{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6370", "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": 6370, "subject": "Literal or metaphor?", "messages": 10, "voices": 6, "first": "2013-04-11T20:23:15+00:00", "last": "2013-04-15T14:53:14+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2013-04-11T20:23:15+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Without wanting to take any position on the current discussion, a metapoint:\n\nSamuel R. Delany (a writer of Wolfe's \"generation\" of SF writers) points\nout in several places that one of the powerful \"features\" of science\nfiction is to literalize metaphors.\n\nFor example, in a mundane novel \"He turned on his left side\" means someone\nrolled over in bed; in an SF novel it may mean that someone threw a switch\nto activate half their body. Or the muzzy metaphor \"Her world exploded\" may\nmean that a planet belonging to some woman blowed up real good.\n\nThe point here is that saying that something is a metaphor doesn't mean\nthat it isn't also literally true -- or even _primarily_ literally true." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" } ] }, { "message_id": "<6F7DCCA2EB134F8D879D7B7C6B35B5E2@Rover>", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2013-04-13T10:24:53+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Without wanting to take any position on the current discussion,\na metapoint:\n\nSamuel R. Delany (a writer of Wolfe's \"generation\" of SF writers)\n points out in several places that one of the powerful \"features\"\nof science fiction is to literalize metaphors.\n\nFor example, in a mundane novel \"He turned on his left side\"\nmeans someone rolled over in bed; in an SF novel it may mean\nthat someone threw a switch to activate half their body. Or the\nmuzzy metaphor \"Her world exploded\" may mean that a planet\nbelonging to some woman blowed up real good.\n\nThe point here is that saying that something is a metaphor\ndoesn't mean that it isn't also literally true -- or even _primarily_\nliterally true." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Delaney's point is true, but I do not think literal metaphors are at too \nmuch risk of being ignored on this list! Freud's \"sometimes a cigar is just \na cigar\" may also be useful at times...\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2013-04-14T04:41:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "<6F7DCCA2EB134F8D879D7B7C6B35B5E2@Rover>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes: The point here is that saying \nthat something is a metaphor\ndoesn't mean that it isn't also literally true -- \nor even _primarily_literally true." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks, Dan'l. I liked that post a lot." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Gerry Quinn: Delaney's point is true, but I do not think \nliteral metaphors are at too much risk of being ignored \non this list! Freud's \"sometimes a cigar is just \na cigar\" may also be useful at times..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Also a good post. We must hope that every thoughtful,\nanalytical poster here has a sort of literary \"concience\"\nto tell him/her when he has speculated too far to be\nplausibly inspired by the text. But whose conscience\nallows too much and whose does not allow enough? The only\npossible judge is Gene Wolfe and he isn't saying much.\n\nIn reading Wolfe interviews, I am struck by one thing- he\nreally expects a lot of his readers. Too much, in many cases.\nI'm currently thinking of when someone asked him if Pig was a\ngodling. He answered in an annoyed tone as though it was far \ntoo obvious that he was, in fact, a godling.\n\nIt wasn't obvious to me, nor to anyone else I know of. But once\nI was forced to think about it, I could see that the blindness and\nthe manner of speech invoke Tartaros and Auk and the name Pig invokes\nPhaea and he first appears in a chapter titled \"Great Pas's Godling\".\nHe isn't as big as the other godling but he is big and knows a lot of\nstuff for a blind guy who seems to appear out of nowhere.\n\nIf I needed the interview to catch that one, what other stuff have I \nmissed. It just seems more likely that I've missed more than I've\n(incorrectly) invented.\n\n(FWIW, I once had a debate with Roy Lackey about whether the names of\nHorn and his family are meant to designate a connection via bovines. I\nrecently noticed that when Horn and Pig are trying to decide a Vironese\nname for him, the big guy suggests \"Bull\" for himself and Horn smiles\nand says, \"People would think we were related\". So I think that resolves\nthat. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2013-04-14T05:32:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Anyone who has read his interviews on Peace knows that a few words create a pattern of conclusiveness. Mrs porter is miss bold across two hundred pages because she is blond, pretty, and associated with trees. Along with other patterns, this id creates a bigger picture. All Wolfe's work is like that, though it is always different. The little details add up to much more. That stuff is extremely deliberate. He changes her name because he likes the act of encoding and obscuring while still creating a method of decoding through patterns. \n\nSent from my iPhone" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On Apr 13, 2013, at 9:41 PM, Lee Berman wrote:\nDan'l Danehy-Oakes: The point here is that saying \nthat something is a metaphor\ndoesn't mean that it isn't also literally true -- \nor even _primarily_literally true." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Thanks, Dan'l. I liked that post a lot." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Gerry Quinn: Delaney's point is true, but I do not think \nliteral metaphors are at too much risk of being ignored \non this list! Freud's \"sometimes a cigar is just \na cigar\" may also be useful at times..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Also a good post. We must hope that every thoughtful,\nanalytical poster here has a sort of literary \"concience\"\nto tell him/her when he has speculated too far to be\nplausibly inspired by the text. But whose conscience\nallows too much and whose does not allow enough? The only\npossible judge is Gene Wolfe and he isn't saying much.\n\nIn reading Wolfe interviews, I am struck by one thing- he\nreally expects a lot of his readers. Too much, in many cases.\nI'm currently thinking of when someone asked him if Pig was a\ngodling. He answered in an annoyed tone as though it was far \ntoo obvious that he was, in fact, a godling.\n\nIt wasn't obvious to me, nor to anyone else I know of. But once\nI was forced to think about it, I could see that the blindness and\nthe manner of speech invoke Tartaros and Auk and the name Pig invokes\nPhaea and he first appears in a chapter titled \"Great Pas's Godling\".\nHe isn't as big as the other godling but he is big and knows a lot of\nstuff for a blind guy who seems to appear out of nowhere.\n\nIf I needed the interview to catch that one, what other stuff have I \nmissed. It just seems more likely that I've missed more than I've\n(incorrectly) invented.\n\n(FWIW, I once had a debate with Roy Lackey about whether the names of\nHorn and his family are meant to designate a connection via bovines. I\nrecently noticed that when Horn and Pig are trying to decide a Vironese\nname for him, the big guy suggests \"Bull\" for himself and Horn smiles\nand says, \"People would think we were related\". So I think that resolves\nthat. \n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<516AA597.1040601@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2013-04-14T12:48:23+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 4/14/2013 12:41 AM, Lee Berman wrote:\n\n(FWIW, I once had a debate with Roy Lackey about whether the names of\nHorn and his family are meant to designate a connection via bovines. I\nrecently noticed that when Horn and Pig are trying to decide a Vironese\nname for him, the big guy suggests \"Bull\" for himself and Horn smiles\nand says, \"People would think we were related\". So I think that resolves\nthat." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Granting, of course, that \"bull\" could designate a moose as well as a \nsteer. But I agree that Horn's family is named around the animal *most \n*Earth people, especially around the Mediterranean (and including the \nancient Egyptians, thus influencing Greek mythology), have used for \nleather, meat, and glue for thousands of years. I'm curious what else \nRoy thought it might be.\n\nBut that's a classic Wolfe info-tidbit drop." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2013-04-14T17:29:21+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "<516AA597.1040601@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff- Granting, of course, that \"bull\" could designate a \nmoose as well as a steer. But I agree that Horn's family is named \naround the animal *most *Earth people, especially around the \nMediterranean (and including the ancient Egyptians, thus influencing \nGreek mythology), have used for leather, meat, and glue for thousands \nof years. I'm curious what else Roy thought it might be." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It was a number of years ago. But IIRC, the debate started when someone \nelse speculated that the name of a certain character, (maybe Patera Bull \nor even Bison?) was suggestive of him being related to Horn. I think it\nwas Roy's general contention that Vironese names were picked (by Wolfe)\nat random and any connections between them were personal inventions and \nshouldn't be to be used to find extra-curricular meaning. I remember asking \nRoy if he might concede that if not bovine then ungulate connections tied\nthe male names of Horn's family together, but he never responded. That may \nhave marked the end of Roy's participation on this board. A shame, but\nunderstandable.