{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6293", "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": 6293, "subject": "Inhumi eyes and names", "messages": 35, "voices": 10, "first": "2012-09-28T17:07:39+00:00", "last": "2012-10-01T12:38:30+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:07:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I just read a passage where Krait is discussing his vision and the vision of all\ninhumi. He says he can see clearly in fog and that the sky always looks black to\nhim and the stars are always there.\n\nThe fog and black sky elements seem to suggest infrared vision to me. Makes sense \nfor a predator of warm blooded creatures. But could infrared be so sensitive as to\ndetect heat differences between empty sky and stars? Or does he just mean he\ncan detect infrared radiation from stars in the daylight without it being \nmasked by the sun's output?\n\nAnyone remember anything else in Short Sun addressing this issue?\n\nAlso, from the recent discussion of Quetzal's name I got curious about the other inhumu\nnames we are given. I knew a krait was a cobra relative. I just learned that juganu is\nHindi for firefly or glow worm. The Hindi connection to krait is interesting. Fava is of \ncourse a plant/bean name. Used in India but not particularly associated with it or Hindi.\n\nThen there is Jahlee. I can't find a plant named this or any variation of the spelling as\nI expected. I can't find an animal either.\n\nI am more than convinced the name Jahlee was meant to invoke Jahi, the vampiric demoness \nfrom Dr. Talos' play. This is a character played by Jolenta, who, like Jahlee, is a red-\nhaired, busty sex goddess. The connections match up nicely.\n\nBut I still wonder why Jahlee's name seems to defy the Vironese naming convention, unlike\nall the other inhumu. Are there any other named inhumu which could help shed light on this\nmystery? \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065DCE6.5040404@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:22:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Regarding the vision thing:\n\nI've struggled with this question for years. I can think of only two \npossibilities. Either\n\n(1) Krait's vision sees all wavelengths but modulates its reception of \nlight that is strong enough to overwhelm its reception of other light \nand is therefore incredibly /sensitive /to what we call visible light, or\n\n(2) it does not see light at all in the visible spectrum. As you say, \ninfrared vision. This assumes the sun does not emit evenly across the \nboard but rather more light than heat. That is easily checked, but you'd \nneed to try wearing night vision goggles during the day to actually test \nit. Would you see the stars at day? I doubt it. The photons are there \nbut just too weak, and probably especially in the infrared range.\n\nI suppose therefore a third possibility exists that incorporates both." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 1:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:\n\nI just read a passage where Krait is discussing his vision and the vision of all\ninhumi. He says he can see clearly in fog and that the sky always looks black to\nhim and the stars are always there.\n\nThe fog and black sky elements seem to suggest infrared vision to me. Makes sense\nfor a predator of warm blooded creatures. But could infrared be so sensitive as to\ndetect heat differences between empty sky and stars? Or does he just mean he\ncan detect infrared radiation from stars in the daylight without it being\nmasked by the sun's output?\n\nAnyone remember anything else in Short Sun addressing this issue?\n\nAlso, from the recent discussion of Quetzal's name I got curious about the other inhumu\nnames we are given. I knew a krait was a cobra relative. I just learned that juganu is\nHindi for firefly or glow worm. The Hindi connection to krait is interesting. Fava is of\ncourse a plant/bean name. Used in India but not particularly associated with it or Hindi.\n\nThen there is Jahlee. I can't find a plant named this or any variation of the spelling as\nI expected. I can't find an animal either.\n\nI am more than convinced the name Jahlee was meant to invoke Jahi, the vampiric demoness\nfrom Dr. Talos' play. This is a character played by Jolenta, who, like Jahlee, is a red-\nhaired, busty sex goddess. The connections match up nicely.\n\nBut I still wonder why Jahlee's name seems to defy the Vironese naming convention, unlike\nall the other inhumu. Are there any other named inhumu which could help shed light on this\nmystery? \t\t \t \t\t\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065E098.5070509@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:38:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065DCE6.5040404@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Naming:\n- There is no reason why the inhumi have to conform to the vironese \nconvention, except maybe when they're named by or descended from some \nvironese person.\n- Isn't Jahlee's name just a nom de guerre, derived from the word for 'liar' \nin gaonese or something like that?\n\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea, \nnot worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n- At first sight, the inhumi would be able to filter out the refraction of \nlight, but I don't think that's feasible (unless they don't see light, of \ncourse).\n\nDavid Stockhoff wrote (28-09-2012 18:22):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Regarding the vision thing:\n\nI've struggled with this question for years. I can think of only two\npossibilities. Either\n\n(1) Krait's vision sees all wavelengths but modulates its reception of light\nthat is strong enough to overwhelm its reception of other light and is\ntherefore incredibly /sensitive /to what we call visible light, or\n\n(2) it does not see light at all in the visible spectrum. As you say,\ninfrared vision. This assumes the sun does not emit evenly across the board\nbut rather more light than heat. That is easily checked, but you'd need to\ntry wearing night vision goggles during the day to actually test it. Would\nyou see the stars at day? I doubt it. The photons are there but just too\nweak, and probably especially in the infrared range.\n\nI suppose therefore a third possibility exists that incorporates both.\n\nOn 9/28/2012 1:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I just read a passage where Krait is discussing his vision and the vision\nof all\ninhumi. He says he can see clearly in fog and that the sky always looks\nblack to\nhim and the stars are always there.\n\nThe fog and black sky elements seem to suggest infrared vision to me.\nMakes sense\nfor a predator of warm blooded creatures. But could infrared be so\nsensitive as to\ndetect heat differences between empty sky and stars? Or does he just mean he\ncan detect infrared radiation from stars in the daylight without it being\nmasked by the sun's output?