{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/1326", "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": 1326, "subject": "To Adam: Christ in Eden", "messages": 5, "voices": 3, "first": "2001-04-09T01:25:47+00:00", "last": "2001-04-12T11:44:33+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nicholas Gevers", "address": "vermoulian at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2001-04-09T01:25:47+00:00", "subject": "(whorl) To Adam: Christ in Eden", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam, thanks for putting the other side’s views so\nplainly and firmly. I’ll respond to your points\nserially.\n\nAdam: “My immediate reaction is that I don't believe\nWolfe is a utopian, even a \"conservative\" one; I don't\nbelieve Wolfe advocates \"Natural Man\" or the \"Noble\nSavage\"; and while the parallel with the ending of the\nMARS trilogy is interesting, I doubt that it means\nWolfe is borrowing Robinson's politics (unless,\nreversing the usual course of events, he's become\nradical in his old age).”\n\nGW is not borrowing an ideology; he has his own. He’s\nreacting to Robinson’s utopian thesis. (The\nrelationship between GW and Robinson is a fascinating\ntopic on its own, beginning with GW’s role as an early\ncreative mentor to KSR, and continuing through\npersonal friendship and intertextual flourishes,\nnotably the equivalence BLUE MARS=ON BLUE’S WATERS,\nGREEN MARS=IN GREEN’S JUNGLES, etc.). I interpret TBSS\nas a political/utopian novel, as I’ve said; but\nconservatives like Wolfe are distrustful of the very\nnotion of utopia, for pretty obvious reasons. Thus, in\nresponding to KSR’s secular utopia, GW must express\nhis reservations in a critical manner; and he does so\nby making it explicitly doubtful that Horn’s utopian\nmodel (protect the poor and helpless against the\ninhumi, influence the inhumi to become benign) can\never be effected in a truly workable form (thus, your\ndoubts about practical applications of the Secret of\nthe Inhumi are justified; Wolfe intends them.) But\nutopia has at least a chance; humans have free will,\nand may select the right path forward.\n\nIn thinking about this matter, it struck me that what\nwe have in TBSS is a sort of counterfactual scenario:\ncall it Christ in Eden, to give the matter an\nappropriately religious spin. What if Christ had come\nnot after millennia of conflict and oppression, but\nrather when the world was new? What if his positive\nexample had been available almost from the start? This\nis Wolfe’s “conceit” in TBSS. Blue is a new world, a\ntabula rasa for humanity if one disregards some\nlingering remnants of the Neighbors, and in this it\nexactly resembles Robinson’s Mars, an open planet in\nthe early stages of colonisation. Blue can turn into a\nmillennial Paradise; it can become anything. After\nconflict, KSR’s Mars becomes a secular version of\nParadise, utopia; GW, for all his conservative doubts,\ngives Blue a nudge towards a theistic version of the\nsame state. Silk/Horn reins in the Man of Han, defeats\nDuko Rigoglio and the corrupt judges of Dorp, teaches,\nperforms exemplary miracles, unveils the Secret that\nhumans can exploit to their great advantage by\nbecoming Good. Christlike, he gives Blue a shove in a\nbenign direction, clearing the sewer of the Past so\nthat the waters may flow beneficently again; but then\nhe leaves, like Christ still, and we are left to infer\nBlue's subsequent history, in the light of our own\nassumptions and prejudices. GW has proffered both hope\nand doubt; we can take them as we will. \n\nIn this light, Brother and Sister are like Adam and\nEve, or, in secular terms, like Natural Man, all\nchoices ahead of them; they are a microcosm of Blue,\nthat Eden of infinite potentiality. Wolfe may not\nbelieve in Natural Man; but like Sir Thomas More\nbefore him, he can engage in thought\nexperiments—UTOPIA was about the achievements and\nexcesses of a non-theistic Natural Utopia in which\nMore did not believe, and Wolfe, while skeptical, will\ngive the Noble Savage his due, moderating his savagery\nwith theistic input so that he becomes Adam, with all\nAdam’s strengths and weaknesses. In short, Wolfe is\ntrying to redeem KSR’s secular utopia by calling it\nback within the Divine fold, and simultaneously\nqualify KSR’s optimism—a difficult, admirable\nbalancing act.