Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod

Lee Berman · 12 Aug 2010, 11:52 · from 2010-August.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: severiansola at hotmail.com (Lee Berman)
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 07:52:29 -0400
Subject: (urth) Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod
Message-ID: <SNT123-W57B05DF133DC82E315801CF970 at phx.gbl>

Jeff Wilson: 

>He says that Severian's race IS the one that shaped his, and I am willing to believe he is more
> knowledgeable than Malrubius.

>If aquastor Malrubius' knowledge doesn't agree with Tzadkiel's, where 
>does it come from?

Malrubius doesn't disagree with Tzadkiel. He thinks severian's humanity might be the race that created
Hierogrammates but he isn't sure.

After Tzadkiel tells Severian specifically that his race (not a cognate race) created Hierogrammates he speaks 
further-

Severian has admitted that as a child he didn't fully believe in the Concilliator (implying he still doesn't).
Tzadkiel then speaks of acolytes who do or did believe in him. I take this to mean he is being polite.
He doesn't want to reveal the "future" (which is Severian's past). I think he doesn't want to tell Severian 
he is the Concilliator and rub it in his face that he didn't and perhaps still doesn't believe in himself.

Tzadkiel goes on to say he was such an acolyte and though they didn't use those words, he reveres The 
Conciliator and New Sun (is it Severian?) of a past manvantara (is it Briah?).

Wolfe could have made it crystal clear that it was Severian's race in Briah which  created the Hierogrammates 
and it is Severian that he reveres, but at every turn he doesn't, using language which simultaneously provides 
us a conclusion and casts doubt upon it. It could be said that he does this in all his work. We are meant 
to be kept off balance.

My conclusion is that those who insist they are unequivocally right about Wolfe's work and are sure of their 
own correctness are, by lupine definition, wrong.

I have noticed that some are willing to take the trouble to post a statement that they are right and/or
another is wrong. But not so willing to take the trouble to post a statement admitting that perhaps
they were not so perfectly right after all.

Yes, that is a challenge. To myself, included.

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