Like a good neighbor

James Wynn · 23 Nov 2011, 17:06 · 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: crushtv at gmail.com (James Wynn)
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:06:27 -0600
Subject: (urth) Like a good neighbor
In-Reply-To: <1322060527.29691.YahooMailClassic at web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1322060527.29691.YahooMailClassic at web161806.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4ECD2813.6020603 at gmail.com>

>> Honestly, as my understanding of what is going on SS has
>> developed, I have come to see the echoes in Sev to be of a
>> gnostic Jesus but the echoes in the Rajan to be the more
>> Orthodox version: mediator, divine Incarnate, Trinity...
> Marc Aramini wrote:
> Well, my problem with this assessment of Silk is that he has no real power to heal the sick and the dying, as Severian occasionally showed.  He can only spiritually abet them [...]

Well, in Severian Wolfe doesn't deal with the Incarnation. He doesn't 
present an example of a Trinity...how Three can be separate but One. The 
concept of resurrection is much more closely paralleled with that of 
Jesus (even Gerry recognizes the Three Days In the Grave incidence). 
With the Rajan, Wolfe is providing placing a Christ-figure in a 
different sense. To a much greater extent than with Severian, Horn dies 
so that mankind can live. And after all, saints heal as well.

> Also, I know I've said this before, but I really don't like the clone Typhon-Silk because it does complicate the four parents on the aureate path:

As you know, I had my own reasons for not liking Silk as Typhon's clone. 
But even when I was strongly arguing that Silk was /surely/ a clone of 
Typhon's son, I recognized that there were a /lot/ of hints equating 
them both as the Big Man himself. Ultimately, I have to go where the 
text leads and if that makes the scene on the Aureate path a mystery? 
Well, it was a bit of a mystery already.

> we CAN identify them if Silk is a son and that fits the details better (assuming the final picture of Silk with his head on Typhon is one of ascension and apotheosis of a son overtaking the demiurge, which actually seems a bit gnostic, no?).

Alas! Were that the only hint that Silk and Typhon are equated. Silk as 
Typhon's son works well in a lot of ways. In a few ways it breaks down. 
Silk as Typhon works in a lot of ways, bringing in references that the 
Son Theory has to ignore. Ultimately, I think it is better. It does make 
the Aureate Path scene problematic. Incidentally, what role, if any, 
does Quetzal play in Silk's resurrection?

> The details of the text are also better fitted with Tussah as a being distinct from Typhon, honestly. There are no dream sequences equating them in the way that Mamelta/Hy/Kypris/Chenille are equated.

Yeah, having accepted that Silk is /merely/ a clone of Typhon (rather 
than in someone both a clone and a son) I admit that there is just no 
way Tussah can be equated to Typhon. The assertion that Silk is Tussah's 
son entirely and solely by mere adoption is B.S., I think. I could fudge 
things by saying that Tussah was wholly possessed by Typhon when he said 
that, and that the gods engineered his death for that reason--that 
works. I'm not entirely satisfied that that is the answer but it works.

On the other hand....hmmm....I'm going to start a new thread on this.

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