# The Secret: Equine Overkill *The Whorl list — 7 messages, 3 voices, 23 Apr 2001* > 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. --- ### David Lebling *23 Apr 2001, 14:44* Another idea on the Secret. If all of the inhumi who have human blood were taken on astral trips by Horn/Silk or someone with equal astral travel abilities, and _left there_ as both Jahlee and Juganu wanted, they would cease to be a danger, even if they weren't killed where they slept. Certainly the Neighbors also had the ability to do this. Still doesn't make "a weapon too heavy to wield." That's the sticking point for me on all these ideas. Dave Lebling aka vizcacha *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Michael Straight *23 Apr 2001, 15:38 · follows David Lebling* > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, David Lebling wrote: > Still doesn't make "a weapon too heavy to wield." That's the sticking point > for me on all these ideas. I am still unable to read "a weapon too heavy to wield" as anything but "a weapon fraught with (moral?) danger to the wielder." Or maybe "a weapon you can't control (that will destroy more than you wish?)." Because if it literally means "a weapon humans and Neighbors don't have the power to use," then I don't see why Horn would even think of the Secret as a weapon. It would just be an interesting but academic fact about the inhumi. Inhumi would die if you could teleport them into the corona of a star, but unless I think the colonists might be able to do that, I wouldn't call that fact a weapon. Given Silk|Horn's (and, I think, Wolfe's) concerns about the moral health of the colonies on Blue, I think the Secret is something the colonists could do, but that would corrupt them morally (which is why I think it has something to do with taking advantage of the inhumi's desire to be human). The Neighbors were able to do it, but declined and left the Blue/Green system entirely rather than become a race that could do such a thing to the inhumi (or perhaps they started to do it--making the inhumi their slaves in the process--then left when they realized how bad it was). -Rostrum *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Adam Stephanides *24 Apr 2001, 09:39 · follows Michael Straight* > on 4/23/01 2:38 PM, Michael Straight at straight at email.unc.edu wrote: > I am still unable to read "a weapon too heavy to wield" as anything but "a > weapon fraught with (moral?) danger to the wielder." Or maybe "a weapon > you can't control (that will destroy more than you wish?)." > > Because if it literally means "a weapon humans and Neighbors don't have > the power to use," then I don't see why Horn would even think of the > Secret as a weapon. Because although Horn doesn't think it can be used, the inhumi do. Kind of like Reagan and Star Wars; in a sense it was a weapon, although most scientists believe that it couldn't work, because the Soviet leadership believed that it could work and altered their behavior accordingly. (If you disagree with this example, substitute something else.) > Given Silk|Horn's (and, I think, Wolfe's) concerns about the moral health > of the colonies on Blue, I think the Secret is something the colonists > could do, but that would corrupt them morally (which is why I think it has > something to do with taking advantage of the inhumi's desire to be human). > The Neighbors were able to do it, but declined and left the Blue/Green > system entirely rather than become a race that could do such a thing to > the inhumi (or perhaps they started to do it--making the inhumi their > slaves in the process--then left when they realized how bad it was). This is a possible reading of the passage on p. 125 of IGJ--that when Horn says the colonists can't wield it, he means they shouldn't, and when he says the Neighbors couldn't, he means they wouldn't--but imo an unnatural one. In particular, the sentence "If they [the Neighbors] could not wield it, there is little hope that we human beings can." is very strained if read in this sense. Also, I don't recall any indication elsewhere that the Neighbors ever had moral scruples regarding their treatment of the inhumi. --Adam *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Michael Straight *24 Apr 2001, 11:51 · follows Adam Stephanides* > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Adam Stephanides wrote: > Because although Horn doesn't think it can be used, the inhumi do. Kind of > like Reagan and Star Wars; in a sense it was a weapon, although most > scientists believe that it couldn't work, because the Soviet leadership > believed that it could work and altered their behavior accordingly. (If you > disagree with this example, substitute something else.) So you're imagining Krait dying in Horn's arms and whispering, "The one thing we fear, the one weapon that would destroy us, is if humans ever develop skins so think we cannot suck their blood[1]. Then we would return to mindless beasts." And Horn rolling his eyes, and thinking, "Well, it won't be hard to keep that 'weapon' a secret, why would I even be tempted to tell anyone something so practically useless?" I find that hard to reconcile with the way Horn frets about the secret. His conversation with his Gaonese concubine sounds like he really thinks there's a possibility the inhumi could be harmed by what he knows. [1] Sort of an exaggeration here, although I think it's much more likely the colonists could genetically engineer thick skin for themselves than it is that they could all live by the Golden Rule. > This is a possible reading of the passage on p. 125 of IGJ--that when