing it lightly, or simply mashing ideas for the heck of it though." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nSo, Witz, are you saying that, fundamentally, you don't think that BotNS is \nfiction? I mean, sure the story's made up, but are you saying that you find \nBotNS to actually be a working-out of an actual theory-of-the-world/cosmos?\n\nI ask because that seems to be a point that comes up among fans of Wolfe a lot \nof times. (Hi, there, brunians, if you're still listening.) It seems like \nthere's definitely a tendency among some Wolfe readers to see him working out a \n*real* cosmology at some level rather than just writing speculative fiction. \n(Maybe David's PKD/Valis reference was prescient on this point, speaking of a \ndude who believed his own sci-f...uh...SF. heh) It's just very different from \nhow I read him: writing speculative fictions that play with different, even \ncontradictory ideas, rather than developing a consistent cosmology.\n\nI would be curious if you could find that interview quote. I recall a number of \ntimes where Wolfe has mentioned in interviews that the world is stranger than we \nmight think, but I haven't actually seen a place where he crosses the line of \nsaying \"this aspect of 'genre' writing/thinking is just plain realism.\" It \nusually seems to me that he's much more cagey about such issues in a way that \nleaves possibilities open rather than explicitly stating his belief in a set of \nparticular ideas. (Even in interviews where he talks about his religion, he'll \nsay things like \"I'm Catholic, but that may not mean what you think it means.\")\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 5:44:19 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern \nagain and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea \nthat he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in \nChrist with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and \ntemporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against \nthe modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape \nhumanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it \nmeans another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that seems \nvery much like what he's given us.\n~Witz\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Yes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same \ncreation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional \nuniverse if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF > wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \n\"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along \nin time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic example.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<907164.24392.qm@web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T00:30:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Understood.\n\nI'm just always wary of how much to think of the speculative stuff as actual \ncosmology in Wolfe. So many questions arise: which books are then cosmological \nand which are just done for the sake of genre? Why would BotNS be concerned with \nhis real beliefs rather than, say, Wizard Knight or There Are Doors? Which are \nmore non-fictional than others, etc.\n\nI like phrasing it as \"working out potential ramifications\" of beliefs much \nbetter than \"cosmology-building.\" Otherwise, it just seems too easy to say, \"I \nwould like it if someone actually believed what Wolfe is saying here...so I'm \ngoing to say that he means that part FER REELZ!\"\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 6:15:36 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nNo, I am not saying that BotNS is not fiction. Not at all.\nI'm saying that I think Wolfe mashed up a lot of his beliefs which might seem to \na simpler mind to be incompatible, and he inserted a Christ-like redeemer into \nit. I'm saying that the metaphors probably DO go far to explain Wolfe's \nfeelings about the universe though, but it is all done within a fictional \nmetaphor. I don't think he is doing it lightly, or simply mashing ideas for the \nheck of it though." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nSo, Witz, are you saying that, fundamentally, you don't think that BotNS is \nfiction? I mean, sure the story's made up, but are you saying that you find \nBotNS to actually be a working-out of an actual theory-of-the-world/cosmos?\n\nI ask because that seems to be a point that comes up among fans of Wolfe a lot " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "of times. (Hi, there, brunians, if you're still listening.) It seems like \nthere's definitely a tendency among some Wolfe readers to see him working out a \n\n*real* cosmology at some level rather than just writing speculative fiction. \n(Maybe David's PKD/Valis reference was prescient on this point, speaking of a \ndude who believed his own sci-f...uh...SF. heh) It's just very different from \nhow I read him: writing speculative fictions that play with different, even \ncontradictory ideas, rather than developing a consistent cosmology.\n\nI would be curious if you could find that interview quote. I recall a number of \n\ntimes where Wolfe has mentioned in interviews that the world is stranger than \nwe \n\nmight think, but I haven't actually seen a place where he crosses the line of \nsaying \"this aspect of 'genre' writing/thinking is just plain realism.\" It \nusually seems to me that he's much more cagey about such issues in a way that \nleaves possibilities open rather than explicitly stating his belief in a set of \n\nparticular ideas. (Even in interviews where he talks about his religion, he'll " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "say things like \"I'm Catholic, but that may not mean what you think it \nmeans.\")\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 5:44:19 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same \npattern \n\nagain and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in \nChrist with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and \n\ntemporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against \nthe modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape \nhumanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it \nmeans another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that \nseems \n\nvery much like what he's given us.\n~Witz\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Yes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same \ncreation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional \nuniverse if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF > wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \n\"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along \n\nin time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic \nexample.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "<38C8423D-F009-494A-A684-0A6B3ACD79C5@liftingfaces.com>", "from": { "name": "Ryan Dunn", "address": "ryan at liftingfaces.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T00:35:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "<49FEF956-8E87-46B3-8A25-5581B9DC99F0@liftingfaces.