vanished people=Hieros

David Stockhoff · 13 Nov 2011, 16:06 · 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: dstockhoff at verizon.net (David Stockhoff)
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 11:06:46 -0500
Subject: (urth) vanished people=Hieros
In-Reply-To: <SNT123-W12C7E16BA6423BCE121FCACFC30 at phx.gbl>
References: <SNT123-W12C7E16BA6423BCE121FCACFC30 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4EBFEB16.2050307 at verizon.net>

On 11/12/2011 11:24 PM, Lee Berman wrote:
> .............just found-
>
>
>
> What we've been pondering was from Fitzgerald's 1st Edition. Just from that, I thought Orion made a
>
> better candidate as The Hunter than the sun, but I just found some snips from later versions of
>
> Fitzgerald's translation of the Rubiyat with significantly different phrasing.  They seem to suggest
>
> the Stone is the sun, (as usual, Wolfe is right) but also that the Hunter is the sun.
>
>
>
>> >2nd Edition
>> >Wake! for the Sun behind yon Eastern height
>> >Has Chased the Session of the Stars from Night:
>> >And, to the field of Heav'n ascending, strikes
>> >The Sultan's Turret in a Shaft of Light.
>
>
> 4th and 5th Edition
>
>> >Wake! for the Sun has scatter'd into flight
>> >The Stars before him from the Field of Night,
>> >Drives Night along with them from Heav'n, and strikes
>> >The Sultan's Turret with a Shaft of Light
>
>

The sun clearly takes center stage, but since the stone-bowl metaphor is 
entirely gone it's hard to argue from this that the sun is a stone. 
Similarly, both versions are martial, not hunting-related, so one can't 
deduce anything about a Hunter either. Still, I see what you mean: Venus 
was never anything but a device if it was intended at all.

I think it's very telling that FItzGerald must have thought his first 
version inferior, but I find it much more interesting. I think that's 
because its images are much less direct and more ambiguous than here. 
Much less literal and far better suited to Wolfe's purpose.

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