\n\nAnyone remember anything else in Short Sun addressing this issue?\n\nAlso, from the recent discussion of Quetzal's name I got curious about the\nother inhumu\nnames we are given. I knew a krait was a cobra relative. I just learned\nthat juganu is\nHindi for firefly or glow worm. The Hindi connection to krait is\ninteresting. Fava is of\ncourse a plant/bean name. Used in India but not particularly associated\nwith it or Hindi.\n\nThen there is Jahlee. I can't find a plant named this or any variation of\nthe spelling as\nI expected. I can't find an animal either.\n\nI am more than convinced the name Jahlee was meant to invoke Jahi, the\nvampiric demoness\nfrom Dr. Talos' play. This is a character played by Jolenta, who, like\nJahlee, is a red-\nhaired, busty sex goddess. The connections match up nicely.\n\nBut I still wonder why Jahlee's name seems to defy the Vironese naming\nconvention, unlike\nall the other inhumu. Are there any other named inhumu which could help\nshed light on this\nmystery?\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065E176.5010104@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:42:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E098.5070509@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Another angle would be that since Krait is lying about flying through \nspace (assuming he is lying), he is lying about the super-vision that \ngoes along with it. It also lets Wolfe have some fun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 1:38 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\n\n\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool \nidea, not worrying very much whether it can be scientifically \nexplained or not.\n- At first sight, the inhumi would be able to filter out the \nrefraction of light, but I don't think that's feasible (unless they \ndon't see light, of course).\n\nDavid Stockhoff wrote (28-09-2012 18:22):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Regarding the vision thing:\n\nI've struggled with this question for years. I can think of only two\npossibilities. Either\n\n(1) Krait's vision sees all wavelengths but modulates its reception \nof light\nthat is strong enough to overwhelm its reception of other light and is\ntherefore incredibly /sensitive /to what we call visible light, or\n\n(2) it does not see light at all in the visible spectrum. As you say,\ninfrared vision. This assumes the sun does not emit evenly across the \nboard\nbut rather more light than heat. That is easily checked, but you'd \nneed to\ntry wearing night vision goggles during the day to actually test it. \nWould\nyou see the stars at day? I doubt it. The photons are there but just too\nweak, and probably especially in the infrared range.\n\nI suppose therefore a third possibility exists that incorporates both.\n\nOn 9/28/2012 1:07 PM, Lee Berman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "I just read a passage where Krait is discussing his vision and the \nvision\nof all\ninhumi. He says he can see clearly in fog and that the sky always looks\nblack to\nhim and the stars are always there.\n\nThe fog and black sky elements seem to suggest infrared vision to me.\nMakes sense\nfor a predator of warm blooded creatures. But could infrared be so\nsensitive as to\ndetect heat differences between empty sky and stars? Or does he just \nmean he\ncan detect infrared radiation from stars in the daylight without it \nbeing\nmasked by the sun's output?\n\nAnyone remember anything else in Short Sun addressing this issue?\n\nAlso, from the recent discussion of Quetzal's name I got curious \nabout the\nother inhumu\nnames we are given. I knew a krait was a cobra relative. I just \nlearned\nthat juganu is\nHindi for firefly or glow worm. The Hindi connection to krait is\ninteresting. Fava is of\ncourse a plant/bean name. Used in India but not particularly associated\nwith it or Hindi.\n\nThen there is Jahlee. I can't find a plant named this or any \nvariation of\nthe spelling as\nI expected. I can't find an animal either.\n\nI am more than convinced the name Jahlee was meant to invoke Jahi, the\nvampiric demoness\nfrom Dr. Talos' play. This is a character played by Jolenta, who, like\nJahlee, is a red-\nhaired, busty sex goddess. The connections match up nicely.\n\nBut I still wonder why Jahlee's name seems to defy the Vironese naming\nconvention, unlike\nall the other inhumu. Are there any other named inhumu which could help\nshed light on this\nmystery?\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065E1EC.80302@irit.fr>", "from": { "name": "Sergei SOLOVIEV", "address": "soloviev at irit.fr" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:44:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In \"On Blue Waters\" the naming of Jahlee is described: the gardener of \nthe Rajan, called Mehman,\nis asked to produce name meaning \"false\" or \"lying\" in the language of \nGaon. Of course your question\nis still interesting, but we have to take this naming scene into account.\n\nSergei" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Lee Berman wrote:\nI just read a passage where Krait is discussing his vision and the vision of all\ninhumi. He says he can see clearly in fog and that the sky always looks black to\nhim and the stars are always there.\n\nThe fog and black sky elements seem to suggest infrared vision to me. Makes sense \nfor a predator of warm blooded creatures. But could infrared be so sensitive as to\ndetect heat differences between empty sky and stars? Or does he just mean he\ncan detect infrared radiation from stars in the daylight without it being \nmasked by the sun's output?\n\nAnyone remember anything else in Short Sun addressing this issue?\n\nAlso, from the recent discussion of Quetzal's name I got curious about the other inhumu\nnames we are given. I knew a krait was a cobra relative. I just learned that juganu is\nHindi for firefly or glow worm. The Hindi connection to krait is interesting. Fava is of \ncourse a plant/bean name. Used in India but not particularly associated with it or Hindi.\n\nThen there is Jahlee. I can't find a plant named this or any variation of the spelling as\nI expected. I can't find an animal either.\n\nI am more than convinced the name Jahlee was meant to invoke Jahi, the vampiric demoness \nfrom Dr. Talos' play. This is a character played by Jolenta, who, like Jahlee, is a red-\nhaired, busty sex goddess. The connections match up nicely.\n\nBut I still wonder why Jahlee's name seems to defy the Vironese naming convention, unlike\nall the other inhumu. Are there any other named inhumu which could help shed light on this\nmystery? \t\t \t \t\t \n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348854941.87068.YahooMailClassic@web160703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:55:41+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E098.5070509@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Also, the light of the sun has been over and over linked to a salvific or spiritual transmogrification in the sequence - the absence of being able to see the sun is certainly a spiritual resonance. Salvation didn't quite work.