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "SF\n\nScience Fiction\nSpeculative Fiction\nScience Fantasy\nSan Francisco\n\n...ryan" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Ryan Dunn wrote:\nScifi works as a film genre, but SF is more PC as Science Fantasy falls under the umbrella.\n\nOr do I have it all bass ackwards?\n\n...ryan\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Matthew Weber wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \"Frisco\".\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy is Sci-Fi offensive?\nIs this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-16T01:09:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<907164.24392.qm@web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes Craig, but wouldn't you agree that any cosmology can be called \"speculative fiction?\"\nIt seems appropriate to me, even though I don't want to demean anyone's revelation." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 15, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nUnderstood.\n\nI'm just always wary of how much to think of the speculative stuff as actual \ncosmology in Wolfe. So many questions arise: which books are then cosmological \nand which are just done for the sake of genre? Why would BotNS be concerned with \nhis real beliefs rather than, say, Wizard Knight or There Are Doors? Which are \nmore non-fictional than others, etc.\n\nI like phrasing it as \"working out potential ramifications\" of beliefs much \nbetter than \"cosmology-building.\" Otherwise, it just seems too easy to say, \"I \nwould like it if someone actually believed what Wolfe is saying here...so I'm \ngoing to say that he means that part FER REELZ!\"\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 6:15:36 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nNo, I am not saying that BotNS is not fiction. Not at all.\nI'm saying that I think Wolfe mashed up a lot of his beliefs which might seem to \na simpler mind to be incompatible, and he inserted a Christ-like redeemer into \nit. I'm saying that the metaphors probably DO go far to explain Wolfe's \nfeelings about the universe though, but it is all done within a fictional \nmetaphor. I don't think he is doing it lightly, or simply mashing ideas for the \nheck of it though.\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Craig Brewer wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "So, Witz, are you saying that, fundamentally, you don't think that BotNS is \nfiction? I mean, sure the story's made up, but are you saying that you find \nBotNS to actually be a working-out of an actual theory-of-the-world/cosmos?\n\nI ask because that seems to be a point that comes up among fans of Wolfe a lot " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "of times. (Hi, there, brunians, if you're still listening.) It seems like \nthere's definitely a tendency among some Wolfe readers to see him working out a \n\n*real* cosmology at some level rather than just writing speculative fiction. \n(Maybe David's PKD/Valis reference was prescient on this point, speaking of a \ndude who believed his own sci-f...uh...SF. heh) It's just very different from \nhow I read him: writing speculative fictions that play with different, even \ncontradictory ideas, rather than developing a consistent cosmology.\n\nI would be curious if you could find that interview quote. I recall a number of \n\ntimes where Wolfe has mentioned in interviews that the world is stranger than \nwe \n\nmight think, but I haven't actually seen a place where he crosses the line of \nsaying \"this aspect of 'genre' writing/thinking is just plain realism.\" It \nusually seems to me that he's much more cagey about such issues in a way that \nleaves possibilities open rather than explicitly stating his belief in a set of \n\nparticular ideas. (Even in interviews where he talks about his religion, he'll " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "say things like \"I'm Catholic, but that may not mean what you think it \nmeans.\")\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Son of Witz \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Wed, December 15, 2010 5:44:19 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)\n\n\n\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same \npattern \n\nagain and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in \nChrist with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and \n\ntemporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against \nthe modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape \nhumanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it \nmeans another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that \nseems \n\nvery much like what he's given us.\n~Witz\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Yes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same \ncreation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional \nuniverse if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF > wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \n\"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along \n\nin time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic \nexample.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \n\"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D096AC8.3030208@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-16T01:26:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "<49FEF956-8E87-46B3-8A25-5581B9DC99F0@liftingfaces.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "SF has also been tried on as \"speculative fiction.\" But all it is is an \nalternative---or the original---to \"sci-fi,\" which is a marketing \ncreation more or less synonymous with \"bad.\" As Dan'l says.\n\nHowever, I'm uncertain as to how to use the term without offending, \nsince it has a real meaning. Good sf and bad sf share the same \ntechnologies and ideas, after all. Thus, I should have used quotes when \nreferring to commercial sf." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/15/2010 6:33 PM, Ryan Dunn wrote:\nScifi works as a film genre, but SF is more PC as Science Fantasy \nfalls under the umbrella.\n\nOr do I have it all bass ackwards?\n\n...ryan\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Matthew Weber > wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It's more how nobody who actually lives in San Francisco calls it \n\"Frisco\".\n\nOn Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Son of Witz \n> wrote:\n\n\n Why is Sci-Fi offensive?\n Is this like, If you were Straight-Edge playing in a Melvins or\n Black Sabbath cover band and you insisted that your genre be\n referred to as \"Doom-Metal\" rather than \"Stoner-Rock\"?\n\n On Dec 15, 2010, at 1:50 PM, \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\"\n > wrote:\n\n > Also, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from\n using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D096C0E.8000303@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-16T01:31:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting. While those possibilities are not disprovable, I think they \nare false.