vanished people=Hieros

Gerry Quinn · 07 Nov 2011, 18:59 · from 2011-November.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: gerry at bindweed.com (Gerry Quinn)
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 18:59:07 -0000
Subject: (urth) vanished people=Hieros
In-Reply-To: <CAMwAopQOGGFwbUzNi7Y8M4caQF7zWUMoA5oarEb3eKf=h8vL6g at mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMwAopQOGGFwbUzNi7Y8M4caQF7zWUMoA5oarEb3eKf=h8vL6g at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <61B1852976FD425FBC1045269B7016C6@Rover>

From: Nick Lee
> Gerry Quinn:

> > That?s because you don?t pay attention to the text. His mode of time
> > travel is to walk or run through the Corridors of Time. The shackle 
> > binds
>  > him in time no less than in space.
> > If you want an analogy, consider a
>  > jet liner with a wall built around it at a distance of 50 yards or so. 
> It
>  > can fly, but nevertheless it is completely trapped by a low wall.

> The text has no a priori meaning, Gerry. It only means what we think it 
> means.

Incorrect.  It means what readers who have properly read it think it means.

> In any case, you've already been given an example of a character who
>  can remove his shackles whenever he wishes. Or do you think those scenes
>  are to be taken at face value, literally, but by your own definition of 
> what is literal?

What absurdity is this?  Much later we are shown a character in a play who 
breaks his fake shackles when the script calls for it  - what does that have 
to do with the Green Man?  We are also shown many more characters who do not 
break their shackles.  Do they count?

> And how do you know what the green man's mode of transportation is? Can
>  you explain it scientifically? Is he capable of running faster than the 
> speed of
> light? That would make him go backwards in time. What is his true 
> mechanism
>  of travel? If you can't explain that, then I don't think your position is 
> tenable.

He clearly does not run faster than light (how could Severian have seen him 
if he did?).  Time travel probably does not exist in reality, and if it does 
neither I nor Gene Wolfe can explain the manner in which it may be achieved. 
But we are reading a work of SF in which, as is often the case, time travel 
and other impossible things happen, and we understand the rules by which 
they happen by what we are told in the book.  In the book, the Green Man 
runs through the Corridors of Time, as Severian himself does later (in the 
text anyway).

> As it stands, we are not privy to the scene of his "capture." Your notion 
> that
> the green man is honest is as much conjecture as anyone else's version of 
> events.

We know he was captured, and that he is chained, apparently against his 
will.  Of course, you may argue that the village of Saltus are engaged in 
some bizarre conspiracy with a shapechanger (no reason to believe he is from 
the future at this point, since you have essentially decided to completely 
ignore everything we are told about the storyline).  And if his purpose is 
to encourage Severian to bring the New Sun, he doesn't need to be a 
shapechanger anyway any more than he needs to be a time traveller, he just 
needs to be a guy that's convincingly painted green.  So what is the point 
of such a conspiracy theory that basically ignores the logic of characters 
and storylines that are meant to relate to them?

> What do the hierodules have to say about the green man and his ability to
> travel through time? Urth, p.361: "But as for returning you to your own 
> time,
>  we cannot help you. Your green man knew more than we, perhaps; or at
>  least he had more energy at his disposal." And on that same page:"You're
>  a materialist, like all ignorant people, but your materialism doesn't 
> make
> materialism true."

Seems like they say about zilch.

> > Right. He must be a shapechanger because... well, because you want him 
> > to be,
> >  so everything we are told about him must be just a joke on the reader.

> Who wants him to be a shapechanger? I'm just exploring the notion and
> seeing where it leads me.

To a chain of random associations, apparently.

- Gerry Quinn

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