{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6028", "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": 6028, "subject": "Phanes", "messages": 5, "voices": 3, "first": "2011-05-27T22:44:30+00:00", "last": "2011-05-30T18:53:17+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nick Lee", "address": "starwaterstrain at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-05-27T22:44:30+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Phanes", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "*From David Stockhoff* dstockhoff at verizon.net\n\n* Severian is a known bisexual. *How do we \"know\" this?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Severian is bisexual in the sense that he has two sexes -- his own, male;\nand Thecla's, female. That is the literaal meaning of \"bisexual.\" Sorry for\nthe confusion. I could have used \"androgynous,\" but that is similarly\npolysemantic. I thought the meaning would be clear to anyone who had read\nNew Sun.\n\n*From James Wynn* crushtv at gmail.com" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "\n\nBoy, Nick, did you ever come to the right counter.\nPhanes is not a bad key. What is your source on him? Because the only\npicture I've found of him is slightly reminiscent of the Zervan (which I\nhave argued is invoked in the character Silk). Only one head, though.\nNor can I find where Ericapaeus could be translated Spring Wind. Nor\nwhere he is associated with Thetis (and this would not be surprising in\na wide variety of monomyth models).\nHow do you mean that Pas can be *derived* from both Erikapaios and Phanes?\nI am also curious where you detected Dionysus in 'Peace'. Do you say\nPhanes is present in 'Peace' and 'Pandora' only through Dionysus? Or\nmore directly?\n\nZervan is the Persian version of Khronos, father to Phanes. Zervan has some\nof the properties of Phanes, however. These are all very old gods, and are\nall probably from the same source or are at least products of heavy\nsyncretism. Of course, Wolfe is almost as obsessed with Persia as he is with\nGreece, so there may be some Zervan references I haven't noticed. I just\nattributed it to Aion/Khronos before." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Erikapaios is translated as \"Spring Wind\" by some, according to scholar\nYehuda Liebes who cites Robert Eisler. Liebes offers a different\ntranslation, however, which I will get to in a minute.\n\nThe letters p-a-s are in both Erikapaios and Phanes. Paios becomes Pas with\nease. Also, Phanes is known as Pan (being a monad, encompassing everything),\nwhich some consider to be the origin of Pas's name.\n\nAs for Metis, etc., here is some more information on Phanes:\nhttp://www.theoi.com/Protogenos/Phanes.html\n\nDionysus appears in Peace as Alden Dennis Weer. I do not mean this\nliterally. Dennis derives from Dionysus, and Weer himself is \"resurrected\"\nfrom a tree. The symbolism here is obvious. Dionysus' Roman form, Bacchus,\nis also mentioned by name. (Though you didn't ask, in The Sorcerer's House,\nBaxter derives from Bacchus.) Then you have the egg. Also, the symbol of the\nmale and female entwined (the \"androgyne\") is mentioned in both Peace and\nPandora. In Peace, there is also the yellow flower. Phanes is known as the\n\"all-shining flower.\" I think there's more to that myself, but that's a\ndifferent essay.\n\nAs for Phane's heads, that's a bit more complicated. Descriptions range from\ntwo to five. It really depends on how you count them. I seem to recall a\nsource that gave him three heads, but I might have confused him with his\nfather, Khronos, who if I'm not mistaken appears in another story. As\nfour-headed, Phanes would be Quadrifrons; two-headed, as Janus. He has the\nheads of a youth, a bull, a ram, and a lion. He is also entwined with a\nserpent (which is sometimes called the fifth head). In the picture you're\nlooking at, the heads are scattered about his body. Chalk the confusion up\nto the fact he's invisible.\n\nPatera Horn's explanation of the Wine God's/Outsider's history makes perfect\nsense if you interpret it as a retelling of Orphic mythology. Phanes created\nthe gods, including Zeus. Zeus swallowed Phanes to achieve the power to\ncreate (the joining of the male and female principles is the key to\ncreation -- Severian as am \"androgyne\" possesses this, hence his powers).\nPhanes is then reborn as the son of Zeus: Dionysus.\n\nPas/Typhon \"swallows\" Phanes/the Outsider. He attempts to create his own\nworld with himself as the supreme deity. Severian (Phanes reborn) destroys\nthe world and remakes it. Severian mates with Apheta (again joining the male\nand female) and brings the New Sun. Silk, enlightened by Phanes, destroys\nthe Long Sun Whorl and remakes it and brings the people to Blue and Green.\nAlso, Pas swallows Phanes again when Silk joins with him in Mainframe.\n\nOrphism is the result of syncretism with other religions including Judaism.\n\"Erikapaios\" is actually a butchered Hebrew term for God, used more often in\nKabbalah, and means \"long suffering.