{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/whorl/694", "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": 694, "subject": "Horn \"Help\"", "messages": 4, "voices": 3, "first": "1999-10-15T17:18:45+00:00", "last": "1999-10-15T19:15:23+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alice Turner", "address": "akt at attglobal.net" }, "date": "1999-10-15T17:18:45+00:00", "subject": "(whorl) Horn \"Help\"", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "An Enraged Enormous Rat is something to see, all right, horrid red eyes\naglow, lice-ridden fur bristling, slimy fangs dripping...\n\nBut I digress. The Rat wrote:\n\n How dare you imply that I'd forgotten Nettle's help? Don't forget that\nNutria's eat Vizcachas alive bite by bite (whatever Vizcachas are)! Hyoomr\naside, I still find it hard to understand how either of them could have\nknown many, many of the things in TBLS. Inventing \"typical\" dialogue is a\nlong way from the large stretches of material they had to learn from other\npeople, and I'm having trouble thinking of how they might have learned all\nthis stuff, and from whom. But what I really need to do is re-read the\nQuartet through Horn's eyes, and see if it is really possible that he and\nNettle could have written it without \"supernatural\" help. Has anyone done\nthis?\n\nYes, indeedy-doody. The four gospeleers of the NT come to mind instantly,\nwriting decades, and dubiously, after the death of their biographee. If you\nthrow Thomas in, five gospeleers.\n\n-alga\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jim Jordan", "address": "jbjordan at gnt.net" }, "date": "1999-10-15T17:37:26+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) Horn \"Help\"", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 05:18 PM 10/15/99 -0400, you wrote:\nAn Enraged Enormous Rat is something to see, all right, horrid red eyes\naglow, lice-ridden fur bristling, slimy fangs dripping...\n\nBut I digress. The Rat wrote:\n\nHow dare you imply that I'd forgotten Nettle's help? Don't forget that\nNutria's eat Vizcachas alive bite by bite (whatever Vizcachas are)! Hyoomr\naside, I still find it hard to understand how either of them could have\nknown many, many of the things in TBLS. Inventing \"typical\" dialogue is a\nlong way from the large stretches of material they had to learn from other\npeople, and I'm having trouble thinking of how they might have learned all\nthis stuff, and from whom. But what I really need to do is re-read the\nQuartet through Horn's eyes, and see if it is really possible that he and\nNettle could have written it without \"supernatural\" help. Has anyone done\nthis?\n\nYes, indeedy-doody. The four gospeleers of the NT come to mind instantly,\nwriting decades, and dubiously, after the death of their biographee. If you\nthrow Thomas in, five gospeleers.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Alga! Talk about slime! ;)\n\tEach of us has her/his own view of the origination of the gospels. What\nmatters here is what Wolfe's view is, and it's not what you describe. Since\nBLS and OBW are highly theological novels, its important to assess what the\nauthor had in mind....\n\tUnless one is a deconstructionist, I guess. Algae is kind of amorphous, so\nmaybe.... ;)\n\nSlobbering Rat-face\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alex David Groce", "address": "alex_groce at gs246.sp.cs.cmu.edu" }, "date": "1999-10-15T19:15:23+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) Horn \"Help\"", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Yes, indeedy-doody. The four gospeleers of the NT come to mind instantly,\nwriting decades, and dubiously, after the death of their biographee. If you\nthrow Thomas in, five gospeleers.\n\n-alga" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alga! Talk about slime! ;)\n Each of us has her/his own view of the origination of the gospels. \nWhat matters here is what Wolfe's view is, and it's not what you describe. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Since BLS and OBW are highly theological novels, its important to assess what " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "the author had in mind....\n Unless one is a deconstructionist, I guess. Algae is kind of \namorphous, so maybe.... ;)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ah, but as someone actually going through the conversion process right now,\nI think formal Catholic position is \"sure the gospels were written later, under\ndifficult circumstances, etc.\" but that, of course, they overcame this by aid\nof the Holy Spirit. So Wolfe could be giving us an analogous process here--\nwith \"mainframe possession\" or something secularly explicable doing the\nOutsider's work--which is a favorite Wolfe tactic. The Dr. Crane hypothesis\nCOULD hold, but a kind of narrative Occam's Razor makes it seem ridiculous--\nif the explanation is just a brain tumor, it's very odd that Silk walks in the\npattern of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.\n\nFrom Father Henry Wansborough, general editor of the New Jerusalem Bible, in\nOxford a few years back I found out that very orthodox Catholics are much more\ncomfortable saying John was written in 70+ AD than many similarly orthodox \nProtestants. The historical approach to the Gospels and the Theological\napproach aren't necessarily opposed, because Christianity is quite concerned\nwith historical events--the claim of the Incarnation is a historical as well\nas metaphysical claim. So, perhaps zapping \"dubiosly,\" what Alga said might\nmatch Wolfe's views. In fact, that the canon had to develop and the Gospels\ndidn't just instantly appear after the resurrection is part of the Church's\nfundamental argument about the Magesterium and Sacred Tradition.\n\n\n\"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.\" John 8:32" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Alex David Groce (agroce+ at cs.cmu.edu)\nPh.D. Student, Carnegie Mellon University - Computer Science Department\n8112 Wean Hall (412)-268-3066\nhttp://www.cs.cmu.edu/~agroce\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Jim Jordan", "address": "jbjordan at gnt.net" }, "date": "1999-10-15T19:04:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: (whorl) Horn \"Help\"", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 07:15 PM 10/15/99 -0400, you wrote:\n\nAh, but as someone actually going through the conversion process right now,\nI think formal Catholic position is \"sure the gospels were written later,\nunder\ndifficult circumstances, etc.\" but that, of course, they overcame this by aid\nof the Holy Spirit. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\tYes, you and I and Wolfe agree, and Alga (almost certainly) doesn't. My\nonly point was that we have to consider what Wolfe had in mind. (Well, I'm\na Reformed Protestant, and I imagine those synagogue-trained Jews demanded\na book-narrative right away, and I imagine Matthew started writing on\nPentecost evening -- but that's for a different list and debate!).\n\tTo return to topic, I'm just toying with the fact that so much else in the\nSilk story is gospel-tracking, that it seems likely that some kind of\nequivalent of the inspiration of the Spirit would also be tracked, and it\nseems likely to me based on the data I've presented. Of course, am I right?\nTime will probably tell, as we read the next two volumes.\n\nNutria\n\n\n*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun." } ] } ] }