Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod

Lee Berman · 13 Aug 2010, 04:04 · 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: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:04:01 -0400
Subject: (urth) Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod
Message-ID: <SNT123-W6381FDD277ACBF838F59ECCF980 at phx.gbl>

>Antonio Marques: You probably do not intend it, but your assertions on how your 
>hyoptheses have support do not sit well with many. It's not the 
>hypotheses themselves, it's both your insistence that they have textual 
>support - where most view at bestest a tiny possibility that they aren't 
>outright excluded, i.e., they may be possible readings, but not 
>certainly the 'supported' ones - and your occasional dropping of wild 
>interpretations as if they were obvious and universally accepted. Then 
>you don't really like it when you're called on that. That's what comes 
>across - at best - as sanctimonius.

Antonio I'm not sure what you are suggesting or asking of me. Are you saying
 my purpose here is to please the "many"? It isn't. I believe in the sanctity of 
the one on one author-reader relationship. I seek to improve my *own* understanding 
of Wolfe books and I am doing that through discussion with others. If my words help
someone else, as their words help me that is icing on the cake.

I do not believe anything is "universally accepted" or.....(have to go back and check 
Roy C. Lackey's phrase)..."accepted Lupine gospel". What does that mean? That one should 
give up one's own interpretation of the books simply to conform to the codified holy 
writings of...whom? What? ..I don't know WHAT the heck that means. Was there a vote I 
was unware of? How am I supposed to  improve my personal interpretations if I am being 
asked to join a conformist community or calcified religion?

If you read my posts you will find I usually qualify my statements with "I think"
or "in my view".  This is not sanctimony. That is how I feel. My ideas are mine
and do not serve the purpose of coercing someone else's ideas to be like mine.

Must I stop saying "I think.." and start saying, "this most humble and unworthy
Wolfe acolyte, meekly submits to the super-majority a worthless minority 
interpretation which has no texual support and is surely wrong"? I don't know what 
you are suggesting.

Well, doesn't matter. I think I am being polite and considerate in my posts. I apologize
to those who feel otherwise.

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