Horn > says the colonists can't wield it, he means they shouldn't, and when he says > the Neighbors couldn't, he means they wouldn't--but imo an unnatural one. > In particular, the sentence "If they [the Neighbors] could not wield it, > there is little hope that we human beings can." is very strained if read in > this sense. Horn seems to respect and look up to the Neighbors. I took the sentence you quote to mean that Horn had higher regard for the goodness of the Neighbors than for his fellow humans, and thus if the secret was too morally dangerous for the Neighbors to use, then it's definitely too dangerous for humans. -Rostrum *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Adam Stephanides *24 Apr 2001, 19:57 · follows Michael Straight* > on 4/24/01 10:51 AM, Michael Straight at straight at email.unc.edu wrote: > His conversation with his Gaonese concubine sounds like he really thinks > there's a possibility the inhumi could be harmed by what he knows. There is a passage which seems to suggest this: Evensong whispered, "You know their secret. You could destroy them." "Yes. I couldn't kill them here and now, if that's what you mean; but I know how they might be returned to the mere vermin that they once were" (OBW [hb], 372). But the context is that Horn and Evensong are being pursued by the inhumi. Given Horn's other statements on the topic, most probably Horn means only that he knows the theoretical means by which the inhumi could be "devolved," and this is why the inhumi want to kill him (regardless of whether or not he himself believes this means practical). > [1] Sort of an exaggeration here, although I think it's much more likely > the colonists could genetically engineer thick skin for themselves than it > is that they could all live by the Golden Rule. And just three pages later, Horn says "If only we cared about each other sufficiently. If only all of us loved all the others enough, they would go back to that [being unintelligent animals]." Do you seriously maintain that Horn is talking about two different things in these two passages? That he knows two separate ways to devolve the inhumi, one morally corrupting and the other requiring a too-great moral elevation? There is another passage in IGJ which contradicts your view. When Horn is talking to Hide, he tells him that Krait "told me something in confidence that they [the inhumi] believe might harm them greatly if it became widely known. I would probably violate my oath if I agreed; but I doubt that it--" (351) Though Wolfe lets Oreb interrupt here, Horn says explicitly that he would violate his oath if he thought that publicizing the Secret would harm the inhumi--not that he would violate it if publicizing the Secret would harm the inhumi without corrupting the colonists. In any case, your argument that because Horn calls the Secret a weapon, he must think it is usable, misreads the text. What Horn says is "It is a great secret, truly. If you will, it is a great and terrible weapon. That is how the inhumi see it, and I will not call them wrong. But it is a weapon too heavy for our hands." (IGJ, 125) In other words, he's saying not that the Secret is a weapon, but that _if_ it's a weapon, it's one too heavy to be used. --Adam *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Michael Straight *24 Apr 2001, 22:57 · follows Adam Stephanides* > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Adam Stephanides wrote: > Evensong whispered, "You know their secret. You could destroy them." > "Yes. I couldn't kill them here and now, if that's what you mean; > but I know how they might be returned to the mere vermin that they once > were" (OBW [hb], 372). > > But the context is that Horn and Evensong are being pursued by the inhumi. > Given Horn's other statements on the topic, most probably Horn means only > that he knows the theoretical means by which the inhumi could be "devolved," > and this is why the inhumi want to kill him (regardless of whether or not he > himself believes this means practical). That doesn't seem like it would merit a flat, "Yes." I'd expect more of a, "well, in theory, if I could get everyone else to cooperate, we could destroy them." But when she says "You could destroy them," Horn answers, Yes." > And just three pages later, Horn says "If only we cared about each other > sufficiently. If only all of us loved all the others enough, they would go > back to that [being unintelligent animals]." Do you seriously maintain that > Horn is talking about two different things in these two passages? That he > knows two separate ways to devolve the inhumi, one morally corrupting and > the other requiring a too-great moral elevation? But two sentences later, Horn explicitly denies that this is the Secret! You may answer that the Secret is the details of the inhumi lifecycle and how caring for each other would prevent inhumi from having intelligent offspring, but if that's all there is, then Horn's broken his oath. If I promise not to tell anyone that flipping this switch will kill you because it turns off your respirator, and then tell people who want to kill you that flipping the switch will kill you, I can hardly protest that I've kept your secret because I didn't mention the respirator. > There is another passage in IGJ which contradicts your view. When Horn is > talking to Hide, he tells him that Krait "told me something in confidence > that they [the inhumi] believe might harm them greatly if it became widely > known. I would probably violate my oath if I agreed; but I doubt that it--" > (351) Though Wolfe lets Oreb interrupt here, Horn says