Seawrack and the Mother

David Stockhoff · 21 Sep 2012, 19:18 · from 2012-September.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, 21 Sep 2012 15:18:27 -0400
Subject: (urth) Seawrack and the Mother
In-Reply-To: <SNT123-W5D9731CDD61E84FC48FE7CF990 at phx.gbl>
References: <SNT123-W5D9731CDD61E84FC48FE7CF990 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <505CBD83.3070802 at verizon.net>

On 9/21/2012 2:49 PM, Lee Berman wrote:
>> David Stockhoff: This is a useful observation. Recall that Abaia is named after an eel
>> that lives in a lake. Why would a super-massive sea monster be named after an eel that
>> lives in a lake? It helps the name to fit if the monster lives "everywhere."
> Agreed. I guess I'll offer this observation. Severian connects the Naviscaput to Abaia.
> But the Naviscaput has taken Night as his mate. In Greek mythology, the mate of Night or
> Nyx is Erebus. (one of their offspring is Charon, source of some of my suspicions about
> the Old Boatman who is Dorcas' husband).
>
> So, which is the Naviscaput, Abaia or Erebus? Could it be both, somehow?
>
> I've mentioned that in the sun series, gender seems to be a mere convention adopted by these
> non-human god-monster beings for their dealings with humans. Names are perhaps even more of
> a human convention (Apheta doesn't seem to need a name until meeting Severian). Maybe "Erebus"
> is just the name for the piece of "Abaia" who ended up near Antarctica. Likewise for
> all the 13 megatherians?

I'll say this: the one thing more frightening than a Cthulhu sleeping 
under the waves is 13 Cthulhus sleeping under the waves.

>
> I find it interesting that in listing the offspring of Greek deities, there is the need
> to distinguish sexually produced offspring from the budded off variety. For the more ancient
> gods like Nyx there seems to be a higher percentage of asexual offspring. But even Zeus and
> Hera have a few budded off kids.
>
> Somehow I get the sense that Wolfe (like Frank Herbert in the Dune series) is trying to get
> us to the idea of a universal god who becomes divided and then reforms into new gods (or
> God?) in whatever way best suits their purpose in the next generation. I'm not a religious
> scholar but perhaps the divided god idea started from Hinduism with Brahma and all his branches
> and all their avatars.
>
> I could almost see this idea as a way for Wolfe to reconcile his ideas about the reality of
> ancient gods with the demands of being a modern Christian. Perhaps being Catholic with its
> emphasis on the Trinity is more fertile ground for such thinking than the more straight,
> monotheistic leanings of Protestantism.

It is certainly true that gender is a big problem for anyone trying to 
understand the divine with only his/her two hands and 5 senses. If 
humans are the purpose of the universe, and humans are gendered, then 
the universe and/or its creator(s) logically must be gendered as well. 
That's one route many religions (and alchemy) have taken.

Christianity denies sex and gender in several ways and at certain 
points---controlled male and female sexuality, the virgin birth, asexual 
angels, an unmated God---but definitely sees humans and their natural 
environment (Eden) as primarily gendered. (By eliminating Mary (the 
fourth member of the Trinity?), Protestantism ends up quite 
male---almost as male as that guy in the Old Testyment.) Wolfe obviously 
has noticed: he sets up the Long Sun as a highly gendered system, with 
even robots getting male and female names. Suggesting, as you do, that 
Abaia is asexual but has a mate is a contradiction---but then so is a 
male God who has no female mate but isn't remotely interested in sex or 
procreation (for contrast, see Jupiter, girlfriends).

But if humans are NOT the big attraction, the main show, then there is 
no reason for the universe or its creator/ruler to be gendered.

In BOTNS, humans clearly ARE pivotal . . . but if you subtract the fact 
that we ourselves are humans who know of no others like us, on balance 
BOTNS actually takes that human centrism and makes it look as 
small-minded and provincial as it possibly can appear. How many novels 
provoke serious debates over the number of Christs, human or otherwise, 
allowed in a uni/multiverse in which humans are so insignificant? We're 
outnumbered by insects on our own planet.

In short, while a line has to be drawn somewhere, I think it's 
appropriate that Severian's indifferent universe is "represented" by 
nongendered super-entities, both good and bad.

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