\n\nAs to your answer---none of those are disprovable either. There is no \nanswer to those questions and therefore they are useless distinctions. \nWe need an OBSERVABLE difference, don't we? I propose that we got \nChrist, and they didn't.\n\nI'm with Lee: Briah is a fallen world with a Serpent but without a \nChrist. That's what Wolfe was exploring." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/15/2010 6:44 PM, Son of Witz wrote:\n\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern again and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.\n\nAnyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs.\nPersonally, I think he attempted to reconcile his convert-Catholic belief in Christ with his beliefs in other worlds, ideas about cyclicality of reality and temporal causality, belief in powers higher than humanity, his revolt against the modern world, and perhaps a belief that extra terrestrials helped shape humanity, along with a hope that our fallen creation can be saved, even if it means another flood to wipe out corrupt humanity. Just guessing, but that seems very much like what he's given us.\n~Witz\n\nOn Dec 15, 2010, at 3:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Yes, exactly. I meant \"sci-fi,\" with the scare quotes.\n\nDo you prefer \"sf\"?\n\nThe question is the same. Why create a \"cyclical iterations of the same creation that keeps playing out in more or less the same pattern\" fictional universe if it's fundamentally the same as ours?\n\nOn 12/15/2010 4:50 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF> wrote:\n\n I mean \"similar,\" i.e., identical except for key differences. That\n is, in the usual sci-fi sense that most people understand.\n\n\nH'mmm. Well, I would have said that the usual science-fictional sense of \"parallel universes\" includes the idea that they are in some sense moving along in time next to ours. The \"mirror universe\" in Star Trek is a classic example.\n\nAlso, please refrain (note that I am asking politely) from using the term \"sci-fi.\" Some find it very offensive.\n\n-- \nDan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101215-1, 12/15/2010\nTested on: 12/15/2010 6:23:14 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D09F5B4.6090203@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T11:19:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Son of Witz-\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern again and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.Anyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the \nfictional worlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. \nFundamentally, The Book of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The \nsetting and history Silmarillion does not align with the Bible either. \nI'm sure there are plenty of materialist atheists who write stories \nabout elves and giants.\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-16T15:26:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D09F5B4.6090203@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 16, 2010, at 3:19 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Son of Witz-\nWhy create a fictional universe if it is fundamentally the same as our own?\nWell, are you sure that our universe is cyclically recreated in the same pattern again and again?\nAre you sure that we shaped a race of beings that in turn shapes us?\nI'm not sure, but I think it's probably true.Anyway, I don't have the quote, but somewhere Wolfe said something to the idea that he wrote New Sun to explore the ramifications of his beliefs." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the fictional worlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. Fundamentally, The Book of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The setting and history Silmarillion does not align with the Bible either. I'm sure there are plenty of materialist atheists who write stories about elves and giants.\n\nu+16b9" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is soooooo obvious it does not need pointing out.\nI think BotNS explores many deeply felt philosophical ideas of ideas of it's author.\nIf you don't, make of it what you will. There are some neat action scenes and weird characters to be found amidst all the endless philosophical and theological musings if you don't think that stuff matters.\n~witz" } ] }, { "message_id": "<95251.33403.qm@web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T15:58:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think BotNS explores many deeply felt philosophical\nideas of ideas of it's author.\nIf you don't, make of it what you will. There are some\nneat action scenes and weird characters to be found\namidst all the endless philosophical and theological\nmusings if you don't think that stuff matters." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think anyone really doubts that angle. There may be plenty of doubt \nabout WHICH philosophical ideas he's working with, but we all like the books \nbecause of that depth, I'd imagine.\n\nI think there's an important distinction, though, between recognizing that the \nbooks explore philosophical aspects of ideas that Wolfe is heavily invested in \nand the idea that all of his works have to straightforwardly reflect his actual \nbeliefs.\n\nSo, for example: what if New Sun is Wolfe exploring a world where there never \nwas a Christ, as was suggested by one of the interview quotes that came up \nyesterday? Such a possibility might well be compatible with the \"atheist\" \nreading of New Sun that was bandied about when we were talking about Peter \nWright's book awhile back. Then you'd have Wolfe writing a \"what-if\" book where \nthe overt cosmology was opposed to what he actually believed at some level, even \nif it was also informed by his actual beliefs about how fallen such a world \nmight actually be. Or Wizard Knight: one way to read that book is to say that \nit's a book about a kid/guy trying to be good when he doesn't have a strong \nChristian model to follow. It doesn't, of course, mean that Wolfe actually \nbelieves in a cosmology of seven levels without a Christian God behind it all, \netc.\n\nI've said this a lot lately, and I'm starting to bore myself, so one last time \nand then I'll shut up: but I'm skeptical of the perspective that sees Wolfe as \ncreating an intricate cosmology, where buried behind his fictions is his actual \noutline of how the universe works where the Greek gods line up in a hierarchy \nwith Christian theology and multiple universes co-exist in such and such a way, \netc. Instead, I find Wolfe to be using all of these ideas (some of which he \nmight actually believe, some of which he might not) in order to explore \nphilosophical and existential consequences of his beliefs. And, for me, the most \ninteresting and relevant aspect of those ideas have to do with what it means for \nhow his characters live their lives, and less about what Wolfe's particular \ntheological or \"supernatural\" beliefs might be. For me, it's always a much more \ninteresting question to ask, say, \"In what way is Severian like and unlike \nChrist, and how hard is it for him to be a good man in the situation in which he \nfinds himself?