\n\n(What if the new sun comes and the last vestiges of fallen man can't even see it, though they yearn for that spiritual completion?)\n\n--- On Fri, 9/28/12, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea, \nnot worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n- At first sight, the inhumi would be able to filter out the refraction of \nlight, but I don't think that's feasible (unless they don't see light, of \ncourse)." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348855112.71325.YahooMailClassic@web160705.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T17:58:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E176.5010104@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nAnother angle would be that since Krait is lying about flying through space (assuming he is lying), he is lying about the super-vision that goes along with it. It also lets Wolfe have some fun.\n\nWolfe is a heavy handed symbolist but a subtle stylist, if that makes any sense. Lies usually need a purpose: ignorance, duplicitousness, or narrative impetus. I always argue that the narrators and editors are ignorant, but Krait is one of the few characters I don't like mapping that ignorant duplicitousness towards, for some reason." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:01:35+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E098.5070509@gmail.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea,\nnot worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n\nWe do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe, right? And if we\nneed 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle, surely it's that the whole work is\nto some degree a form of 'magical realism' or the like, right? It really\nis 'science fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or another.\n\n-DOJP" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "nate jarvis", "address": "natejarv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:14:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "wolfe wiki says Jahlee = fake, counterfeit. I run 'fake' and\n'counterfeit' through Hindi>English on google translate and get ???? /\nJ?l? for 'counterfeit'.\n\nWhen I then run that back through H>E 'counterfeit' is still there,\nsurrounded by synonyms for\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jali\n\nNate." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348856108.46790.YahooMailClassic@web160701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:15:08+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\n\nFrom: Daniel Petersen \nSubject: Re: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Friday, September 28, 2012, 11:01 AM\n\n\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques??wrote:\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea, not worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n\n\nWe do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe, right? “And if we need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle, surely it's that the whole work is to some degree a form of 'magical realism' or the like, right” ?It really is 'science fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or another.\n\n\nFor the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic explanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n\n\n(For example, such as the external objective proofs to aid interpretation in the short story the changeling involving the actor Peter Palmer who played the oaf lil' abner - born in 1931 as our narrator Peter Palmer should have been instead of the 1934 birthdate his account posited, making him too young to enter the war legally - and the fact that the origin of the word oaf lies in a bad exchange - such that he was swapped back in 1931 and his subsequent encounter with his changeling warped his memories).\n\n\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the Pelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: the symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL there somehow." } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065E9A3.2000202@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:17:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348855112.71325.YahooMailClassic@web160705.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I know. For me, he's too obviously a liar to be lying.\n\nIf that makes any sense." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 1:58 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, David Stockhoff //* wrote:\n\n\n\n\n Another angle would be that since Krait is lying about flying\n through space (assuming he is lying), he is lying about the\n super-vision that goes along with it. It also lets Wolfe have some\n fun.\n\nWolfe is a heavy handed symbolist but a subtle stylist, if that makes \nany sense. Lies usually need a purpose: ignorance, duplicitousness, or \nnarrative impetus. I always argue that the narrators and editors are \nignorant, but Krait is one of the few characters I don't like mapping \nthat ignorant duplicitousness towards, for some reason.\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065E9E8.3050001@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:18:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348854941.87068.YahooMailClassic@web160703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Which argues for Krait as blind to the sun, or merely insensitive to it?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 1:55 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nAlso, the light of the sun has been over and over linked to a salvific \nor spiritual transmogrification in the sequence - the absence of being \nable to see the sun is certainly a spiritual resonance. Salvation \ndidn't quite work.\n(What if the new sun comes and the last vestiges of fallen man can't \neven see it, though they yearn for that spiritual completion?)\n\n--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Ant?nio Pedro Marques //* wrote:\n\n\n\n\n Vision:\n - I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a\n cool idea,\n not worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained\n or not.\n - At first sight, the inhumi would be able to filter out the\n refraction of\n light, but I don't think that's feasible (unless they don't see\n light, of\n course).\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348856387.3176.YahooMailClassic@web160706.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:19:47+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E9A3.2000202@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n\nFrom: David Stockhoff \nSubject: Re: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Friday, September 28, 2012, 11:17 AM\n\n\nI know. For me, he's too obviously a liar to be lying.