Inhumi eyes and names

David Stockhoff · 28 Sep 2012, 19:35 · 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 15:35:25 -0400
Subject: (urth) Inhumi eyes and names
In-Reply-To: <CAGB0RZ5NNXtUX=_2ymiUcc8_4hVpvjPCmdyy+9ZuKE-PVQNLLw at mail.gmail.com>
References: <SNT123-W5D9FF07D37F91E30F3BBBCF820 at phx.gbl>
	<5065DCE6.5040404 at verizon.net> <5065E098.5070509 at gmail.com>
	<CAGB0RZ41FNONx0CHvxuongm7+=6kVHnEHarj1CGAgcdMSjN0nQ at mail.gmail.com>
	<5065EB3A.9050808 at verizon.net>
	<CAGB0RZ5NNXtUX=_2ymiUcc8_4hVpvjPCmdyy+9ZuKE-PVQNLLw at mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5065FBFD.1050406 at verizon.net>

Yes, exactly. I had almost added to that "or else the playwright would 
have to explain about the demons etc." I assumed that would be taken as 
implied, but of course given the context I should not have assumed that 
this was obvious.

You're saying the same thing I am, except my example was drawn from 
straightforward realism and you are expanding it to non-realism.

On 9/28/2012 3:26 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:
> No, Chekhov's gun does *not* have to be combustive rather than demonic 
> *if* demonic forces are part of the narrational storyworld - the 
> 'scientific' view in that case would be to admit these forces into the 
> causal meshwork.  I think that's the best way to read Wolfe's Solar 
> Cycle.  I think these books are in a similarly 'supernatural' world to 
> the Soldier series - just with lots of (what we traditionally know as) 
> science also woven in.
>
> -DOJP
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 7:23 PM, David Stockhoff 
> <dstockhoff at verizon.net <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>> wrote:
>
>     Absolutely. Still, it should make enough scientific sense to be
>     roughly predictive.
>
>     In other words, Chekhov's famous gun needs to work by explosive
>     combustion, not fiery demons who become enraged when you pray to
>     Satan under a full moon.
>
>     On 9/28/2012 2:01 PM, Daniel Petersen wrote:
>
>         Ant?nio Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com
>         <mailto:entonio at gmail.com> <mailto:entonio at gmail.com
>         <mailto: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.
>
>         -DOJP
>
>
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         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 <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