\" than it is to spend a lot of mental effort trying to figure out \nwhether he actually is a Christ or whether his universe is related to ours as a \nparallel or previous universe with or without an actual moment of salvation, \netc.\n\nThe latter kinds of questions turn Wolfe into an esoteric, if fascinating, \nmyth-maker -- but I don't believe the same myths and, so, ultimately his ideas \nwould simply be curiosities to me. But it also seems to lose a certain human \nfocus for me since the questions start to become more about what Wolfe himself \nbelieves than about what we might learn about the consequences of his ideas. \nSeverian's story has always mattered to me in a very personal and even moral way \napart from whatever cosmological puzzles lie behind it. All of the world and \ncosmology-building is fascinating, but it's not why I've always liked Wolfe.\n\nMini-rant over. I should go back to semi-lurking. :)\n\n\n\n " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T16:55:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D09F5B4.6090203@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM, James Wynn wrote:\nYou know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the fictional\nworlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. Fundamentally, The\nBook of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The setting and history\nSilmarillion does not align with the Bible either. I'm sure there are plenty\nof materialist atheists who write stories about elves and giants." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Actually, Tolkien went out of his way to make the cosmology of the\nSilm. compatable (though only by some fast dancing) with Christianity.\nThe \"gods\" are angels, etc." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A4645.5060105@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:03:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I understood that to be James' point. Tolkien was a Christian writer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/16/2010 11:55 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nOn Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the fictional\nworlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. Fundamentally, The\nBook of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The setting and history\nSilmarillion does not align with the Bible either. I'm sure there are plenty\nof materialist atheists who write stories about elves and giants." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Actually, Tolkien went out of his way to make the cosmology of the\nSilm. compatable (though only by some fast dancing) with Christianity.\nThe \"gods\" are angels, etc." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:08:28+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A4645.5060105@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:03 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nI understood that to be James' point. Tolkien was a Christian writer." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll let James speak for himself if I'm wrong, but I understood his\nsaying that \"Silmarillion does not align with the Bible\" as meaning\nthat it was not in line with Tolkien's actual beliefs. My point is\nthat, while I doubt that JRRT actually \"believed\" the Silmarillion,\nits cosmology actually _does_ align with the Bible, with the correct\ndance steps.\n\n--Dan'l" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/16/2010 11:55 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM, James Wynn ?wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "You know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the\nfictional\nworlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. Fundamentally,\nThe\nBook of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The setting and history\nSilmarillion does not align with the Bible either. I'm sure there are\nplenty\nof materialist atheists who write stories about elves and giants." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Actually, Tolkien went out of his way to make the cosmology of the\nSilm. compatable (though only by some fast dancing) with Christianity.\nThe \"gods\" are angels, etc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101216-0, 12/16/2010\nTested on: 12/16/2010 12:03:02 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A4A66.3020505@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:20:38+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ah, OK. Yes, although Tolkien did not worship the Ainur or Iluvatar, \nthey aren't exactly heretical.\n\nMelkor, of course, is Lucifer/Satan. Tolkien was following in the \nfootsteps of at least one fantasist." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/16/2010 12:08 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nOn Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:03 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I understood that to be James' point. Tolkien was a Christian writer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll let James speak for himself if I'm wrong, but I understood his\nsaying that \"Silmarillion does not align with the Bible\" as meaning\nthat it was not in line with Tolkien's actual beliefs. My point is\nthat, while I doubt that JRRT actually \"believed\" the Silmarillion,\nits cosmology actually _does_ align with the Bible, with the correct\ndance steps.\n\n--Dan'l" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 12/16/2010 11:55 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:19 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 4, "text": "You know, just because someone has beliefs does not mean that the\nfictional\nworlds they create need to be in line with those beliefs. Fundamentally,\nThe\nBook of the New Sun is fantasy literature. The setting and history\nSilmarillion does not align with the Bible either. I'm sure there are\nplenty\nof materialist atheists who write stories about elves and giants." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Actually, Tolkien went out of his way to make the cosmology of the\nSilm. compatable (though only by some fast dancing) with Christianity.\nThe \"gods\" are angels, etc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "---\navast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.\nVirus Database (VPS): 101216-0, 12/16/2010\nTested on: 12/16/2010 12:03:02 PM\navast! - copyright (c) 1988-2010 AVAST Software.\nhttp://www.avast.com\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A4F30.90504@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:41:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "David Stockhoff-\nI understood that to be James' point. Tolkien was a Christian writer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'll let James speak for himself if I'm wrong, but I understood his\nsaying that \"Silmarillion does not align with the Bible\" as meaning\nthat it was not in line with Tolkien's actual beliefs. My point is\nthat, while I doubt that JRRT actually \"believed\" the Silmarillion,\nits cosmology actually _does_ align with the Bible, with the correct\ndance steps.