Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy

James Wynn · 17 Nov 2011, 17:28 · 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: crushtv at gmail.com (James Wynn)
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:28:26 -0600
Subject: (urth) Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy
In-Reply-To: <F0460D9F70CB4425949F36BBC3259473@Rover>
References: <163817.55332.qm at web58206.mail.re3.yahoo.com><4EC2EA57.6050603 at verizon.net><4EC2F7F8.50603 at verizon.net><4EC32090.3080402 at gmail.com><B9D6EE0B77924CE3B3A6141A77AE9C7B@Rover><4EC3D6A0.3010702 at gmail.com><785184038C7F43F5B8904AF2ACEEDAEC@Rover><4EC3EA56.5040304 at verizon.net><269ABB99AB7A4844B481781484E4FFE0@Rover><4EC3F0F1.8050004 at gmail.com><361A3DF9EDE34095B43F57AFC934C667@Rover><4EC3FB63.7010301 at gmail.com><8B62A70E4701459087B6534260A0D361@Rover><4EC40D79.1080009 at gmail.com><3509EB1DEEA74B1A868D1A0E3A6D2E7A@Rover><4EC425DF.8000303 at gmail.com><CAJ8=rthM7y+s2Jk+2OF6t1JUhYrhJLNKEmkcvQMj752B=Hz6Xw at mail.gmail.com><4EC42AFA.2000008 at gmail.com><F3ABD324B1E84461A089FEF226F8FC30@Rover><4EC4872B.4020603 at verizon.net><3FD4B4C9049148FCA9E1C2193CFBB5F0@Rover><4EC5091F.10007 at verizon.net><4EC520E6.3080505 at gmail.com><496A0102D6484FFD8598FD036F20265C@Rover><4EC52F27.6080702 at gmail.com><7270FCCB96DD4753A243203E844A79D1@Rover>
	<4EC53B39.5040904 at gmail.com>
	<F0460D9F70CB4425949F36BBC3259473@Rover>
Message-ID: <4EC5443A.4050308 at gmail.com>


> *From:* James Wynn <mailto:crushtv at gmail.com>
> > No. *According to the text* Silk saw *Oreb*. He only doubted himself
> > based on the fact that "it made no sense" since Oreb couldn't fly. Then
> > he collects a series of other rationalizations.
> Gerry Quinn wrote:
> In the darkness.  In the faint skylight from a curtained window.  But 
> he "saw" him so it must have been Oreb no matter what absurdly 
> contrived explanation we have to make to justify it.  That's just 
> silly literalism.

"Silly literalism"? Is this sarcasm? Because taking a statement like 
this from you as said earnest is really too much.

>
> > If none of your theories explains the second Oreb (or the something 
> that
> > looked an awful lot like Oreb flying out the window) then they explain
> > nothing.
> A bird possessed by Mucor explains it, IMO.  It's the best I can do at 
> the moment.

Not even good enough for you, huh?

> Now, how do you explain how a time travelling one-eyed Rajan looks 
> like a 70+ year old Pike?

Having had posited a theory that Silk misidentified Oreb for an 
alternate bird for which there is no foreshadowing or further mention in 
the text, and having called it "silly literalism" to imagine that Silk 
actually saw Oreb when he awoke and "saw Oreb"....I don't know why you 
have a problem with it. Obviously Pike looks a lot like an older Silk. 
He has long white hair like the older Silk.  The older Silk has been 
through it. So he has a few less wrinkles. Big deal. Unless he pulled 
his eye socket open, Silk would not have noticed the missing eye. So I 
don't get that objection. For that matter we don't KNOW how old the 
Rajan is when Silk sees him. Maybe he's spent 20 years on the Whorl by 
the time Silk sees him. Night choughs are clearly long lived.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20111117/b2ec4d2a/attachment.htm>

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