the prime calcula/his citadel and other quotes

Gerry Quinn · 20 Jan 2011, 18:53 · from 2011-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: gerryq at indigo.ie (Gerry Quinn)
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:53:09 -0000
Subject: (urth) the prime calcula/his citadel and other quotes
References: <480981.94889.qm at web161809.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <B637BC25E61B4AF59CDDB034EF69373A@jill>

From: "Marc Aramini" <marcaramini at yahoo.com>
> --- On Thu, 1/20/11, Gerry Quinn <gerryq at indigo.ie> wrote:
>>
>> And then look at other facts such as the fact that Mamelta
>> when she is in her own mind never says anything about being
>> Silk's lover...

Do you have no comment at all on the above?  She spends a long time alone 
with Silk, and she never says anything like this again.  She *says it *only* 
when under the influence of Mucor.

> The fact is the mouth of Mamelta utters those words, and I think
>  it is Mamelta, and you think it is Mucor.

Mucor was possessing her just before she said it (or she would not have 
woken).  Mucor was clearly possessing her just after she said it.  Our 
default assumption, surely, is that Mucor was possessing her as she said it.

After Mucor leaves her, she never says anything of the sort.  That is quite 
strong confirmation that it was Mucor who said it.  Her strongest display of 
emotion comes when she finally realises she is on the Whorl and it has been 
travelling for generations.

>   Not only is it evidence
>  that Silk is recognized.  You ignore everything that is pointing to
 > the same thing, like, for example, when he is with Mamelta he feels
>  as if he is being held by his mother, the certainty Mama was coming
> down in the tunnels, the statement later that he knows how he came
> to be later thanks to an experience underground, and you dismiss it
> ALL with really realistic, flat, straightforward readings.

Because those flat and straightforward readings explain it all perfectly 
well!

>  THESE
>  CLUES ARE ALL CONSISTENT GERRY.  I EVEN QUOTED
> WHERE IT SAYS THE MEMORIES OF THE MONARCH AND
> HIS FAMILY WHERE REMOVED, AND STILL SHOWED
>  RECOGNITION MUCOR RECOGNIZING SILK, BUT YOU
>  DISMISSED IT.  Who is ignoring information in the text now?
 >  This is not even  a big leap.

I don't get what you're saying here.  Mucor knows Silk.  Mamelta doesn't. 
Brain operation or not, though, Mamelta does remember the Monarch and his 
family. She talks to Silk about them. What information am I ignoring?

> How can you show me Eleanor Bold is Mrs. Porter in Peace?
> The above statements are like ten million times more direct, copious,
> and clear, and they are all consistent, ALL WE NEED IS A
> REASON FOR TYPHON TO GET RID OF HIS LOVER AND
> WIPE HER MEMORY, but it sure seems like she was included in
> the Seal to be awoken at a VERY particular time as part of the plan
>  of Pas, but that time was prematurely reached.

I don't have Peace to hand, and I can't remember the details well enough to 
comment.  The question, anyway, is what is Wolfe saying here, in Book of the 
Long Sun?

Mamelta was one of many Sleepers - many thousands, certainly, perhaps even 
millions.  She was one of hundreds in the vault, some of whom had also 
previously been woken by Mucor.  What makes you think she was anyone 
special?  And if she was somehow Kypris's original (with somebody else's 
mind, except when she hasn't) why doesn't Kypris (the god) ever have 
anything to say about it?  (Actually, the only time Kypris talks about what 
Typhon might do to someone who offended him, she says "he kills... or 
nothing", suggesting that exotic revenges are not his style.)

> Okay, I've said my peace.  I just can't believe that a flat literal
 > interpretation takes so many dismissive views of consistent evidence,
> this IS NOTHING like where Gene was trying to really hide stuff.

I don't think I'm taking flat literal interpretations of anything here, or 
dismissing evidence excessively.  I have said in the past that I think the 
concrete events are the important part, but I don' t mind at all taking 
clues or hints from dreams, allusions or what have you.  But first and 
foremost, we are reading a story that was written to make sense.  If a 
dream-hint leads us to something that doesn't make sense, then we've 
misinterpreted it, or we've followed the paths wrong.

I've given my interpretation of Silk's dreams - do you see anything 
implausible about it?  If you had a dream in which your lover turned into 
another person, would you think they actually were that person, or would you 
look for a less dramatic explanation?  Maybe there *is* something connection 
between them, or in your understanding of them.  Or maybe you just ate too 
much cheese before going to bed.  In a novel the latter interpretation 
(cheese) would be an inelegant explanation, but the former would be 
perfectly fine.  That even applies in a science fiction novel!

And Kypris actually *tells* us the meaning of the vision she shows Silk in 
the airship - your interpretation ignores what she is saying!

I agree that Wolfe is not trying to hide stuff!

- Gerry Quinn

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