\n\nI think the Long Sun naming falls along the same lines as saint names in \nBotNS. Some, like Dorcas, are clearly significant while most are not. \nPerhaps most of the plant and animal names of Viron were not picked with\nsignificant meanings but others like the Silk-Chenille-Tussah cluster or\nmost obviously the Potto-Tarsier-Lemur, et al. group clearly were intended \nto imply connection.\n\nIn addition to connections surely some names like Blood, Quetzal or Remora or Bison were meant to reflect certain obvious or hidden attributes of the individual, themselves. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Gerry Quinn", "address": "gerry at bindweed.com" }, "date": "2013-04-15T09:42:11+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "From: Lee Berman" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It was a number of years ago. But IIRC, the debate started when someone\nelse speculated that the name of a certain character, (maybe Patera Bull\nor even Bison?) was suggestive of him being related to Horn. I think it\nwas Roy's general contention that Vironese names were picked (by Wolfe)\nat random and any connections between them were personal inventions and\nshouldn't be to be used to find extra-curricular meaning. I remember \nasking\nRoy if he might concede that if not bovine then ungulate connections tied\nthe male names of Horn's family together, but he never responded. That may\nhave marked the end of Roy's participation on this board. A shame, but\nunderstandable." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If that was the reason I would not find it understandable, and so I assume \nthere must have been some other reason. Even if one doubts the ungulate[*] \nconnection (which I would find difficult) one cannot dispute that Wolfe \npicked the names with a view to alliteration at least. And given that \nalliteration reduces the space of possibilities, the chance of an accidental \nungulate connection is reduced.\n\n[*] Maybe ungulate isn't quite right, though. Horn, Hide and Hoof might be \nthought of as epidermal by-products of large domesticated grass-eaters. \nEither way, it's natural to link them.\n\n- Gerry Quinn" } ] }, { "message_id": "<516BD6DF.70008@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2013-04-15T10:30:55+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Gerry Quinn wrote (15-04-2013 10:42):" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: Lee Berman" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "It was a number of years ago. But IIRC, the debate started when someone\nelse speculated that the name of a certain character, (maybe Patera Bull\nor even Bison?) was suggestive of him being related to Horn. I think it\nwas Roy's general contention that Vironese names were picked (by Wolfe)\nat random and any connections between them were personal inventions and\nshouldn't be to be used to find extra-curricular meaning. I remember asking\nRoy if he might concede that if not bovine then ungulate connections tied\nthe male names of Horn's family together, but he never responded. That may\nhave marked the end of Roy's participation on this board. A shame, but\nunderstandable." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[I would rather imagine Roy doesn't see a point in filling the list with \ndiscussions of the same ideas again and again and again.]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If that was the reason I would not find it understandable, and so I assume\nthere must have been some other reason. Even if one doubts the ungulate[*]\nconnection (which I would find difficult) one cannot dispute that Wolfe\npicked the names with a view to alliteration at least. And given that\nalliteration reduces the space of possibilities, the chance of an accidental\nungulate connection is reduced.\n\n[*] Maybe ungulate isn't quite right, though. Horn, Hide and Hoof might be\nthought of as epidermal by-products of large domesticated grass-eaters.\nEither way, it's natural to link them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not necessarily epidermal, cf. Sinew. But that, not 'bovine', is the theme \nin Horn's family, the remark over 'bull' notwithstanding. I don't recall \nanyone ever not seeing it." } ] }, { "message_id": "<516BEF89.7090609@verizon.net>", "from": { "name": "David Stockhoff", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2013-04-15T12:16:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "On 4/14/2013 1:29 PM, Lee Berman wrote:\nDavid Stockhoff- Granting, of course, that \"bull\" could designate a\nmoose as well as a steer. But I agree that Horn's family is named\naround the animal *most *Earth people, especially around the\nMediterranean (and including the ancient Egyptians, thus influencing\nGreek mythology), have used for leather, meat, and glue for thousands\nof years. I'm curious what else Roy thought it might be." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It was a number of years ago. But IIRC, the debate started when someone\nelse speculated that the name of a certain character, (maybe Patera Bull\nor even Bison?) was suggestive of him being related to Horn. I think it\nwas Roy's general contention that Vironese names were picked (by Wolfe)\nat random and any connections between them were personal inventions and\nshouldn't be to be used to find extra-curricular meaning. I remember asking\nRoy if he might concede that if not bovine then ungulate connections tied\nthe male names of Horn's family together, but he never responded. That may\nhave marked the end of Roy's participation on this board. A shame, but\nunderstandable.\n\nI think the Long Sun naming falls along the same lines as saint names in\nBotNS. Some, like Dorcas, are clearly significant while most are not.\nPerhaps most of the plant and animal names of Viron were not picked with\nsignificant meanings but others like the Silk-Chenille-Tussah cluster or\nmost obviously the Potto-Tarsier-Lemur, et al. group clearly were intended\nto imply connection.\n\nIn addition to connections surely some names like Blood, Quetzal or Remora or Bison were meant to reflect certain obvious or hidden attributes of the individual, themselves. \t\t \t \t\t" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I see. It does not seem to me something worth leaving a board over. The \npattern doesn't seem to indicate anything in particular, story-wise.\n\nI'm reminded of the old cliche that American Indians who followed the \nbison used every part of the animal. I'm sure the Egyptians did too, but \nthe cliche has to do with the Indians. That would suggest both men are \nrelated to Horn.\n\nAny thoughts on the significance of cattle/bison to Horn's family? They \nweren't cattle people; bison are undomesticated." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee Berman", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2013-04-15T14:53:14+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Literal or metaphor?", "in_reply_to": "<516BEF89.7090609@verizon.net>", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Gerry Quinn: >Maybe ungulate isn't quite right, though. Horn, Hide and Hoof \nmight be thought of as epidermal by-products of large domesticated grass-eaters.\nEither way, it's natural to link them." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Pedro Marques: Not necessarily epidermal, cf. Sinew. But that, \nnot 'bovine', is the theme in Horn's family, the remark over 'bull' \nnotwithstanding. I don't recall anyone ever not seeing it." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "David Stockhoff: Any thoughts on the significance of cattle/bison to Horn's family? \nThey weren't cattle people; bison are undomesticated." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, we could debate whether the connection is as broad as \"ungulate\", in the middle \nlike Gerry's \"large, domesticated grass eaters\" or a narrow as \"bovine\". I find that\nmildly interesting. But what I find more germane is that even Gerry agrees that there\nis a natural connection which is apparent to pretty much everyone here.\n\nMy point on the individual nature of Wolfe's namings may be illustrated by \"Sinew\".\nAs Antonio notes, sinew/tendon is not an epidermal tissue product like horn, hoof\nand hide are. Taking up Gerry's observation of alliteration, Sinew also departs from\nthe pattern of the other three \"H\" names.\n\nI think this is likely not accidental. Sinew is Horn's \"bad\", ungrateful, rebellious\nson while Hoof and Hide are loyal, dutiful and respecful kids. A bit stunning that \nWolfe manages to illustrate Sinew's separation from the family with both literary\nand biological symbolism of names." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I see. It does not seem to me something worth leaving a board over. The \npattern doesn't seem to indicate anything in particular, story-wise." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, of the people still here, I think only Dan'l might have been in a position to\nobserve the full arc of Roy C. Lackey on this board in real time. Roy started\nseveral years before I did so I have to rely on the archive perusal I did before I \nstarted posting.\n\nIt was my observation that Roy started out like any poster here, making contributions, \noffering his theories for the interest of other Wolfe fans. But later, he seemed to \nsettle more comfortably into the role of enforcer; the guy who told others why their theories\ndidn't hold water. I can see why such a role might become spiritually draining after a while.\nI don't think the question of whether Patera Bull might be part of Horn's family was\nspecifically the reason for him leaving the board. I think it was more of a last\nstraw kind of thing. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] } ] }