\n--Dan'l" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ehh...The creation story in Silmarillion simply does not jive with \nGenesis. I don't see how all the hammers and grease in Mordor could \nwedge it in. While there's nothing _hostile_ to Judeo-Christianity in \nMiddle Earth, I seem to recall that Tolkien said in \"Letters\" that he \ndeliberately left religion out of the books.\n\nWhile Wolfe has not been so careful about not touching the high-voltage \nwire called Religion, I think the same thing applies in that his \ncharacters think and talk about religion in different terms than we do. \nIt is essentially the same as in the Soldier books. Wolfe deals with \nreligion from the perspective of his characters, not in the way he would \nif he were teaching a Sunday School class. The themes and concepts are \ncompatible and sometimes analogous. The characters' sense of their \nrelationship to the Increate is different. Irreconcilably different. And \nno amount of dancing will bridge the gap. To try to do so is like asking \nfor scientific justification for Galadriel's bowl. Or to question \nwhether a human baby raised by a tribe of chimpanzees would survive, let \nalone come to lead the troop.\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerryq at indigo.ie" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:44:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" \n\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Or, more precisely, sciemce fiction as described by those with no idea of \nwhat is good or bad science fiction. I think I would have subscribed to \nthat concept in the past, but I feel that the term 'sci-fi' has lost a good \ndeal of its pejorative force over the past couple of decades. So while I \nwould use 'SF', 'Sci-Fi' no longer bothers me much.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:44:51+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A4F30.90504@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "As I understood it, the cosmology of Arda/Middle Earth was supposed to\nbe a mythical re-telling of the \"true\" (for Tolkien) cosmology,\ndressed up in the myths of the Elves, etc. Of course they wouldn't\nuse angels and demons and creation and all of that; they're not\nhumans, and the cosmology we have received as revealed wisdom, etc.,\nis only for Fourth Age peoples.\n\nBut a straight 1-for-1 substitution (a la Lewis) would have been\ndistasteful for Tolkien, who loved myths and the changes myths and\nlanguages go through as cultures meet and intersect, but hated\nallegory.\n\nLH" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:41 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "David Stockhoff-\nI understood that to be James' point. Tolkien was a Christian writer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I'll let James speak for himself if I'm wrong, but I understood his\nsaying that \"Silmarillion does not align with the Bible\" as meaning\nthat it was not in line with Tolkien's actual beliefs. My point is\nthat, while I doubt that JRRT actually \"believed\" the Silmarillion,\nits cosmology actually _does_ align with the Bible, with the correct\ndance steps.\n--Dan'l" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ehh...The creation story in Silmarillion simply does not jive with Genesis.\nI don't see how all the hammers and grease in Mordor could wedge it in.\n?While there's nothing _hostile_ to Judeo-Christianity in Middle Earth, I\nseem to recall that Tolkien said in \"Letters\" that he deliberately left\nreligion out of the books.\n\nWhile Wolfe has not been so careful about not touching the high-voltage wire\ncalled Religion, I think the same thing applies in that his characters think\nand talk about religion in different terms than we do. It is essentially the\nsame as in the Soldier books. Wolfe deals with religion from the perspective\nof his characters, not in the way he would if he were teaching a Sunday\nSchool class. The themes and concepts are compatible and sometimes\nanalogous. The characters' sense of their relationship to the Increate is\ndifferent. Irreconcilably different. And no amount of dancing will bridge\nthe gap. To try to do so is like asking for scientific justification for\nGaladriel's bowl. Or to question whether a human baby raised by a tribe of\nchimpanzees would survive, let alone come to lead the troop.\n\nu+16b9\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:46:58+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Personally, I prefer \"words for nerds.\"\n\nLH" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Gerry Quinn wrote:\n\nFrom: \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Or, more precisely, sciemce fiction as described by those with no idea of\nwhat is good or bad science fiction. ?I think I would have subscribed to\nthat concept in the past, but I feel that the term 'sci-fi' has lost a good\ndeal of its pejorative force over the past couple of decades. ?So while I\nwould use 'SF', 'Sci-Fi' no longer bothers me much.\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A515F.7090809@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:50:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Lane Haygood-\nBut a straight 1-for-1 substitution (a la Lewis) would have been\ndistasteful for Tolkien, who loved myths and the changes myths and\nlanguages go through as cultures meet and intersect, but hated\nallegory." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Although Narnia was more tightly allusive than Middle Earth, Lewis \nemphatically rejected the label \"allegory\" for it. He compared it to a \nstew with lots of different familiar flavors.\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lane Haygood", "address": "lhaygood at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:52:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A515F.7090809@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Case in point for why we should take author's self-assessment with a\ngrain of salt." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:50 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Lane Haygood-\nBut a straight 1-for-1 substitution (a la Lewis) would have been\ndistasteful for Tolkien, who loved myths and the changes myths and\nlanguages go through as cultures meet and intersect, but hated\nallegory." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Although Narnia was more tightly allusive than Middle Earth, Lewis\nemphatically rejected the label \"allegory\" for it. He compared it to a stew\nwith lots of different familiar flavors.\n\nu+16b9\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ryan Dunn", "address": "ryan at liftingfaces.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:53:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I usually go with \"Male Romance Novels\".\n\n...ryan" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 16, 2010, at 12:46 PM, Lane Haygood wrote:\nPersonally, I prefer \"words for nerds.