\" Again, this is according to Yehuda\nLiebes, the book: Studies in Jewish Myth and Messianism. As an aside,\nanother epithet of YHWH is \"God of the winds.\" Wolfe could have picked up\nthe term \"Spring Wind\" in a book on mysticism.\n\nNow this is all condensed from my thesis, but I'm still working out all the\nkinks. My understanding of the world of Briah is this: Christ is never born.\nChristianity does not become the world religion. Instead, a cult devoted to\nPhanes/Dionysus fulfills much the same function. Instead of a single Christ,\ndifferent figures, perhaps only Severian in different guises, is his means\nof rebirth. Silk is enlightened by him. To Wolfe, Phanes is the same god as\nGod, just by a different name. Pas, by attempting to become God, does so but\nonly by losing those traits which were evil and gaining those which were\ngood.\n\nOr something like that.\n\n--Nick" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2011-05-28T07:18:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Phanes", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Nick Lee: Severian is bisexual in the sense that he has two sexes -- his own, male;\nand Thecla's, female. That is the literaal meaning of \"bisexual.\" Sorry for\nthe confusion. I could have used \"androgynous,\" but that is similarly\npolysemantic. I thought the meaning would be clear to anyone who had read\nNew Sun." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oh, you meant Thecla. Got it. In UotNS she has all but faded, so in my broad concept of \nSeverian, I don't consider her as important a part of him as the middle three books of\nBotNS would suggest. But she is right there, intertwined, for 3/5 of the story.\n \n \nI'd say \"bisexual\" has a meaning in modern English which is not ambiguous (dual sexual \norientation/attraction) and not what you meant. Also \"androgynous\"with its implication of \nambiguity would not have been the correct term either. \n \nSome might say \"sex\" and \"gender\" are perfect synonyms but I think there are shades of \ndifference; sex referring more specifically referring to the physical/genital, while gender \nis used more in referring to mental differences. So, I propose \"bi-gender\" as the best term \nto describe Severian/Thecla's condition." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dionysus appears in Peace as Alden Dennis Weer. I do not mean this literally. Dennis derives \nfrom Dionysus, and Weer himself is \"resurrected\"from a tree. The symbolism here is obvious." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nCareful. If it really was \"obvious\", wouldn't everyone see it? But if is clear to you, I do \nthink that's interesting and worth reporting.\n \nNick, I do like the start of the thesis you are building here. Some, as sergei, recently expressed,\nprefer to read WOlfe from a humanistic/psychological level. As I've argued in the past, I think\nWolfe deliberately interweaves other levels into his stories, like the Secret House within House\nAbsolute. These levels include the religious/mythological, the political with a hefty dose of \nautobiography. (I won't redundantly gush about the skill of that weaving)\n \nOn the autobiographical side I'd like to note that there might be agreement that Weer, Severian\nand Silkhorn are among the most autobiographical characters in the Wolfe retinue (with #5 also\njoining in). Your thesis seems to suggest a Dionysial connection to those three characters.\n \nDavid Stockhoff and I have discussed the general principle of \"story as universe; author as \ngod/creator\"and the possibility that Wolfe applies that principle in the Sun Series with an \nadjustment to \"author as demiurge\". I'm wondering if the gnostic recognition of the \nDionysus/Pan figure as demiurge and WOlfe's auctorial self-identification could be of use to your \nthesis.\n \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nick Lee", "address": "starwaterstrain at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-05-28T19:24:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Phanes", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It is proving difficult to condense my ideas here. I just wrote 85 pages on\nthis subject, and duplicating the rhetorical effect is impossible.\n\nFrom: Lee Berman \n\nCareful. If it really was \"obvious\", wouldn't everyone see it? But if is" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "clear to you, I do think that's interesting and worth reporting." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I only meant that it is obvious once you know that \"Dennis\" means\n\"Dionysus.\" And naturally you have to know the myths associated with\nDionysus. He is associated with trees, particularly the fig tree (think YHWH\nand Silk in Long Sun), and rebirth. Weer is basically a vintner. Dionysus is\nalso the god who gave Midas his touch, though it wasn't one of stone.\n\nRobert Graves translates \"Dionysus\" as \"lame god.