\n\nIf that makes any sense.\nit does. The best way to hide a truth is to put it into the mouth of an obvious liar. If one were inclined to hide a truth in the first place - not everyone is." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348856523.52458.YahooMailClassic@web160703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:22:03+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065E9E8.3050001@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nWhich argues for Krait as blind to the sun, or merely insensitive to it?\n\nGreat question, and very valid, if there is any symbolic significance. Perhaps they cannot perceive the greater daytime light because their senses are too indiscriminate??... ??" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065EB3A.9050808@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:23:54+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Absolutely. Still, it should make enough scientific sense to be roughly \npredictive.\n\nIn other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive \ncombustion, not fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to Satan \nunder a full moon." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 2:01 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques > wrote:\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool \nidea, not worrying very much whether it can be scientifically \nexplained or not.\n\nWe do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe, right? And \nif we need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle, surely it's that the \nwhole work is to some degree a form of 'magical realism' or the like, \nright? It really is 'science fantasy' to one degree or another, in \none sense or another.\n\n-DOJP\n\n\n\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:26:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065EB3A.9050808@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff wrote:\nIn other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive combustion,\nnot fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to Satan under a full\nmoon." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You know, that gives me a great idea for a fantasy trilogy..." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065EDB3.3090305@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:34:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348856523.52458.YahooMailClassic@web160703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 2:22 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, David Stockhoff //* wrote:\n\n\n\n\n Which argues for Krait as blind to the sun, or merely insensitive\n to it?\n\nGreat question, and very valid, if there is any symbolic \nsignificance. Perhaps they cannot perceive the greater daytime light \nbecause their senses are too indiscriminate ... ?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Right. Or they are too alien to care, or don't need the sun. But the \ninhumi are plainly only as inhuman as their inability to feed on us \nmakes them. i.e., they are a classically Wolfean form of human.\n\nFor me, the juxtaposition of sun and stars suggests gnosticism---that \none can only truly see without light. This certainly suggests willful \nblindness, unless there is truth to the statement.\n\ni should note that the reason I associate Krait-vision with spaceflight \nis that any creature with sensitive eyes would be blinded in \nnear-stellar space, so there would need to be some mechanism to prevent \nthat." } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065EDE6.4000802@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:35:18+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 2:26 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nDavid Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "In other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive combustion,\nnot fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to Satan under a full\nmoon." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You know, that gives me a great idea for a fantasy trilogy..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I was thinking a short story, at least. ;)" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "nate jarvis", "address": "natejarv at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T18:51:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065EDE6.4000802@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "A Fistful of Yags." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:35 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\nOn 9/28/2012 2:26 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "David Stockhoff wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "In other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive\ncombustion,\nnot fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to Satan under a full\nmoon." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You know, that gives me a great idea for a fantasy trilogy..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I was thinking a short story, at least. ;)\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T19:21:10+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348856108.46790.YahooMailClassic@web160701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\nFor the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic\nexplanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n...\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the\nPelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: the\nsymbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL there somehow.\n\nYeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' in no\nway mitigates against any symbolism. I'm wondering what I said that made\nthat worth pointing out? All I'm saying is that the 'mechanism', in the\nSolar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of 'scientific' naturalism.\n There are surely 'occult', or 'preternatural' forces at work in this\nseries, in addition to and in conjunction with mega-futuristic\nsuper-science.\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\nFor the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic\nexplanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n...\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the\nPelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: the\nsymbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL there somehow." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen *wrote:\n\n\nFrom: Daniel Petersen \nSubject: Re: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names\nTo: \"The Urth Mailing List\" \nDate: Friday, September 28, 2012, 11:01 AM\n\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques \nwrote:\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea,\nnot worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n\nWe do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe, right? And if\nwe need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle, surely it's that the whole work\nis to some degree a form of 'magical realism' or the like, right? It\nreally is 'science fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or\nanother.\n\n\n For the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic\nexplanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n\n (For example, such as the external objective proofs to aid\ninterpretation in the short story the changeling involving the actor Peter\nPalmer who played the oaf lil' abner - born in 1931 as our narrator Peter\nPalmer should have been instead of the 1934 birthdate his account posited,\nmaking him too young to enter the war legally - and the fact that the\norigin of the word oaf lies in a bad exchange - such that he was swapped\nback in 1931 and his subsequent encounter with his changeling warped his\nmemories).\n\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the\nPelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: the\nsymbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL there somehow.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T19:26:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065EB3A.9050808@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, Chekhov's gun does *not* have to be combustive rather than demonic *if*\ndemonic forces are part of the narrational storyworld - the 'scientific'\nview in that case would be to admit these forces into the causal meshwork.\n I think that's the best way to read Wolfe's Solar Cycle. I think these\nbooks are in a similarly 'supernatural' world to the Soldier series - just\nwith lots of (what we traditionally know as) science also woven in.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:23 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nAbsolutely. Still, it should make enough scientific sense to be roughly\npredictive.\n\nIn other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive\ncombustion, not fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to Satan\nunder a full moon.\n\nOn 9/28/2012 2:01 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Ant?nio Pedro Marques >\nwrote:\nVision:\n- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea,\nnot worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.\n\nWe do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe, right? And if\nwe need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle, surely it's that the whole work\nis to some degree a form of 'magical realism' or the like, right? It\nreally is 'science fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or\nanother.\n\n-DOJP\n\n\n\n\n\n______________________________**_________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065FAE4.6040509@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T19:30:44+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That is a helpful clarification, thanks. We all thought you had gone \nwobbly on us.\n\nStrike the scaffold, boys!" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 3:21 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini > wrote:\nFor the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic \nexplanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n...\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the \nPelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: \nthe symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL \nthere somehow.\n\nYeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' \nin no way mitigates against any symbolism. I'm wondering what I said \nthat made that worth pointing out? All I'm saying is that the \n'mechanism', in the Solar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of \n'scientific' naturalism. There are surely 'occult', or \n'preternatural' forces at work in this series, in addition to and in \nconjunction with mega-futuristic super-science.\n\n-DOJP\n\n\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini > wrote:\n\nFor the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic \nexplanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective \"proof\"\n...\nWolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the \nPelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: \nthe symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL \nthere somehow.\n\n\n\n\n --- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen\n />/* wrote:\n\n\n From: Daniel Petersen >\n Subject: Re: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5065FBFD.1050406@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T19:35:25+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Yes, exactly. I had almost added to that \"or else the playwright would \nhave to explain about the demons etc.\" I assumed that would be taken as \nimplied, but of course given the context I should not have assumed that \nthis was obvious.\n\nYou're saying the same thing I am, except my example was drawn from \nstraightforward realism and you are expanding it to non-realism." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 3:26 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\nNo, Chekhov's gun does *not* have to be combustive rather than demonic \n*if* demonic forces are part of the narrational storyworld - the \n'scientific' view in that case would be to admit these forces into the \ncausal meshwork. I think that's the best way to read Wolfe's Solar \nCycle. I think these books are in a similarly 'supernatural' world to \nthe Soldier series - just with lots of (what we traditionally know as) \nscience also woven in.\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:23 PM, David Stockhoff \n> wrote:\n\n Absolutely. Still, it should make enough scientific sense to be\n roughly predictive.\n\n In other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive\n combustion, not fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to\n Satan under a full moon.\n\n On 9/28/2012 2:01 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\n Ant?nio Pedro Marques >> wrote:\n Vision:\n - I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a\n cool idea, not worrying very much whether it can be\n scientifically explained or not.\n\n We do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe,\n right? And if we need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle,\n surely it's that the whole work is to some degree a form of\n 'magical realism' or the like, right? It really is 'science\n fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or another.\n\n -DOJP\n\n\n\n\n\n _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348861155.32656.YahooMailClassic@web160705.