Silk corrupted?

John Watkins · 22 Jan 2009, 23:14 · from 2009-January.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: john.watkins04 at gmail.com (John Watkins)
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:14:45 -0500
Subject: (urth) Silk corrupted?
In-Reply-To: <6136.67.142.130.31.1232665710.squirrel at brunians.org>
References: <W648292421519261232665018@webmail26>
	<6136.67.142.130.31.1232665710.squirrel at brunians.org>
Message-ID: <93d4039f0901221514j7934e15ycb831b95f233e3a at mail.gmail.com>

And the lyrics of Moby. Don't forget Moby.



On 1/22/09, brunians at brunians.org <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:
> The idea that people (or some people) are in some way related to stars is
> very, very old.
>
> It appears in Judaism, Hinduism and various American Indian religions.
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>
>> violence?
>> that may be overstepping.  any great work is larger than it's author's
>> intention.  But I'm sympathetic with your feeling, despite having to poke
>> at it a bit.
>>
>> What I don't understand, all Christ arguments aside, is "How does a star
>> have the consciousness of Severian? How does a star resurrect humans? How
>> does a star steer time?
>>
>> just asking.
>> ~witz
>>
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes [mailto:danldo at gmail.com]
>>>Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 02:46 PM
>>>To: 'The Urth Mailing List'
>>>Subject: Re: (urth) Silk corrupted?
>>>
>>>On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:40 PM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I concede, of course, that the Bible takes precedence as a literary
>>>> work in
>>>> both stature and history, so Severian and Jesus can never really be
>>>> coequals. But please let's dispense with the notion---the
>>>> assumption---that
>>>> there can only be a single Christ in all of human literature. It's an
>>>> indefensible position.
>>>
>>>Agreed. Writers are free to create as many Christs as they choose, and
>>>to make them theoanthropoi, divine, etc.
>>>
>>>What is key here is that we are interpreting a work by a writer who
>>>takes the position that Jesus was a unique historical figure, the sole
>>>Theoanthropos and Redeemer, an event which will not and *can* not
>>>be repeated. This is *Wolfe's* position, and to interpret his work in
>>>a way that violates this position is to do that work a violence which
>>>I cannot condone.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, writer, trainer, bon vivant
>>>-----
>>>http://www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer
>>>http://www.danehyoakes.com
>>>
>>>I once absend-mindedly ordered Three Mile Island dressing in a
>>>restaurant and, with great presence of mind, they brought Thousand
>>>Island Dressing and a bottle of chili sauce. -- T. Pratchett
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Urth Mailing List
>>>To post, write urth at urth.net
>>>Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

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