{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/1281",
    "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": "whorl",
  "thread": {
    "id": 1281,
    "subject": "Seawrack's boy-toy",
    "messages": 1,
    "voices": 1,
    "first": "2001-03-22T01:25:52+00:00",
    "last": "2001-03-22T01:25:52+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<whorl-v0012-0477@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Robert Borski",
        "address": "rborski at charter.net"
      },
      "date": "2001-03-22T01:25:52+00:00",
      "subject": "(whorl) Re: Seawrack's boy-toy",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Shellac, having inhaled a little too much of himself in a closed room,\nwriting:\n\n<But more importantly, why do you and everyone else cling to this notion\nthat Seawrack was given to Horn?  I've mentioned this before and now I have\nthe citation.  This is during an early meeting with Krait, who comments upon\nHorn's \"lovely woman\":\n\n       \"Not mine,\" I told him.\n       \"Not now, and not ever.\"\n       Seawrack herself said \"But he belongs to me.\"  She joined me at\n       the foot of the mast and linked her arm in mine.  \"The Mother\n       gave him to me.  What of it?\"\n       (OWB, hb, pp. 175)>\n\nWell, Horn doesn't seem to buy this. As he notes in OBW, p. 186:\n\n\"The real riddle concerning Seawrack is this: if the Mother took care of\nSeawrack in order that Seawrack might lure others, as fowlers use a captive\nbird, did the Mother send her back among her own kind--among us--so that she\nmight lure more or lure them better? To put it simply, did the Mother suffer\na change of heart, or is she pursuing some deep plan that will culminate in\nour destruction? It is very important that we know this.\"\n\nMoreover, \"boy-toy\" implies a dominant female power structure that is simply\nnot present. Horn sexually assaults Seawrack; he is hardly her pretty boy\nplaything, to be used for sexual gratification only. Plus he abandons her,\nnot she him. And how do you explain, given this interpretation, the ending,\nwhere Seawrack goes off with PassilkHorn on the Whorl's second journey to\nthe stars--that after PassilkHorn helps Cilinia/Scylla to achieve a final\nmeasure of eternal peace, the Mother, to show her gratitude, once again\ngives him (or whatever residue is left of Horn in PassilkHorn) to Seawrack,\nso she can command _him_ to go along with her???\n\nSorry, but I still don't believe this is the answer as to why the Mother\ngave Seawrack to Horn (although I like your idea about the Krait parallel).\n\nRobert Borski\n\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun."
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}