Wolfean epiphany

David Stockhoff · 02 Dec 2011, 21:59 · from 2011-December.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: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:59:47 -0500
Subject: (urth) Wolfean epiphany
In-Reply-To: <36B534A558774F08B0D378FBE1D40347@Rover>
References: <SNT123-W31B5B9A4618A76826A0700CFB60 at phx.gbl>
	<36B534A558774F08B0D378FBE1D40347@Rover>
Message-ID: <4ED94A53.8080107 at verizon.net>

Thinking about how "fair" Wolfe was in writing UNS to explain all the 
things readers missed in BNS, something occurred to me regarding Apheta, 
who seems impossible to predict:

We already had a clear clue that Sev was to meet Apheta and mate with 
her and produce the New Sun---that is, that the New Sun would be 
procreated, not created. I doubt anyone saw it. That clue is that the 
Old Autarch failed and was unmanned.

Why is this a clue to a strange and climactic scene of UNS? Because the 
unmanning was not a random punishment. There were surely practical 
reasons for it, but I think Wolfean logic demanded it. It's ridiculously 
simple. Positive is balanced with negative, presence with absence. 
Either you pass and your genitals contribute to a mythic regeneration or 
you fail and they no longer exist.

The genitals were the key. We knew the New Sun would result. So (action 
A) removal of genitals pointed to the presence of (action B) 
procreation. Had the eyes or head been removed, that would have pointed 
to creation of the New Sun by means involving the eyes or head.

I don't know if it's possible to apply this principle elsewhere; it 
needs other relevant knowledge to provide context. Does the apparent 
absence of Severa (her identity not revealed in UNS and therefore either 
not important or nonexistent), point to another "obvious" presence 
somewhere else? Perhaps a doubled or multiplied Severian?

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