{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/1415", "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": 1415, "subject": "Hermeneutic Crocagators", "messages": 3, "voices": 3, "first": "2001-05-02T08:27:19+00:00", "last": "2001-05-03T12:30:03+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2001-05-02T08:27:19+00:00", "subject": "(whorl) Hermeneutic Crocagators", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I wrote then Jason wrote:\n[re: inhumi taken along with the Nieghbors]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " They're not \"hypothesized,\" dammit. The Neighbors _say_ so,\n in RETURN. (Don't ask me for a page cite, though; my copies\n of SHORT are out on loan and won't be back for a while.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Fine; assume the Neighbors never lie and that the narrator is\n100% trustworthy. That's a reasonable hypothesis, but\nnevertheless an assumption." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I disagree; it is not a reasonable hypothesis, and I make no \nsuch assumption. \n\nBhere's a pretty simple hermeneutic principle here: I do assume\nby default, unless there is some specific _reason_ to believe \nthat either the Neighbors or the Narr are giving false information, \nthat a given statement is true. If we don't make this assumption,\nthen there's no particular reason not to say \"the whole damn thing \nis a lie.\"\n\nTaking this to a more complex construction, Mr Wolfe has done \nsomething in the \"Short\" books that give us a set of hermeneutic\npossibilities not normally present in an \"unreliable narrator\"\ntext: by providing us with explicit \"editors,\" he has provided\nus with the ability to distinguish at least five and possibly \nmore degrees of trustworthiness in the Narr's statements \n(including his quoting of others):\n\n1. Those directly corroborated by the \"editors.\"\n\n2. Those corroborated indirectly by the \"editors\" -- e.g., they\n cannot directly corroborate Horn's experiences with Seawrack\n in OBW, but they can corroborate her existence.\n\n3. Those concerning which the \"editors\" would know the \"truth,\"\n and have the opportunity to contradict the Narr, and do not,\n e.g., most of his experiences from the battle with Soldo on.\n (Of course, here we have the problematic possibilities that\n one or more of the editors might themselves have some reason \n for concealing the truth and letting the Narr's statement \n stand.)\n\n4. Those concerning which the \"editors\" would have no direct\n knowledge, e.g., those concerning his experiences from the\n time Horn departs for Pajarocu until he hooks up with Hoof,\n or is it Hide? (I find them about as distinct as Donald\n Duck's nephews...)\n\n5. Those concerning which the \"editors\" directly contradict\n the Narr. (But note that we still have to judge for ourselves\n whose statement, if any, is \"correct,\" and whether the other\n party is mistaken, lying, or something else)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "The important aspect of that assumption (or \"fact,\" whatever) lies\nin the effects of the interaction of abilities that enables astral\ntravel, or bilocation. Maybe the Neighbors can do some things by\nthemselves, others only with the inhumi. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Possibly, but I suggest that (barring some compelling reason to \nbelieve so) this is needlessly multiplying entities." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Maybe thinking about the relation between Horn's ability to\nbilocate in terms of his movement _into_ Silk, as it were, \nand the presence of inhumi might shed some light on the pesky\nquestion of astral travel." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Perhaps the Narr is able to bilocate only after Horn's \ntransmigration into Silk's body, and then only with the (witting \nor un-) assistance of an inhum*, precisely _because_ he is not a \nNeighbor? To put it differently: the question is not \"why is he\nable to do this only under these circumstances,\" but \"why is he\nable to do it at all,\" and the circumstances under which he can\ndo it should then be regarded as clues rather thanr restrictions." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I'm also curious about Quetzal's lineage, but that seems to be\na minor thread." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Agreed. Certainly there is very little in \"Short\" that bears\n_directly_ on Q." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " > He [Quetzal] might have been born on Green, however." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The word seems to be \"must.\" It appears that the inhumi \ncan only breed on Green." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "We don't really know much about the abilities of the Neighbors. \nThey might be able to replicate inhumi breeding conditions. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ahem. And the key words in my cited remark are \"seems\" and \n\"appears.\" Certainly the Neighbors _might_ be able to do this;\nthen we must ask, Is there any evidence in the text that they\n(a) can and (b) have any reason to? I don't wish to be difficult,\nbut I'm against erecting towers of speculation when simpler\nexplanations are or even _might be_ available; and I think it's\nclear that we're too \"young\" in exploring these books to be\nable to say that we've exhausted the simple explanations." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Again, the question here is-- if Quetzal was born on Green,\nby what means did he make his way to the Loganstone. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Failing evidence otherwise, I see no reason to dismiss the\nNeighbor's statement cited earlier. Have you any specific \n_textual_ reason to doubt that Q was brought there by the\nNeighbors?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " There are implications that it has been only a short time --\n I believe I first got that impression on the island with the\n not-very-ruined Neighbor-place in BLUE." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Agreed. However, a short time could mean centuries, or decades,\ndepending on the technology involved and the degree of ruin. \nSince we don't know (or, more precisely, since I can't recall\nany statements on this matter) the inhumi lifespan, this\ncould involve generations. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Or might not: the only thing we know for certain is that an inhuma\nwho was active shortly after Sinew was born has produced at least\none generation of offspring and is still active enough to have \nreturned to Blue around the time of the opening of OBW." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Still speculation, but pertinent for determining whether\nintelligence passes to grandchildren." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Unless we can find either a specific case of a grandchild \n(which I suspect may be difficult), or a combination of \nevidence pointing to (a) the longevity of inhumi and (b) the \nage of the ruins (which I suspect is impossible), I see no \nway to do anything _but_ speculate on this. \n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jason Ingram", "address": "jingram at usc.edu" }, "date": "2001-05-02T21:32:42+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) Hermeneutic Crocagators", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It seems that I was being overly simplistic in my attempt to portray \nBlattid as nit-picking over semantics. I'm glad that I provoked him \nto present a valuable hermeneutic analysis. I might add another \ncategory: scenes which the editors present based upon their private \nconversations with the narrator (roughly half of _Return_). Here we \nhave reconstructed scenes based upon statements by the narrator, \nwhich the narrator seemingly didn't have a chance to edit; a sort of \ncamera obscura corroboration that is itself questionable.\n\nI should preface my comments below by stressing that I don't really \ndisagree with Dan'l's conclusions.\n\nRegarding Occam's razor and bilocation: (quoting Blattid)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Perhaps the Narr is able to bilocate only after Horn's\ntransmigration into Silk's body, and then only with the (witting\nor un-) assistance of an inhum*, precisely _because_ he is not a\nNeighbor? To put it differently: the question is not \"why is he\nable to do this only under these circumstances,\" but \"why is he\nable to do it at all,\" and the circumstances under which he can\ndo it should then be regarded as clues rather thanr restrictions." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I agree with this method; it seems more parsimonious to argue that \nthe narrator has the same ability to bilocate as the Neighbors, and \nthat the inhumi are prerequisite for both. Otherwise we have to find \na new reason to explain why the Neighbors took inhumi along with \nthem. There are plenty of other reasons, but why needlessly multiply \nexplanations? (Of course, the Neighbors were able to transmit Horn's \nconsciousness into Silk's body with the aid of their ring, but the \nnarrator's ability to bilocate afterwards only strengthens my \nconviction that the inhumi act as 'amplifiers' for abilities \npossessed and bestowed by the Neighbors.)\n\n\nBlattid:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't wish to be difficult,\nbut I'm against erecting towers of speculation when simpler\nexplanations are or even _might be_ available; and I think it's\nclear that we're too \"young\" in exploring these books to be\nable to say that we've exhausted the simple explanations." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I think it would be difficult to find any simple explanation that \nfits the available evidence. Believing that the inhumi can only \nbreed on Green implies that the Neigbors have to return to replenish \ntheir \"stock,\" or that they have found some other workaround. (Maybe \nthey didn't want to take inhumi along but ended up doing so anyway; \nthis would introduce turbulence into other readings.) I'm reluctant \nto press this point, but it occurs to me that *if* Green were the \nonly breeding ground for inhumi, then a number of inhumi infused with \nNeighbor-abilities (whatever those are) would likely be running \naround. Intriguing notion . . .\n\n(next I quote blattid then myself; skirting both Heideggerian \ndiscussions of the difference between \"seems to be 'must'\" and \n\"might\" and Hegelian debate about \"appearance\" and the value of \nspeculation)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " > Again, the question here is-- if Quetzal was born on Green,\n by what means did he make his way to the Loganstone. \n\nFailing evidence otherwise, I see no reason to dismiss the\nNeighbor's statement cited earlier. Have you any specific\n_textual_ reason to doubt that Q was brought there by the\nNeighbors?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I must have been confused about the nature of the Neighbor's \nstatement. I didn't think that they had claimed to have dropped an \ninhum* off upon the Whorl. If they did, could someone please cite a \npage number?\n\nI'll endorse the rest of Dan'l's post, and refrain from speculatin' \nin public . . .\n\nJason--I'll adopt the nom de whorl of 'Sepia', if it's available.\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Robert Borski", "address": "rborski at charter.net" }, "date": "2001-05-03T12:30:03+00:00", "subject": "(whorl) Re: Re: Hermeneutic Crocagators", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Quoth the newly-monickered Sepia:\n\n\n\nI've always argued this was a distinct possibility--that the inhumi can\nbreed on Blue in either sewer or stagnant water, the same way leeches or the\nalbino crocagators of New York do. Horn (who thinks that feathers fall at a\ndifferent rate of speed than iron) is convinced it is otherwise and Jahlee\nsemi-endorses this, but I believe both are lying. And while containing\nsewage or designing better waste treatment facilities is well within the\nrealm of possibility (note Inclito's civil engineering skills), draining\nevery wetland or pool of muck is not (think \"weapon too heavy to handle\".) I\nbelieve it was William Ansley who brought up the mosquito parallel and it\nremains apposite.\n\n<>\n\n< I must have been confused about the nature of the Neighbor's statement. I\ndidn't think that they had claimed to have dropped an inhum* off upon the\nWhorl. If they did, could someone please cite a page number?>\n\nP. 235, RTTW. Vadsig is talking to Horn about her wish to visit the Whorl.\n\n-----------------------\n\n\"To go to the Long Sun Whorl I would like. Always of it you talk, and cook,\nand my old master and mistress. In Grotestad they were born, mysire, but\nnever it I have seen.\"\n\nI told her it was possible she would.\n\n\"There the Vanished People went?\"\n\nI nodded.\n\n\"To greet us it was?\"\n\n\"You might put it so, though they were sensible enough to find out a good\ndeal about us--and infect us with inhumi--\n\n\"Bad thing!\"\n\n\"Before they ventured to greet even a few of us.\"\n\n\"Bad it was,\" Vadsig agreed with Oreb.\n\n\"To leave inhumi among us?\" I shook my head. \"It was a small price to pay\nfor two whorls, and it enabled the neighbors to guage much more accurately\nthe differences between our race and their own.\"\n------------------------\n\nRobert Borski\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] } ] }