\" This is not a\nconventional translation, but it does explain why Weer, Silk, and Severian\nall limp. I am sure Wolfe has read Graves. (Dionysus is also the god of\ndrama, the theater, and for this reason Severian becomes caught up in\nplays.) Vi's wedding contains all the elements that are instrumental in the\nPhanes myth, and he did hatch from an egg.\n\nRead Borski's essay on Peace: http://www.siriusfiction.com/PaxBorskii.html\n\nIt has some of this information and more insights, though I believe his\nthesis is far off the mark. Weer as the Devil would certainly be clever, but\nwould it mean anything? No, it's just a smokescreen. He also misses Weer's\ngreatest sin, but that's another essay. Dionysus is associated with the\ndevil because he is horned, a nature deity, and the Catholic church\nconducted a smear campaign on nature deities. Dionysian cults were also\nconsidered subversive, which is ironic given Christian history. Also, the\ndragon/serpent is not evil but a divine figure in the East. It was divine in\nthe West as well, until we began to consider wisdom folly.\n\nSome, as sergei, recently expressed, prefer to read WOlfe from a" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "humanistic/psychological level. As I've argued in the past, I think Wolfe\ndeliberately interweaves other levels into his stories, like the Secret\nHouse within House Absolute. These levels include the\nreligious/mythological, the political with a hefty dose of autobiography." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "There is no text but the text we create as readers. Our methods of\ninterpretation are influenced by our environment. It is not possible to know\nthe text the way the author knows it, and yet we try.\n\nI believe that, at his foundation, Wolfe is a genre writer. This is not\nmeant as a slight. What I mean is that Wolfe builds a world. This is the\nground he lays for the story he wants to tell. His stories reflect his\ninterests. He wouldn't be much of a writer if there were nothing more to\nhim. Still, he does repeat himself. Look at the repetition of blue and green\nin his stories. Always these two colors: blue and green. Also the wolves,\nand if I may, Dionysus. I think it is misleading to think of his work as\npossessing levels. It's all there at once. It may appear as levels because\nwe only glimpse a bit at a time. The \"it\" is the story.\n\nOn the autobiographical side I'd like to note that there might be agreement" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "that Weer, Severian and Silkhorn are among the most autobiographical\ncharacters in the Wolfe retinue (with #5 also joining in). Your thesis\nseems to suggest a Dionysial connection to those three characters." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "More than those three characters.\n\nCertainly Weer is autobiographical. He is such in the sense that he is a\nkind of alternate reality version of Wolfe. He is Wolfe asking \"what if?\"\nWhat if he hadn't married Rosemary? What if he had stayed at home? What if\nhe had worked as an engineer the rest of his life and never wrote? What if\nhe hadn't read as much literature? Wolfe loves \"what if?\" scenarios.\n\nAs for the others, I suggest that they are characters dear to Wolfe and have\nmuch of him in them. He draws on his life for details, but I wouldn't call\ntheir stories autobiographical.\n\nThe Dionysus/Phanes connection goes beyond those characters. As I said, he\nis associated with the protagonist of Sorcerer's House. Also, if you read\nthe short story \"Empires of Foliage and Flower\" set in the Briah universe,\nyou'll notice the story bears resemblance to the mythology of\nPhanes/Dionysus. Take Prince Patizithes -- Patizithes means \"Lord of Wine\n(literally zythos, an alcoholic drink).\" The child, Barrus, this is a\nmispelling of Bacchus. I believe the unnamed girl in that story is Rosemary.\nRosemary means Aphrodite, and in one myth Dionysus mates with her. She gives\nhim a son, another wine god who is said by some to be Dionysus himself. Then\nthere's Father Thyme, who is Khronos, father of Phanes. Dionysus is the\n\"resurrecting god\" the eternal force of creation. He appears in many guises.\n\nI suggest that in Wolfe's readings of mysticism and mythology (and history\nin general) he came upon Dionysus and found him many times over, as I have.\nPlutarch thought the Jews worshipped the wine god (from the Sabbath,\nSabazois being an analog deity). His worship also presaged the practices of\nthe Christians -- drinking wine that is blood and taking the god into\nyourself. Dionysus/Phanes is also identified with the Logos, and so is\nChrist. This provided the foundation for Wolfe's \"what if?\" What if Christ\nwere never born? Well, Phanes/Dionysus was associated with Mithras. Both the\nMithraic and Orphic cults were active around the time of Christianity.