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T19:39:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\n\nYeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' in no way mitigates against any symbolism. “I'm wondering what I said that made that worth pointing out” ?All I'm saying is that the 'mechanism', in the Solar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of 'scientific' naturalism. ?There are surely 'occult', or 'preternatural' forces at work in this series, in addition to and in conjunction with mega-futuristic super-science.\n\n\n-DOJP: http://www.urth.net\n\n\nI was pointing out that in addition to symbolic levels there are usually obscured MECHANISTIC ones (hot gas making a tent rise, in that case) that are also at work in New Sun. The puzzle was whether the miracles of the claw where cellular rearrangements or simply a pocket time dilation device (fueled not by the claw but by the resonance between the Conciliator's blood and the white fountain and existing across many times). There are mechanistic explanations in Wolfe, it's not just \"magic\". Though it may at times be apotropaic and dualistic in nature, it can often be linked to cause and effect." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T20:01:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5065FBFD.1050406@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "David Stockhoff wrote:\n\"Strike the scaffold, boys!\"\n\nCheeky so and so...\n\n\"You're saying the same thing I am, except my example was drawn from\nstraightforward realism and you are expanding it to non-realism.\"\n\nWell, 'non-realism' is a bit loaded - I'd rather say you drew your example\nfrom 'straightforward realism' (inverted commas intentional) and I drew\nmine from, say, 'magical realism' or 'mythical realism' or 'supernatural\nnaturalism' or some such thing. (All of the latter being, to Wolfe's own\nstated view at least, more amenable to his fiction than so-called\nstraightforward realism.)\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:35 PM, David Stockhoff wrote:\nYes, exactly. I had almost added to that \"or else the playwright would\nhave to explain about the demons etc.\" I assumed that would be taken as\nimplied, but of course given the context I should not have assumed that\nthis was obvious.\n\nYou're saying the same thing I am, except my example was drawn from\nstraightforward realism and you are expanding it to non-realism.\n\nOn 9/28/2012 3:26 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "No, Chekhov's gun does *not* have to be combustive rather than demonic\n*if* demonic forces are part of the narrational storyworld - the\n'scientific' view in that case would be to admit these forces into the\ncausal meshwork. I think that's the best way to read Wolfe's Solar Cycle.\n I think these books are in a similarly 'supernatural' world to the Soldier\nseries - just with lots of (what we traditionally know as) science also\nwoven in.\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:23 PM, David Stockhoff > wrote:\n\n Absolutely. Still, it should make enough scientific sense to be\n roughly predictive.\n\n In other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive\n combustion, not fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to\n Satan under a full moon.\n\n On 9/28/2012 2:01 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:\n\n Ant?nio Pedro Marques >> wrote:\n Vision:\n - I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a\n cool idea, not worrying very much whether it can be\n scientifically explained or not.\n\n We do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe,\n right? And if we need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle,\n surely it's that the whole work is to some degree a form of\n 'magical realism' or the like, right? It really is 'science\n fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or another.\n\n -DOJP\n\n\n\n\n\n\n ______________________________**_________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T20:07:36+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348861155.32656.YahooMailClassic@web160705.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, any 'real' magic (i.e. occult sorcery or what have you) wouldn't be\n'just magic' anyway, it seems superfluous to me that you point this out.\n I'm not in any way denying causality (that's just silly). I'm saying it\nshould all be 'linked to cause and effect' (as you say) *very broadly\nconceived* - which I also think you're saying when you limn that causal\nsphere as ranging from the Conciliator's blood to the white fountain.\n\n-DOJP" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:\n\n\n--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen *wrote:\n\n\n\nYeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' in no\nway mitigates against any symbolism. I'm wondering what I said that made\nthat worth pointing out? All I'm saying is that the 'mechanism', in the\nSolar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of 'scientific' naturalism.\n There are surely 'occult', or 'preternatural' forces at work in this\nseries, in addition to and in conjunction with mega-futuristic\nsuper-science.\n\n-DOJP: http://www.urth.net\n\n\n\nI was pointing out that in addition to symbolic levels there are usually\nobscured MECHANISTIC ones (hot gas making a tent rise, in that case) that\nare also at work in New Sun. The puzzle was whether the miracles of the\nclaw where cellular rearrangements or simply a pocket time dilation device\n(fueled not by the claw but by the resonance between the Conciliator's\nblood and the white fountain and existing across many times). There are\nmechanistic explanations in Wolfe, it's not just \"magic\". Though it may at\ntimes be apotropaic and dualistic in nature, it can often be linked to\ncause and effect.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Daniel Petersen", "address": "danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T20:10:24+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That was meant to read: 'so it still seems superfluous to me...'" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Daniel Petersen <\ndanielottojackpetersen at gmail.com> wrote:\nWell, any 'real' magic (i.e. occult sorcery or what have you) wouldn't be\n'just magic' anyway, it seems superfluous to me that you point this out.\n I'm not in any way denying causality (that's just silly). I'm saying it\nshould all be 'linked to cause and effect' (as you say) *very broadly\nconceived* - which I also think you're saying when you limn that causal\nsphere as ranging from the Conciliator's blood to the white fountain.\n\n-DOJP\n\nOn Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "--- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen *wrote:\n\n\n\nYeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' in\nno way mitigates against any symbolism. I'm wondering what I said that\nmade that worth pointing out? All I'm saying is that the 'mechanism', in\nthe Solar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of 'scientific' naturalism.