Shapeshifting Evidence and Principles

b sharp · 28 May 2006, 22:20 · from 2006-May.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: bsharporflat at hotmail.com (b sharp)
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 18:20:48 -0400
Subject: (urth) Shapeshifting Evidence and Principles
Message-ID: <BAY103-F4F6E0AFF8662DC8A66C0AD79C0 at phx.gbl>

Roy, thanks for the responsive and thoughtful (in both senses of the word) 
post.

In regards to 5th Head, I do have a sense of the time frame and when I say I 
think they belong in the same universe I don't mean the immediate story 
blends right into BotNS.  But Sainte Anne and Sainte Croix don't just 
disappear when the 5th Head story ends. They have a future and I see the 
established principles there appear in BotNS.  If you don't see cloning or 
shapeshifting or characters similar to #5 and Phaedria then okay, I do 
accept that. It may be a complete illusion or just a function of Gene 
Wolfe's subconscious interests in that period of his life that I see but, 
what can I say. I see it.

Perhaps my Atrium of Time post will be more to your liking. It is very nuts 
and bolts.

Human beings have different sort of brains and it can be nearly impossible 
for unilke brains to see eye to eye.  So instead I'll use this post to 
illustrate not my "rightness" but to illustrate my current position. 
So..take a look at this picture:

http://www.valerio.net/pictures/image_2_996.jpg

What are your first thoughts? Mine are, "okay, a ring" and "where is the 
jewel?".  Now to me, Roy and mournings glory stop with, "okay a ring".

If I say "where is the jewel?" they say a ring doesn't need a jewel.  I say 
but "there is a jewel missing!"  They say "we have no reason to think that.  
A ring is a round piece of metal that goes around your finger and looks 
pretty.  This object is a ring, it has all the attributes of a ring, end of 
story, no jewel needed."  "But there is an empty space...never mind, let me 
look around".

So, I go looking for the missing jewel.  I find a few that don't fit.  I 
find one on the floor, under the table. I try putting it in the empty space 
between the tines and it seems to fit.  Roy and mg say, the jewel is 
worthless or interesting, but adds nothing to the purpose of the ring.  "It 
doesn't make it rounder, or more metallic or fit your finger better or 
prettier".  I say, "well I think it might make it prettier, depending on 
taste and it makes the ring richer and more valuable but...welll....anyway, 
look, there are tines which hold jewels and the tines are empty and here is 
a jewel in the right place, at the right time, with the right shape....". 
Then I give up and write this post.

In the meantime I have my original inspriation for joining here, Robert 
Borski, yelling over my shoulder from his book that the four doubled tines 
represent the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, which makes it obvious the 
missing jewel is the Star of Nepal.  The filigree on the side of the ring 
looks North African and thus represents the theft of the Star of Nepal by 
the Bey of Tunis. Using cryptonymic analysis we reverse Bey to achieve the 
word YEB, and we know that in Semitic languages a J has a Y sound so the 
ring means the next president of the USA will be you know who.

A day in the life of Bsharp.  How I suffer in the middle LOL!  In 
seriousness I appreciate all the input, guidance and collaboration I've 
found in this community so far.  It has been just great.

-bsharp

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net