\nScholars speculate that any of these might have won out and grown. So, if\nChristianity didn't exist, the Orphic cult would have taken over. God, after\nall, isn't really Phanes. That is just a name. If he is truly omnipotent, he\nwould be fundamentally the same in each universe. What man calls him is\nincidental.\n\nYou're already aware of Wolfe's preoccupation with wolves. Most leave it as\nbeing a simple obsession with his own name, inserting himself into the\nstory, a metafictional trick. The real reason is more complex. Wolfe is\ninterested in the wild/civilized dichotomy. Dionysus exemplifies this. He is\nknown as \"Liber\" and he frees us from the constraints of civilization. Like\nShiva, he is \"Nysa,\" god of creation, destruction, and religious ecstacy.\nAll these we can equate with the Christian god.\n\nDavid Stockhoff and I have discussed the general principle of \"story as" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "universe; author as god/creator\"and the possibility that Wolfe applies that\nprinciple in the Sun Series with an adjustment to \"author as demiurge\". I'm\nwondering if the gnostic recognition of the Dionysus/Pan figure as demiurge\nand WOlfe's auctorial self-identification could be of use to your thesis." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've spent a great deal of time studying gnosticism, both regarding Wolfe\nand for my own interests. Wolfe isn't Phillip K. Dick, though. It's not that\nsimple. Wolfe, and when I say \"Wolfe\" I always mean the figure in my\nimagination and not the man himself, is distrustful of authority. To be more\nprecise, he views the simple, primeval human existence as superior, the\nEdenic existence. In this stage of human development, we answer only to\nnature, to the Creator. Man, in his hubris, attempts to \"swallow\" God. He\nattempts to become Him, setting himself up over others, creating rules and\nlaws that are not God's. The demiurge is a human force. God cannot be\ndestroyed, though. Kill him, and he will be reborn. Attempt to become God,\nand he will burn out everything that is not him.\n\nNow what does this have to do with Briah? Plutarch also identifies the\nJewish god with Typhon, who in one myth kills Dionysus (the god of\noutsiders, by the way), much the same way Zeus kills Phanes to become top\ndog. The Hypsistarians also worshipped the Jewish god under the name Typhon.\nHe is, after all, the \"God of winds.\" There has been speculation on why\nTyphon, Wolfe's character, is named so, leading some to believe he is a\ncacogen because he has the name of a monster. It's also the name of a god,\nthe (Christian) God, in fact. Typhon is just a man. He is a Nebuchadnezzar.\nHe wants to be God.\n\nEl was originally a sky god, like Zeus, until a small sect of desert nomads\nbegan to assign to him the attributes of all gods. He was god of both\ncreation and destruction, which explains a lot about the Old Testament. Did\nit ever strike you as interesting that, in the Wizard Knight, Heaven and\nHell, Elysion and Niflheim, God and Satan, are connected? That is the story\nof how a world in which the Norse pantheon becomes dominant would work.\n\nPeter Wright sees The Book of the Long Sun and other stories as Wolfe's\nattempts to explain The Book of the New Sun. I suggest that it appears this\nway becaue Wolfe is preoccupied with a different story. This is only the tip\nof the iceberg as regards the symbolism and associations with\nDionysus/Phanes. I haven't even gotten to Terminus Est, the Claw of the\nConciliator, and the azoth. I can't know if Wolfe intended all these\nallusions. Coincidence can only explain so much, though. I'm certainly a\nminority in my interpretations. I don't know of anyone else who reads\nPandora the way I do, except maybe one poster on this list.\n\n--Nick" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2011-05-30T03:56:26+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Phanes", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Nick Lee: It is proving difficult to condense my ideas here. I just wrote 85 pages on\nthis subject, and duplicating the rhetorical effect is impossible." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nI can imagine. Still I'm glad you made the attempt. If I can't match you for your \nscholarship on the subject, I can at least say I agree with your approach. It may\nbe a minority of contributors here who are open to exploring the mythological \nunderpinnings of WOlfe's work but the minority is a pleasant one, and perhaps showing\na few signs of growth." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I only meant that it is obvious once you know that \"Dennis\" means\n\"Dionysus.\" And naturally you have to know the myths associated with\nDionysus. He is associated with trees, particularly the fig tree (think YHWH\nand Silk in Long Sun), and rebirth. Weer is basically a vintner." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nNo I didn't know that about the name Dennis. Thanks. And I think it means I should be\nreading Peace in a more Dionysian light. That's now on my \"to do\" list." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Read Borski's essay on Peace: http://www.siriusfiction.com/PaxBorskii.html\nIt has some of this information and more insights, though I believe his\nthesis is far off the mark. Weer as the Devil would certainly be clever, but\nwould it mean anything? No, it's just a smokescreen. He also misses Weer's\ngreatest sin, but that's another essay. Dionysus is associated with the\ndevil because he is horned, a nature deity, and the Catholic church\nconducted a smear campaign on nature deities." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nI think Borski is very bright and insightful but I agree he often leads himself far down\nthe wrong path. One of my complaints is him seeing Father Inire only as a Moses figure \nwhich leads to all sorts of odd conclusions. My own current view is that Inire is another \nWolfe character connected to Dionysus, via Pan-> Inuus -> Inire (verb for sexual entrance). \nThe monkey connection is through the archaic monkey genus name Inuus. Not that I don't see\nany Moses connection to Inire. But to ignore the Dionysian-Promethian-Azazel connection is \nto miss a lot, imho (some also find aspects of Fenrir in him; had to mention it).\n \nI am aware of the Catholic (and other Christian sects') crusade to demonize nature gods, most\nespecially the horned Dionysus/Green Man/Great God Pan. But I'm not sure that is grounds to\ndismiss the connection, especially in the mind of a Catholic author. While I would guess \nWolfe believes in a spiritually higher Christian God of goodness, I suspect he also believes \nin the realness of a material, more earthly devilish, nature sort of god which is in balance/\nopposition. I think he personally finds both influences in himself, and as a demiurge creator,\ntends to put all the darkest sides of himself into his stories. Thus the appearance of \nDionysian characters with autobiographical aspects in his work. (I suspect Wolfe doesn't\nconsider a Dionysian demiurge to be pure evil but as a necessary balance to the impossible\ngoodness of God)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I think it is misleading to think of his work as possessssing levels. It's all there at once. \nIt may appear as levels because we only glimpse a bit at a time. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nFair enough if you can comprehend Wolfe in such a gestalt fashion. Perhaps I can do that also, \nbut when attempting to describe that totality to other people, I've found it helps to use such \nheuristic devices as breaking things into levels. One of the tricks of trying to communicate in \nsuch a limited venue as this one." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "As for the others, I suggest that they are characters dear to Wolfe and have\nmuch of him in them. He draws on his life for details, but I wouldn't call\ntheir stories autobiographical." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " \nFor me, Wolfe drawing upon his personal life to ascribe details to one of his characters IS\nautobiographical. I say this in the sense of describing the levels of his work, to distinguish\nfrom elements of his characters and stories which are religious, mythological, historical or \npolitical in origin. Again, I find this useful as a way to describe my reading of Wolfe to \nothers because... well, for me, I find large gaps in the Sun Series if it is read at any one level. \nBut reading with simultaneous awareness of all the levels fills in just about all the gaps. For me, \nanyway.\n \n \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<4DE3E79D.6000705@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2011-05-30T18:53:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Phanes Off-List", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 5/28/2011 2:24 PM, Nick Lee wrote:\n\nI believe that, at his foundation, Wolfe is a genre writer. This is \nnot meant as a slight. What I mean is that Wolfe builds a world. This \nis the ground he lays for the story he wants to tell. His stories \nreflect his interests. He wouldn't be much of a writer if there were \nnothing more to him. Still, he does repeat himself. Look at the \nrepetition of blue and green in his stories. Always these two colors: \nblue and green." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Nick,\n\nI think you and I read Wolfe's various novels and short stories \nsimilarly except I don't read his attraction as centered around a single \ndeity or myth. Like you, I have a hard time explaining my explanation in \nan email. It's too long and to all-encompassing. It's not This or That. \nIt's everywhere. It's like trying to explain how water relates to the \nocean. I constantly feel like I need to bring more bring more into it. I \nbring this up now because you mentioned the Wolfe's 'blue-green' theme, \nand I believe I can directly explain why it so important.\n\nIf you care to, I'll share it with you. Perhaps we can help each other \nalong.\n\nJames" } ] } ] }