Inhumi eyes and names

David Stockhoff · 28 Sep 2012, 19:30 · 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, 28 Sep 2012 15:30:44 -0400
Subject: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names
In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ7FK-tirk-_ihmrBCBbPOSZkS16k7v6VX1O_2r4Efqa8w at mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAGB0RZ41FNONx0CHvxuongm7+=6kVHnEHarj1CGAgcdMSjN0nQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<1348856108.46790.YahooMailClassic at web160701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAGB0RZ7FK-tirk-_ihmrBCBbPOSZkS16k7v6VX1O_2r4Efqa8w at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5065FAE4.6040509 at verizon.net>

That is a helpful clarification, thanks. We all thought you had gone 
wobbly on us.

Strike the scaffold, boys!

On 9/28/2012 3:21 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini <marcaramini at yahoo.com 
> <mailto:marcaramini at yahoo.com>> wrote:
> For the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic 
> explanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective "proof"
> ...
> Wolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the 
> Pelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: 
> the symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL 
> there somehow.
>
> Yeah, admitting that the 'genre' or 'mode' is some kind of 'fantasy' 
> in no way mitigates against any symbolism.  I'm wondering what I said 
> that made that worth pointing out?  All I'm saying is that the 
> 'mechanism', in the Solar Cycle, does *not* have to be in terms of 
> 'scientific' naturalism.  There are surely 'occult', or 
> 'preternatural' forces at work in this series, in addition to and in 
> conjunction with mega-futuristic super-science.
>
> -DOJP
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Marc Aramini <marcaramini at yahoo.com 
> <mailto:marcaramini at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> For the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic 
> explanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective "proof"
> ...
> Wolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the 
> Pelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that home: 
> the symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was STILL 
> there somehow.
>
>
>
>
>     --- On *Fri, 9/28/12, Daniel Petersen
>     /<danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>     <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>>/* wrote:
>
>
>         From: Daniel Petersen <danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com
>         <mailto:danielottojackpetersen at gmail.com>>
>         Subject: Re: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names
>         To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net
>         <mailto:urth at lists.urth.net>>
>         Date: Friday, September 28, 2012, 11:01 AM
>
>         Ant?nio Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com
>         <http://us.mc1607.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=entonio at gmail.com>> wrote:
>         Vision:
>         - I think this is one case where Wolfe just chose to go with a
>         cool idea, not worrying very much whether it can be
>         scientifically explained or not.
>
>         We do all realise this is a lot of what's going on Wolfe,
>         right?  And if we need 'explanation' in the Solar Cycle,
>         surely it's that the whole work is to some degree a form of
>         'magical realism' or the like, right?  It really is 'science
>         fantasy' to one degree or another, in one sense or another.
>
>     For the most part, I think there are still mechanistic or symbolic
>     explanations for stuff like this, and sometimes objective "proof"
>     (For example, such as the external objective proofs to aid
>     interpretation in the short story the changeling involving the
>     actor Peter Palmer who played the oaf lil' abner - born in 1931 as
>     our narrator Peter Palmer should have been instead of the 1934
>     birthdate his account posited, making him too young to enter the
>     war legally - and the fact that the origin of the word oaf lies in
>     a bad exchange - such that he was swapped back in 1931 and his
>     subsequent encounter with his changeling warped his memories).
>     Wolfe has reasons for weird details ... and his whole spiel on the
>     Pelerine's tent making a castle in the sky really drives that
>     home: the symbolic meaning was clear, but the mechanistic one was
>     STILL there somehow.
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Urth Mailing List
>     To post, write urth at urth.net <mailto:urth at urth.net>
>     Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

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