\n There are surely 'occult', or 'preternatural' forces at work in this\nseries, in addition to and in conjunction with mega-futuristic\nsuper-science.\n\n-DOJP: http://www.urth.net\n\n\n\nI was pointing out that in addition to symbolic levels there are usually\nobscured MECHANISTIC ones (hot gas making a tent rise, in that case) that\nare also at work in New Sun. The puzzle was whether the miracles of the\nclaw where cellular rearrangements or simply a pocket time dilation device\n(fueled not by the claw but by the resonance between the Conciliator's\nblood and the white fountain and existing across many times). There are\nmechanistic explanations in Wolfe, it's not just \"magic\". Though it may at\ntimes be apotropaic and dualistic in nature, it can often be linked to\ncause and effect.\n\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1348867769.22601.YahooMailNeo@web124502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-28T21:29:29+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348854941.87068.YahooMailClassic@web160703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "--- On Fri, 9/28/12, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Vision:- I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a cool idea, not worrying very much whether it can be scientifically explained or not.- At first sight, the inhumi would be able to filter out the refraction of light, but I don't think that's feasible (unless they don't see light, of course)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Marc Aramini >\nAlso, the light of the sun has been over and over linked to a salvific or spiritual transmogrification in the sequence - the absence of being able to see the sun is certainly a spiritual resonance. Salvation didn't quite work." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "...\n\nInfrared vision for the inhumi makes perfect sense to me. The sky is blue because short wavelengths are scattered more than long; we get lots of blue light from the sky, but little red. Therefore infrared should be scattered even less. A being that could see only in the infrared, and maybe not the near infrared, would be able to see the sun, but the sky would look black to him or her. I can't think of why such a creature wouldn't be able to see the stars.\n\nAren't the stars visible during the day on Urth, because the sun is faint and reddish? Perhaps gthis implies a symbolic, or for some, a coded link?\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5066225B.7000308@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-28T22:19:07+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1348867769.22601.YahooMailNeo@web124502.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 5:29 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote:\n \nInfrared vision for the inhumi makes perfect sense to me. The sky is blue because short wavelengths are scattered more than long; we get lots of blue light from the sky, but little red. Therefore infrared should be scattered even less. A being that could see only in the infrared, and maybe not the near infrared, would be able to see the sun, but the sky would look black to him or her. I can't think of why such a creature wouldn't be able to see the stars.\n \nAren't the stars visible during the day on Urth, because the sun is faint and reddish? Perhaps gthis implies a symbolic, or for some, a coded link?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That too. But I had not thought (not being a physicist) of scattering, \nwhich helps to obscure the stars for us. But wouldn't stars themselves \ntend not to emit infrared visible over interstellar distances?" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2012-09-30T07:29:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5066225B.7000308@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff: i should note that the reason I associate Krait-vision \nwith spaceflight is that any creature with sensitive eyes would be blinded \nin near-stellar space, so there would need to be some mechanism to prevent \nthat." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Actually, Horn himself (though I guess he has died and is now SilkHorn) \nassociates Krait's vision with inhumi space flight. I think such casual\nassumptions of their space flight is what makes this impossible thing so\nbelieveable.\n\nI consider the spaceflight thing to be part of the real secret of the inhumi\nso perhaps the assumption is helping to disguise something about the inhumi.\nI'm thinking of their snake-(serpent-?) like nature that Marc has noted for\nthem in the text, especially for Jahlee. Though a krait isn't a pit viper, \nthat type of snake is often described as having infrared vision through their\npits." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Jerry Friedman: Aren't the stars visible during the day on Urth, because the \nsun is faint and reddish? Perhaps gthis implies a symbolic, or for some, a \ncoded link?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is a very interesting thought. Afterall, inhumi are from Green and \"Green\nis Urth!\" Moreover, Severian is at least once compared to a vampire by Dorcas\nPlus he is also bitten by a vampire bat." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "nate jarvis: wolfe wiki says Jahlee = fake, counterfeit. I run 'fake' and\n'counterfeit' through Hindi>English on google translate and get ???? /\nJ?l? for 'counterfeit'." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is helpful. I did encounter the word \"jali\" in my searches, as the name for\nthose intricately carves screens so prevalent in Indian architecture. Not sure\nhow that connects to counterfeit. I still wonder a little why Wolfe chose to \nmake Jahlee the one of five exception to Vironese naming convention. I still \nthink maybe the necessary connection to Jahi is part of it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: but Krait is one of the few characters I don't like mapping that \nignorant duplicitousness towards, for some reason." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Oh I find Krait to be an absolutely fascinating character. He admits he considers\nhumans to be a food crop, like cattle. And Horn says he knows that cattle must be\ntamed and that he recognizes Krait, (with his superior intelligence), tamed him in\nthe pit.\n\nThen there is Krait's connection to Sinew. A true father-son dynamic is established.\nAnd there is the clear (to me) connection of both Krait and Sinew to Gene Wolfe's\nown son with whom he had (published) difficulties. When I consider the love and \ndisrespect, the lies and bloodsucking and manipulation depicted between Horn and \nthese characters, I feel a real sense of empathy for what this family must have\ngone through. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<50687BAE.6050806@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2012-09-30T17:04:46+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/30/2012 3:29 AM, Lee Berman wrote:\nI consider the spaceflight thing to be part of the real secret of the inhumi\nso perhaps the assumption is helping to disguise something about the inhumi.\nI'm thinking of their snake-(serpent-?) like nature that Marc has noted for\nthem in the text, especially for Jahlee. Though a krait isn't a pit viper,\nthat type of snake is often described as having infrared vision through their\npits." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Good clue." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "nate jarvis: wolfe wiki says Jahlee = fake, counterfeit. I run 'fake' and\n'counterfeit' through Hindi>English on google translate and get ???? /\nJ?l? for 'counterfeit'." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "This is helpful. I did encounter the word \"jali\" in my searches, as the name for\nthose intricately carves screens so prevalent in Indian architecture. Not sure\nhow that connects to counterfeit. I still wonder a little why Wolfe chose to\nmake Jahlee the one of five exception to Vironese naming convention. I still\nthink maybe the necessary connection to Jahi is part of it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Counterfeit = Deceiver?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Then there is Krait's connection to Sinew. A true father-son dynamic \nis established. And there is the clear (to me) connection of both \nKrait and Sinew to Gene Wolfe's own son with whom he had (published) \ndifficulties. When I consider the love and disrespect, the lies and \nbloodsucking and manipulation depicted between Horn and these \ncharacters, I feel a real sense of empathy for what this family must \nhave gone through." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I actually don't know anything about this. Without necessarily getting \ninto details, what's the broad story there?" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1349033824.18964.YahooMailClassic@web160701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-09-30T19:37:04+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<50687BAE.6050806@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "--- On Sun, 9/30/12, David Stockhoff wrote:\n\n\n\n\n\nI actually don't know anything about this. Without necessarily getting into details, what's the broad story there?\nThe Short Sun books are dedicated to Wolfe's children. He has a very strained/ non-existent relationship with his son Matty, but closer relatonships with his other children, such as Roy and Terri. I won't delve into that much mroe personally, as it isn't really my place." } ] }, { "message_id": "<1349054042.50230.YahooMailNeo@web124503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "Jerry Friedman", "address": "jerry_friedman at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2012-10-01T01:14:02+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<5066225B.7000308@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: David Stockhoff " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 9/28/2012 5:29 PM, Jerry Friedman wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "? Infrared vision for the inhumi makes perfect sense to me. The sky is \nblue because short wavelengths are scattered more than long; we get lots of blue \nlight from the sky, but little red. Therefore infrared should be scattered even \nless. A being that could see only in the infrared, and maybe not the near \ninfrared, would be able to see the sun, but the sky would look black to him or \nher. I can't think of why such a creature wouldn't be able to see the \nstars.\n? Aren't the stars visible during the day on Urth, because the sun is \nfaint and reddish? Perhaps gthis implies a symbolic, or for some, a coded link?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "That too. But I had not thought (not being a physicist) of scattering, which \nhelps to obscure the stars for us. But wouldn't stars themselves tend not to \nemit infrared visible over interstellar distances?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't see why. ?There's be less energy from the stars we see, but I imagine it would be enough to see them. ?Many stars, probably the majority, emit more strongly in the infrared than the visible, but most of them are pretty faint.\n\nA check of the archives (I'm too lazy to check the books) says the inhumi are cold-blooded. “That would help. ?There's still a constraint that they'd have to use wavelengths considerably shorter than those produced at typical temperatures on Green, where it's hot. ?I was thinking about trying to figure out what would be necessary for the day sky to look black to them. ?Did I mention laziness”\n\nJerry Friedman" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David Duffy", "address": "david.duffy at qimr.edu.au" }, "date": "2012-10-01T03:33:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "<1349054042.50230.YahooMailNeo@web124503.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Jerry Friedman wrote:\nA check of the archives (I'm too lazy to check the books) says the \ninhumi are cold-blooded. That would help. There's still a constraint \nthat they'd have to use wavelengths considerably shorter than those \nproduced at typical temperatures on Green, where it's hot. I was \nthinking about trying to figure out what would be necessary for the day \nsky to look black to them. Did I mention laziness?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Maybe they wear polaroids" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2012-10-01T12:38:30+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Inhumi eyes and names", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini:The Short Sun books are dedicated to Wolfe's children. He has a \nvery strained/ non-existent relationship with his son Matty, but closer relatonships \nwith his other children, such as Roy and Terri. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks Marc. Yes, I thought I'd seen some sort of mention of this conflict and when I\nfirst read OBW the connection jumped instantly to mind. I don't have a personal \nrelationship with Mr. Wolfe but the conflict and the publishing of it was confirmed\nfor me in a correspondence I had with Mantis (M. Andre-Driussi) a while back.\n\nGiven the insolence, deception and manipulation laced with occasional expressions of\npaternal love we see in the Horn-Sinew/Krait relationship I think we can get a\nreasonably clear picture of what Wolfe is trying to show. Perhaps even a sense of the \nsort of demons which so often interfere with family relationships and the realness of\nthe pain involved. As Shakespeare expressed it, \"How sharper than a serpent's tooth it\nis. To have a thankless child.\" \t\t \t \t\t " } ] } ] }