explicitly that he > would violate his oath if he thought that publicizing the Secret would harm > the inhumi--not that he would violate it if publicizing the Secret would > harm the inhumi without corrupting the colonists. This, I admit, is the best prooftext for your case. I don't see how it can fit into my theory. > In any case, your argument that because Horn calls the Secret a weapon, he > must think it is usable, misreads the text. What Horn says is "It is a > great secret, truly. If you will, it is a great and terrible weapon. That > is how the inhumi see it, and I will not call them wrong. But it is a > weapon too heavy for our hands." (IGJ, 125) In other words, he's saying not > that the Secret is a weapon, but that _if_ it's a weapon, it's one too heavy > to be used. When I read this passage, particularly the words "great and terrible weapon," I think "atom bomb" or "Sauron's ring." A terrible weapon is one with the potential to do much more harm than I intend, or that tempts me not to care about the harm that I do, not a weapon that I probably can't use at all. The colonists learning to love and care for each other would be an amazing, wonderful thing; it would so transform society that any effect it would have on the inhumi problem would seem like a minor side-effect. I can't fathom Horn (or Wolfe) thinking of it as a means to some other end, much less as a weapon. It's like trying to develop automobiles because horseshoes are so expensive (even that analogy is far too weak). -Rostrum *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. --- ### Adam Stephanides *25 Apr 2001, 22:26 · follows Michael Straight* > on 4/24/01 9:57 PM, Michael Straight at straight at email.unc.edu wrote: > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Adam Stephanides wrote: >> Evensong whispered, "You know their secret. You could destroy them." >> "Yes. I couldn't kill them here and now, if that's what you mean; >> but I know how they might be returned to the mere vermin that they once >> were" (OBW [hb], 372). >> >> But the context is that Horn and Evensong are being pursued by the inhumi. >> Given Horn's other statements on the topic, most probably Horn means only >> that he knows the theoretical means by which the inhumi could be "devolved," >> and this is why the inhumi want to kill him (regardless of whether or not he >> himself believes this means practical). > That doesn't seem like it would merit a flat, "Yes." I'd expect more of > a, "well, in theory, if I could get everyone else to cooperate, we could > destroy them." But when she says "You could destroy them," Horn answers, > Yes." I think that under the circumstances, with Horn believing himself under imminent threat of death, he might not be so precise. But I'll grant that this is the passage which is the most problematic for my reading. >> And just three pages later, Horn says "If only we cared about each other >> sufficiently. If only all of us loved all the others enough, they would go >> back to that [being unintelligent animals]." Do you seriously maintain that >> Horn is talking about two different things in these two passages? That he >> knows two separate ways to devolve the inhumi, one morally corrupting and >> the other requiring a too-great moral elevation? > But two sentences later, Horn explicitly denies that this is the Secret! > You may answer that the Secret is the details of the inhumi lifecycle and > how caring for each other would prevent inhumi from having intelligent > offspring Yes. > but if that's all there is, then Horn's broken his oath. If I > promise not to tell anyone that flipping this switch will kill you because > it turns off your respirator, and then tell people who want to kill you > that flipping the switch will kill you, I can hardly protest that I've > kept your secret because I didn't mention the respirator. Horn has a legalistic attitude towards his oath: he hints broadly at the Secret, both in his conversation with Hide and in his manuscript. And the respirator analogy doesn't apply: Horn doesn't believe the secret can be used by the colonists, and in any case Horn saying "if you love each other enough you will destroy the inhumi, but I can't tell you why" would be unlikely to persuade anybody to change their behavior. > The colonists learning to love and care for each other would be an > amazing, wonderful thing; it would so transform society that any effect it > would have on the inhumi problem would seem like a minor side-effect. I > can't fathom Horn (or Wolfe) thinking of it as a means to some other end, > much less as a weapon. It's like trying to develop automobiles because > horseshoes are so expensive (even that analogy is far too weak). To repeat my earlier statement, it is the inhumi, not Horn, who think of the Secret as a weapon; Horn just passes along their view. Horn never tries to tell people "love one another so that you can destroy the inhumi." In his conversation with Evensong, it is Evensong who brings up the Secret and its use against the inhumi; elsewhere, when he talks about applying the Secret against the inhumi, it's always in the context of explaining how he can control the inhumi through fear of the Secret, or why the inhumi want to kill him. And, going back to my earlier post on the Secret, "loving each other" and "solving the inhumi problem" aren't opposed to each other as concepts. Essentially, the inhumi are the dark side of humanity; so eliminating this dark side and eliminating the inhumi threat are symbolically the same thing. --Adam *This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun. ---