\n \nAdam: “The more I think about it, the less I\nunderstand how the inhumi's secret, or \"loving one\nanother,\" is supposed to render the inhumi harmless. \nI don't see what the colonists could do if they all\nloved each other that they can't do now, which would\nkeep the inhumi from getting any human blood. As for\n2), for the inhumi to voluntarily stop preying on\nhumans, they'd have to be not just benign. They'd\nhave to be self-sacrificing enough to give up their\nintelligence rather than attack humans (which, in\nmoderation, apparently does humans no long-term harm).\n But if the colonists became so altruistic that the\ninhumi would absorb that much altruism, then they\nwould be altruistic enough to allow the inhumi to prey\non them rather than lose their intelligence. In any\ncase, as someone once pointed out, can the inhumi\nreally believe the colonists as a group capable of\nsuch altruism?”\n\nAssuming (as Wolfe and Silk are, let me emphasise\nagain, unwilling naively to do) that the Secret can be\nfully harnessed, it has a clear practical application.\nNote how often Horn/Silk emphasises the vulnerability\nof the poor, the elderly, and the isolated to the\ninhumi. Answer: protect them, look after them, so that\nthey are no longer defenseless; implement social\njustice, stop fighting among yourselves. Utopia, in\nother words. And once this has been realised, by all\nmeans offer the inhumi a voluntary source of human\nblood; make them human, absorb them into utopia. This\nmay sound impossible, but so do elementary Christian\nideals, really; that doesn’t mean they mustn’t be\naspired to. Some sacrifices are worthwhile. Look at\nMaliki’s village.\n\nAdam: “But Horn doesn't kill Jahlee as a deterrent to\nother inhumi; he kicks her to death in anger, and is\ndeeply ashamed of it afterwards. (And if it had been\na deterrent, then it didn't work, since it was\nfollowed shortly afterwards by the mass attack.)\n\n“I agree, though, that Jahlee's death is a plausible\ndevelopment, though not inevitable. My complaint was\nnot at the failure of the inhumi subplot to resolve in\na utopian fashion, but at its failure to resolve at\nall (except as far as Jahlee is concerned). The\nSecret was a big letdown (I don't buy the theory that\nHorn has concealed the real secret from us, for\nreasons I've stated before, and if I did it wouldn't\nmake me happier), and the victory over the massed\ninhumi at the wedding solves nothing.\n\n“The more I think about that wedding attack, though,\nthe fishier it \nsounds. Such a mass attack (at least six hundred\ninhumi) seems to be \nunprecedented. It must be very rare, at least, or Blue\nwould have to be far more militarized and regimented\nthan it is. Would Juganu really be able to get\nhundreds of inhumi deviate from their usual habits and\njoin him in his private revenge? And would these\ninhumi continue the attack once they saw that the\nwedding party was armed, contrary to expectations?”\n\nJahlee’s death foreshadows the wedding massacre, which\nIS a deterrent. Adam, I think you miss the real\nmotives for Juganu’s attack, motives which numerous\nother inhumi share. Motive Number One: Horn/Silk and\nhis wife know the Secret, and those around them may\nwell have got wind of it too. So: attack en masse and\nkill them when they are all together. Why do you think\nJuganu was lurking about in New Viron, if not to spy\non Horn/Silk and assess his intentions, arrange his\ndeath if possible? Motive Number Two: Silk/Horn is a\nMessiah to the Inhumi, the human being in whom they\nhave reposed much of their hope of becoming truly\nhuman; now he has turned against them, and they feel\nbetrayed. So attack en masse and kill him. And forget\nthe risks of doing so.\n\nIn other words, the inhumi subplot certainly resolves\nitself; the terms on which humans should interact with\nthe inhumi are laid down: tame them, in a nutshell,\nfirst by force and then by another sort of sanguinary\nsuasion, as it were. The only worthy “covenant with\nevil” is one which makes evil good.\n\n--Nick Gevers." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2001-04-11T12:34:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) To Adam: Christ in Eden", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 4/9/01 3:25 AM, Nicholas Gevers at vermoulian at yahoo.com wrote:\nAdam, thanks for putting the other side’s views so\nplainly and firmly." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To be even more plain and firm, I don't see any evidence that Wolfe was\nthinking about utopias at all when he wrote TBOTSS. None of the communities\nSilkhorn encounters is remotely utopian (I don't see any warrant for\nconsidering Sinew's village a utopia, and two people living in the\nwilderness don't count). Silkhorn's statesmanship as Rajan of Gaon is\nthoroughly pragmatic, as far as we know, with nothing utopian about it. The\nrevolution he leads in Dorp presumably replaces a bad regime with a better\none, but it doesn't create a utopia. Nor is the moral advice he ladles out\nutopian in any sense (saying \"be nicer to poor people\" doesn't qualify one\nas a radical reformer, let alone a utopian). And I don't see a shred of\nevidence that Silkhorn has \"nudged\" Blue in the direction of utopia. If\nWolfe was indeed responding to Robinson's Mars trilogy (which I haven't\nread), it's more likely that his point was simply \"if humans set out to\ncolonize another planet, this mess is what would _really_ happen.\" (I'm\nalso surprised at your implication that Blue at the time of Silkhorn's\nreturn is an Eden.)\n\nNor, for that matter, does Silkhorn's behavior on Blue strike me as being\nparticularly Christ-like, despite Hoof's description of him as frighteningly\ngood. (The more I think about this description, the more it seems to me\nlike cheating by Wolfe: an attempt to evoke by fiat a reaction that his\nportrayal of Silkhorn hasn't made us feel.)\n\n--Adam\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2001-04-11T11:25:26+00:00", "subject": "RE: (whorl) To Adam: Christ in Eden", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Nor, for that matter, does Silkhorn's behavior on Blue strike me as\nbeing particularly Christ-like, despite Hoof's description of him as\nfrighteningly good. (The more I think about this description, the\nmore it seems to me like cheating by Wolfe: an attempt to evoke by\nfiat a reaction that his portrayal of Silkhorn hasn't made us feel.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ummmm... I think, maybe, that Mr Wolfe does not _intend_ us to have \nthe reaction to (Hoof'n'Hide's) Silk|Horn* that we had to Horn's Silk. \n\n----------\n* Nice formulation, William!\n----------\n\nOn the other hand, it's interesting how effective the Narr _is_ in\ndealing with problems in Gaon, in Soldo/Blanko, and in Dorp, \napparently by \"assuming the virtue,\" acting to the best of his \nability as he believed Silk would act. (I imagine a future \ngeneration of Bluvians wearing \"WWSD?\" buttons.) \n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2001-04-12T11:44:33+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) To Adam: Christ in Eden", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "on 4/11/01 1:25 PM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes at ddanehy at siebel.com wrote:\nNor, for that matter, does Silkhorn's behavior on Blue strike me as\nbeing particularly Christ-like, despite Hoof's description of him as\nfrighteningly good. (The more I think about this description, the\nmore it seems to me like cheating by Wolfe: an attempt to evoke by\nfiat a reaction that his portrayal of Silkhorn hasn't made us feel.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ummmm... I think, maybe, that Mr Wolfe does not _intend_ us to have\nthe reaction to (Hoof'n'Hide's) Silk|Horn* that we had to Horn's Silk." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Do you mean Horn's Silk in TBOTLS, or Silkhorn's (i. e. the narrator's)\nSilkhorn? It's the latter I was talking about.\n\nAnd I didn't find either Silkhorn's or Hoof'n'Hide's Silkhorn frighteningly\ngood. (I wouldn't expect Silkhorn to talk about how good he was, of course,\nbut his actions didn't strike me as being frighteningly good.) Truth to\ntell, I found Silkhorn's disquisitions on morality and the gods more boring\nthan anything else.\n\n--Adam\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2001-04-12T09:59:37+00:00", "subject": "RE: (whorl) To Adam: Christ in Eden", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Ummmm... I think, maybe, that Mr Wolfe does not _intend_ us to have\nthe reaction to (Hoof'n'Hide's) Silk|Horn* that we had to Horn's Silk." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Do you mean Horn's Silk in TBOTLS, or Silkhorn's (i. e. the narrator's)\nSilkhorn? It's the latter I was talking about." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I mean the former. Silk|Horn (whether portrayed by the Narr or by Hood & \nHife, is (to me, at least) an attractive character but _not_ the\nterrifyingly \ngood man Silk was: he's far more _human_ than Silk-alone.\n\nAs for his \"disquisitions,\" well... I won't go as far as \"boring,\" but\nthey're definitely inferior to those of just-Silk as portrayed by \nHorn-and-Nettle.\n\n--Dan'l\nwho wonders if Horn has a brother named Hardart\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] } ] }