{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/410",
    "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": 410,
    "subject": "Hy-napping",
    "messages": 2,
    "voices": 2,
    "first": "1997-07-30T13:47:38+00:00",
    "last": "1997-07-31T19:32:27+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<whorl-v0007-0531@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Kieran Cleary",
        "address": "kierannwn at tinet.ie"
      },
      "date": "1997-07-30T13:47:38+00:00",
      "subject": "(whorl) Re: Hy-napping",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Gene Wolfe responded to Q. 22 as follows:\n\n22.  \"Why did Auk . . . kidnap Hyacinth, and why . . . did he let her\ngo?\"  Because Tartaros had told him to bring a woman.  He released\nher as he recovered from his brain injury, was able to think more\nclearly, and realized that Hyacinth was not the woman he should\nbring.  (Putting it another way, he released her because Tartaros\ntold him to.  These answers are not as disparate as they may appear.)\n\nNow, as I recall, Tartaros' command included something like \"..a woman is\ncrucial, this is not\". Just musing aloud, but is this because Tartaros is\nalready gathering the potential colonists and is mindful of the fact that a\nviable colony needs women to bear children? Is the apparent reference to\n[brain injury=Tartaros] equivalent to Dr. Crane's [Outsider\nenlightenment=Silk's anuerism] ?\n\nAlso, I can't admit to being too happy that the explanation of the\nmotivation of one of the central characters, Quetzal, remains beyond the\nscope of the Long Sun books. Tune in next year, when the foul plans of the\nmalignant inhumi become..........less opaque.\n\nlasrach.\n----------"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "message_id": "<whorl-v0007-0532@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Alice K. Turner",
        "address": "al at interport.net"
      },
      "date": "1997-07-31T19:32:27+00:00",
      "subject": "(whorl) Hy-napping",
      "in_reply_to": "<whorl-v0007-0531@digest.urth.net>",
      "reply_link": "subject",
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "Gene Wolfe responded to Q. 22 as follows:\n\n22.  \"Why did Auk . . . kidnap Hyacinth, and why . . . did he let her\ngo?\"  Because Tartaros had told him to bring a woman.  He released\nher as he recovered from his brain injury, was able to think more\nclearly, and realized that Hyacinth was not the woman he should\nbring.  (Putting it another way, he released her because Tartaros\ntold him to.  These answers are not as disparate as they may appear.)\n\nNow, as I recall, Tartaros' command included something like \"..a woman\nis\ncrucial, this is not\". Just musing aloud, but is this because Tartaros\nis\nalready gathering the potential colonists and is mindful of the fact\nthat a\nviable colony needs women to bear children? Is the apparent reference\nto\n[brain injury=Tartaros] equivalent to Dr. Crane's [Outsider\nenlightenment=Silk's anuerism] ?"
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "lasrach, the simple answer to your question, I think, is \"yes.\" But this\nwas my question originally, and I think Wolfe's answer is somewhat\ndisingenuous. Consider: Tartaros has been at Auk's side for quite a\nwhile, stays with him while Hy is imprisoned for the better part of a\nweek (mantis can supply time-line), while food is brought for her\netc.---it sure as hell wouldn't take that long to realize that she's the\nwrong woman. No, I fear the real answer is that the novelist needed her\noff-stage to give Silk some freedom of movement, and that he didn't\nconstruct an alibi for himself as neatly as he usually does. Though it\nwould have been fairly easy--a sighting of or even an adroit reference\nto Chenille could have done it."
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "Also, I can't admit to being too happy that the explanation of the\nmotivation of one of the central characters, Quetzal, remains beyond\nthe\nscope of the Long Sun books. Tune in next year, when the foul plans of\nthe\nmalignant inhumi become..........less opaque."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Agreed. If -Long Sun- is taken as an self-contained entity, it truly\nisn't fair to the reader. But I guess we, this group in particular,\ncan't take it that way.\n\n-alga-"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}