\"\n\nLH\n\nOn Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Gerry Quinn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "From: \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Or, more precisely, sciemce fiction as described by those with no idea of\nwhat is good or bad science fiction. I think I would have subscribed to\nthat concept in the past, but I feel that the term 'sci-fi' has lost a good\ndeal of its pejorative force over the past couple of decades. So while I\nwould use 'SF', 'Sci-Fi' no longer bothers me much.\n\n- Gerry Quinn\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:58:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<95251.33403.qm@web37606.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Good post Craig.\n\nI want anyone who is paying attention to what I've written to understand clearly that I don't think Wolfe has rendered a cosmology that actually models his belief system in BotNS, nor do I think he does that in his other works, of which I have only read a small portion.\n\nThe discussion is perhaps complicated by the idea that there are \"two authors\", one translating the other from a different culture. I think it is undeniable that Severian takes all of his philosophical musings with heartfelt seriousness. As a reader and an artist, I just don't feel that an author would invest that many pages in such musings if he didn't hold them somewhat dearly. (of course, an author writing a propaganda piece would, but I don't smell that stink on the Sun Series.)\n\nI merely suggest that Wolfe has his own deeply felt philosophical ideas that have been expertly EXPLORED in the permutations of these twelve novels. I do not think he has made a literal map of his views. That people seem to think this is my view is part of why I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall. I'm talking about METAPHOR. This is why I'm always trying to swat off the \"yeah but if Jesus didn't give his sermon in briah\" nonsense. It's waaaay too literal take on a Speculative Metaphysical Fantasy, in my opinion. Your milage may vary.\n\nTo that end, I think a few things SEEM fairly undeniable about the real world author of these books philosophical / metaphysical views:\n\nHe seems to believe the realm of humanity is a fallen realm that needs regeneration and salvation from powers beyond the stage of Earth.\n\nHe seems to believe in the unity of seeming opposites on fundamental aspects of reality like Resurrection & Death, Past & Future, Good & Evil, etc.\n\nHe seems to have a heartfelt belief that the soul transcends death.\n\nHe seems to have digested the human condition exeedingly well, and is capable of rendering the grandest human notions against the most common human foibles.\n\nHe seems to write using many extremely loaded metaphysical symbols because he is deeply concerned about the realities that these symbols represent to the humanity. They work too well and run too deep to be some post-modern monkey-shines.\n\nDoes anyone honestly think this small list is off the mark?\n\n ~Witz" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Dec 16, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Craig Brewer wrote:\nI think BotNS explores many deeply felt philosophical\nideas of ideas of it's author.\nIf you don't, make of it what you will. There are some\nneat action scenes and weird characters to be found\namidst all the endless philosophical and theological\nmusings if you don't think that stuff matters." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think anyone really doubts that angle. There may be plenty of doubt \nabout WHICH philosophical ideas he's working with, but we all like the books \nbecause of that depth, I'd imagine.\n\nI think there's an important distinction, though, between recognizing that the \nbooks explore philosophical aspects of ideas that Wolfe is heavily invested in \nand the idea that all of his works have to straightforwardly reflect his actual \nbeliefs.\n\nSo, for example: what if New Sun is Wolfe exploring a world where there never \nwas a Christ, as was suggested by one of the interview quotes that came up \nyesterday? Such a possibility might well be compatible with the \"atheist\" \nreading of New Sun that was bandied about when we were talking about Peter \nWright's book awhile back. Then you'd have Wolfe writing a \"what-if\" book where \nthe overt cosmology was opposed to what he actually believed at some level, even \nif it was also informed by his actual beliefs about how fallen such a world \nmight actually be. Or Wizard Knight: one way to read that book is to say that \nit's a book about a kid/guy trying to be good when he doesn't have a strong \nChristian model to follow. It doesn't, of course, mean that Wolfe actually \nbelieves in a cosmology of seven levels without a Christian God behind it all, \netc.\n\nI've said this a lot lately, and I'm starting to bore myself, so one last time \nand then I'll shut up: but I'm skeptical of the perspective that sees Wolfe as \ncreating an intricate cosmology, where buried behind his fictions is his actual \noutline of how the universe works where the Greek gods line up in a hierarchy \nwith Christian theology and multiple universes co-exist in such and such a way, \netc. Instead, I find Wolfe to be using all of these ideas (some of which he \nmight actually believe, some of which he might not) in order to explore \nphilosophical and existential consequences of his beliefs. And, for me, the most \ninteresting and relevant aspect of those ideas have to do with what it means for \nhow his characters live their lives, and less about what Wolfe's particular \ntheological or \"supernatural\" beliefs might be. For me, it's always a much more \ninteresting question to ask, say, \"In what way is Severian like and unlike \nChrist, and how hard is it for him to be a good man in the situation in which he \nfinds himself?\" than it is to spend a lot of mental effort trying to figure out \nwhether he actually is a Christ or whether his universe is related to ours as a \nparallel or previous universe with or without an actual moment of salvation, \netc.\n\nThe latter kinds of questions turn Wolfe into an esoteric, if fascinating, \nmyth-maker -- but I don't believe the same myths and, so, ultimately his ideas \nwould simply be curiosities to me. But it also seems to lose a certain human \nfocus for me since the questions start to become more about what Wolfe himself \nbelieves than about what we might learn about the consequences of his ideas. \nSeverian's story has always mattered to me in a very personal and even moral way \napart from whatever cosmological puzzles lie behind it. All of the world and \ncosmology-building is fascinating, but it's not why I've always liked Wolfe.\n\nMini-rant over. I should go back to semi-lurking. :)\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A5356.4070408@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2010-12-16T17:58:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yeah, Aslan kind of dominates the flavor, doesn't he?\n\nMore cilantro!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 12/16/2010 12:52 PM, Lane Haygood wrote:\nCase in point for why we should take author's self-assessment with a\ngrain of salt.