So who is the child in Baldander's bed? [was: Juturna, the Missing Sister]

Jack Smith · 29 Jul 2010, 15:57 · from 2010-July.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: jack.smith.1946 at gmail.com (Jack Smith)
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:57:55 -0400
Subject: (urth) So who is the child in Baldander's bed? [was: Juturna,
	the 	Missing Sister]
In-Reply-To: <53885.77566.qm at web50708.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <SNT123-W123AD558987FC4D6443A3FCFA90 at phx.gbl>
	<53885.77566.qm at web50708.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzyU0FofreLK6s182Y3cSsOxPX=kT90T41n=o4 at mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the link to the Mattachine Society--has some good info even if
homosexuality is not the issue.


On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Jerry Friedman
<jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>wrote:

> From: Lee Berman <severiansola at hotmail.com>
>
>
> >>Jack Smith- Severian uses the word "catamite" and so something must
> suggest a
> >>sexual
> >>element to him.  But I like the idea that the child is Baldander's son
> (or
> >>his Number Five).
> >
> >No reason he can't be both (though Baldanders is dark haired). The thing
> is the
> >word
> >"catamite" is used. Severian is not a real person who might have
> meaningless
> >random
> >
> >musings. This is a fictionally created person whose every word has been
> crafted
> >with
> >a purpose. As Jack suggests, we are compelled, purposefully, by the
> author, to
> >think of
> >pedophilia because that word is used.
>
> I agree so far.
>
> >Now if that big baby (it is a very large baby I think, not a retarded
> older
> >child) had
> >
> >been found with a bottle and rattle in a giant crib, then perhaps we could
> doubt
> >that
> >
> >Baldanders had sexual intentions. But this baby is adorned with fancy
> >accoutrements and
> >is chained to Baldanders' bed, which itself is decked out like a sybaritic
> 70's
> >love nest.
>
> Still agreeing.
>
> >Severian may have doubts about the baby's catamite status, but we cannot.
>
> Of course we can.
>
> What Severian says is, "The catamite beneath (if catamite he was)..." and
> "Large
> though he [the boy] was, I have never been able to believe that Baldanders
> practiced pederasty as that term is usually understood, though it may well
> be
> that he had hoped to do so when the boy grew larger still."
>
> So there we have it.  Severian thinks the boy isn't a catamite yet but may
> well
> be intended for that purpose.  The reason for his doubt may be that the boy
> is
> still too small (or too immature?).
>
> I cannot imagine why we should feel more sure that any part of this is
> right or
> wrong than Severian does.
>
> > Other parts of the story suggest Severian is in a constant state of
> denial when
> >it comes
> >
> > to pedophilia.
>
> Not constant.  He does discuss it in reference to the young blood donor as
> well
> as here.
>
> > We may live in a Michael Jackson world where pedophilia jokes can be part
> > of a comedian's monologue or a recurring character on Family Guy, but
> Gene
> >Wolfe didn't.
> >
>
> I agree again.
>
> > The Pelerines mention toleration of it,
>
> Possibly.  Ava says, "'...some befriend children left homeless by the
> struggle.'"
>
> "Remembering Casdoe's son, I said, 'I can see why you object to that.'"
>
> "'We do not object--most certainly not to that, and not to things vastly
> less
> natural.'"
>
> She may mean that they don't object when people take care of homeless
> children
> to sexually exploit them, or she may be referring to other "unnatural"
> practices
> but not that.  I doubt very much she means the Pelerines tolerate
> pedophilia
> when the children have other possibilities.  (To the extent that objecting
> to
> anything would do them any good.  Whatever the religion of Severian's time
> is
> like, we hear little or nothing of its moral doctrines or the idea that
> anyone
> might follow them.)
>
> > but it is a very sore subject for Severian, for some reason.
>
> A lot of people don't bring it up often.  However, as I said before, I
> agree
> with you that it's striking that Severian doesn't mention it in reference
> to the
> apprentices' lives in the Matachin Tower.  (As many here have probably
> found
> out, the name Matachin can suggest homosexuality, though not pedophilia.
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattachine_Society>.)
> ...
>
> > I find the introduction of a rather fantastic, or unpleasantly outrageous
> >concept then
> >
> > clouding it with doubt to be a recurring trope in Gene Wolfe's work. I
> think
> >the best
> > example is the suggestion that VRT has Dr. Marsch being killed and
> replaced by
> >an abo.
> >
> > Perhaps an abo who forgets his own true identity. There are many seeds of
> doubt
> >which are
> > planted in the story to allow denial that this is what happened. Enough
> to
> >spark lively
> >
> > debate in past years on this forum. But then it was discovered that Gene
> Wolfe,
> >in a rare
> > departure from reticence, openly acknowledges that the replacement of Dr.
> >Marsch happened,
> > in one of his interviews.
> >
> > From this, I deduce that Occam's Razor often does not work in trying to
> >understand Wolfe's
> > work. Surely sometimes a flying building turns out to be simply a tent
> >cathedral playing hot
> >
> > airballoon. But also often, a more fantastic interpretation is the best,
> >auctorially intended
> >
> > one.At the least we are meant to consider fantastic explanations on an
> equal
> >par with mundane
> >
> > ones.
>
> I was wrong about "V. R. T." (though maybe not on this forum), but I think
> I was
> preferring the more elaborate explanation and Occam's Razor would have led
> me to
> the solution Wolfe gave.
>
> No doubt you're right in general that we should consider fantastic
> explanations,
> but I don't see how it applies to the boy in Baldanders's castle.
>
> Jerry Friedman
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>



-- 
Best wishes,
Jack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20100729/d4567d02/attachment-0001.htm>

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