\n\nOn Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:50 AM, James Wynn wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Lane Haygood-\nBut a straight 1-for-1 substitution (a la Lewis) would have been\ndistasteful for Tolkien, who loved myths and the changes myths and\nlanguages go through as cultures meet and intersect, but hated\nallegory." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Although Narnia was more tightly allusive than Middle Earth, Lewis\nemphatically rejected the label \"allegory\" for it. He compared it to a stew\nwith lots of different familiar flavors.\n\nu+16b9\n_______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List" } ] }, { "message_id": "<7837028F-5CC6-4146-923A-470F9658FA67@butcherbaker.org>", "from": { "name": "Son of Witz", "address": "sonofwitz at butcherbaker.org" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:03:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Sci-Fi", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 16, 2010, at 9:44 AM, \"Gerry Quinn\" wrote:\n\nFrom: \"Dan'l Danehy-Oakes\" " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"Sci-Fi\" is the sound of two crickets screwing.\n\nMore seriously: \"Sci-Fi\" is a term made up by a publicity hack, in\nanalogy with the then-popular \"Hi-Fi\" for \"high fidelity\" stereo\nequipment. It referred, and in many SF fans' minds still refers, to\nmovies about giant insects devouring Cleveland and suchlike. \"Sci-fi\"\nis, in short, _bad_ science fiction." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Or, more precisely, sciemce fiction as described by those with no idea of what is good or bad science fiction. I think I would have subscribed to that concept in the past, but I feel that the term 'sci-fi' has lost a good deal of its pejorative force over the past couple of decades. So while I would use 'SF', 'Sci-Fi' no longer bothers me much.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I agree Gerry.\n\nI love me some Heavy Metal.\nBands in the nineties that played what they, today, would be proud to call \"Metal\" had to call it \"Grunge\" in order to not be lumped in with all that 80's Hair Metal.\nEvery realm is mostly crap, even and especially in the most high brow stuff. Fine art has more turds per dozen than literature, I'd wager. \n\nJust stick to your tropes and who fucking cares about the ever changing winds of popular opinion known as Fashion!\n\n~witz" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:05:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A4F30.90504@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:41 AM, James Wynn wrote:\n\n\nEhh...The creation story in Silmarillion simply does not jive with Genesis.\nI don't see how all the hammers and grease in Mordor could wedge it in.\n While there's nothing _hostile_ to Judeo-Christianity in Middle Earth, I\nseem to recall that Tolkien said in \"Letters\" that he deliberately left\nreligion out of the books." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Except for the Elves' quasi-Marian devotion to Elbereth, of course. And Tom\nBombadil as a genius loci (there's your Green Man, folks)." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\n\nLet each man pass his days in that wherein his skill is greatest.\n Sextus Propertius (54 B.C.-A.D. 2), Elegies, II, i, 46" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A5551.3030001@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:07:13+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Lane Haygood-\nBut a straight 1-for-1 substitution (a la Lewis) would have been\ndistasteful for Tolkien, who loved myths and the changes myths and\nlanguages go through as cultures meet and intersect, but hated\nallegory." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "James Wynn-\nAlthough Narnia was more tightly allusive than Middle Earth, Lewis\nemphatically rejected the label \"allegory\" for it. He compared it to a stew\nwith lots of different familiar flavors." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Lane Haygood-\nCase in point for why we should take author's self-assessment with a\ngrain of salt." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think the Cambridge lit professor had a point. IIRC he said that an \nallegory is a story with a series of locks, each with a key. He used \nPilgrim's Progress as an example and Pilgrim's Regress surely applies as \nwell. Now, the gods of the Whorl are closely analogous to the gods of \nOlympus and in many cases perform their deeds. I've argued emphatically \nthat the plot of the novel is mapped over Robert Graves' telling of the \ndeeds of Aristaeus with nods to references in Pindar, Herodotus, and \nPlutarch. But I wouldn't call tBotLS an allegory of Greek myth or even \nan allegory of the life of Aristaeus.\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:19:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A4F30.90504@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:41 AM, James Wynn wrote:\nEhh...The creation story in Silmarillion simply does not jive with Genesis.\nI don't see how all the hammers and grease in Mordor could wedge it in." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "How does it not? Eru/Iluvatar/God speaks the world into being (the\nactual act of creation is his word Ea: let it be), just as in Genesis.\nIf the details vary, well, someone as intelligent as Tolkien cannot\nhave failed to notice that they vary in Genesis, too, where there are\ntwo incompatible creation accounts." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "?While there's nothing _hostile_ to Judeo-Christianity in Middle Earth, I\nseem to recall that Tolkien said in \"Letters\" that he deliberately left\nreligion out of the books." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That was specifically referring to _LotR_, and even there there are\nhints of religion, as when Faramir and company \"say grace\" before\nmeals." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4D0A5D7C.8020909@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:42:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "James Wynn-\nEhh...The creation story in Silmarillion simply does not jive with Genesis.\nI don't see how all the hammers and grease in Mordor could wedge it in." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes-\nHow does it not? Eru/Iluvatar/God speaks the world into being (the\nactual act of creation is his word Ea: let it be), just as in Genesis.\nIf the details vary, well, someone as intelligent as Tolkien cannot\nhave failed to notice that they vary in Genesis, too, where there are\ntwo incompatible creation accounts." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No Adam and Eve. No Cain & Able. No Garden. No Fall. No world-wide \nflood. No Babel. No \"first born\" in Genesis, although one could argue \nthat there are in the Koran. And while the Eldar are reincarnated \ncontinuously until then end of the world, humanity escapes the \"circle \nof the world\" /but no one knows where they go/. There's room to APPEND \nthe Second Covenant on to it after the fact, but Earth and Middle Earth \narrive there from dramatically different places." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "While there's nothing _hostile_ to Judeo-Christianity in Middle Earth, I\nseem to recall that Tolkien said in \"Letters\" that he deliberately left\nreligion out of the books." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That was specifically referring to _LotR_, and even there there are\nhints of religion, as when Faramir and company \"say grace\" before\nmeals." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Eh..as you like. But who they are praying to is problematic given the \nrest of Tolkien's subcreation. Praying to one of the Valar seems the \nmost likely, but that is problematic in a Judeo-Christian universe.\n\nu+16b9" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Matthew Weber", "address": "palaeologos at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:46:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A5D7C.8020909@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM, James Wynn wrote:\nEh..as you like. But who they are praying to is problematic given the rest\nof Tolkien's subcreation. Praying to one of the Valar seems the most likely,\nbut that is problematic in a Judeo-Christian universe.\n\nu+16b9" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "The majority of the world's Christians pray to saints and angels to\nintercede for them in a variety of ways." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Matt +\n\nLet each man pass his days in that wherein his skill is greatest.\n Sextus Propertius (54 B.C.-A.D. 2), Elegies, II, i, 46" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:47:01+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A5D7C.8020909@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM, James Wynn wrote:\nNo Adam and Eve. No Cain & Able. No Garden. No Fall. No world-wide flood. No\nBabel. No \"first born\" in Genesis, although one could argue that there are\nin the Koran. And while the Eldar are reincarnated continuously until then\nend of the world, humanity escapes the \"circle of the world\" /but no one\nknows where they go/. There's room to APPEND the Second Covenant on to it\nafter the fact, but Earth and Middle Earth arrive there from dramatically\ndifferent places." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Au contraire. The creation and earliest days of humanity take place\noff stage, so Adam and Eve and the Garden remain a possibility; and\nwhen humans show up in the Elvish lands it is clear that they _have_\nfallen (there is a \"shadow\" upon them of which they do not speak). And\nit doesn't say that \"no one\" knows where humans go when they die -- it\nsays that _the Elves_ do not know." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Eh..as you like. But who they are praying to is problematic given the rest\nof Tolkien's subcreation. Praying to one of the Valar seems the most likely,\nbut that is problematic in a Judeo-Christian universe." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "They don't actually pray, they just face the West silently." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<8A5BBFC2-1BC1-47B6-B2AB-969338684EFD@io.com>", "from": { "name": "Adam Thornton", "address": "adam at io.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T18:48:03+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "<4D0A5356.4070408@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Dec 16, 2010, at 11:58 AM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nYeah, Aslan kind of dominates the flavor, doesn't he?\n\nMore cilantro!" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "THIS ALZABO TASTES LIKE LION." } ] }, { "message_id": "<352842.44724.qm@web37603.mail.mud.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Craig Brewer", "address": "cnbrewer at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2010-12-16T19:03:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) (no subject)", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Made me crack open my copy of Tolkien's letters. Some relevant stuff in #153 \"To \nPeter Hastings\":\n\n\"As for 'whose authority decides these things?' the immediate 'authorities' are \nthe Valar (the Powers or Authorities): the 'gods'. But they are only created \nspirits - of high angelic order we should say, with their attendant lesser \nangels - reverend, therefore, but not worshipful... [and then adds in a lengthy \nnote]: There are thus no temples or 'churches' or fanes int his 'world' among \n'good' peoples. They had little or no religion in the sense of worship. For help \nthey may call on a Vala (as Elbereth), as a Catholic might on a Saint, though no \ndoubt knowing in theory as well as he that the power of the Vala was limited and \nderivative. But this is a 'primitive age': and these folk may be said to view \nthe Valar as children view their parents or immediate adult superiors, and \nthough they know they are subjects of the King he does not live in their country \nnor have there any dwelling...\"\n\nThere's more. But what may be relevant to the discussion of how much Tolkien \nactually worried about matching up his mythology with actual Christian history \nis his long discussion in the same letter about the value of \"subcreation\" and \nits potential for overstepping the bounds of God's type of Creation. He seems \nvery much at pains to point out that he is doing something very humble and not \nat all meant to be actually part of \"creating theology\" or anything like that. \nHe continually reminds the writer who wrote him (a Catholic book store owner) \nthat he was writing fiction and not things meant to be taken as \"too true.\"\n\n\n\n\n\n----- Original Message ----\nFrom: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes \nTo: The Urth Mailing List \nSent: Thu, December 16, 2010 12:47:01 PM\nSubject: Re: (urth) (no subject)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM, James Wynn wrote:\nNo Adam and Eve. No Cain & Able. No Garden. No Fall. No world-wide flood. No\nBabel. No \"first born\" in Genesis, although one could argue that there are\nin the Koran. And while the Eldar are reincarnated continuously until then\nend of the world, humanity escapes the \"circle of the world\" /but no one\nknows where they go/. There's room to APPEND the Second Covenant on to it\nafter the fact, but Earth and Middle Earth arrive there from dramatically\ndifferent places." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Au contraire. The creation and earliest days of humanity take place\noff stage, so Adam and Eve and the Garden remain a possibility; and\nwhen humans show up in the Elvish lands it is clear that they _have_\nfallen (there is a \"shadow\" upon them of which they do not speak). And\nit doesn't say that \"no one\" knows where humans go when they die -- it\nsays that _the Elves_ do not know." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Eh..as you like. But who they are praying to is problematic given the rest\nof Tolkien's subcreation. Praying to one of the Valar seems the most likely,\nbut that is problematic in a Judeo-Christian universe." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "They don't actually pray, they just face the West silently." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] } ] }