resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative lineage for Sev

David Stockhoff · 06 Oct 2014, 17:46 · from 2014-October.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: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 13:46:58 -0400
Subject: (urth) resurrecting a 2002 thread that posits an alternative
 lineage for Sev
In-Reply-To: <BLU175-W4D7E8F9A23D86B224C9C7CFB90 at phx.gbl>
References: <BLU175-W4D7E8F9A23D86B224C9C7CFB90 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <5432D592.7000000 at verizon.net>

I can't argue with that. But I do think that for this eastern-mythical 
interpretation to really work, it must fit into---and be secondary 
to---some kind of Catholic incorporating/transforming structure.

On 10/2/2014 8:37 AM, Lee wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:35 AM, David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net> wrote:
>> I agree. Marc's position has a point, in that incest which is neither intended nor known can't be much of a symbol.
>
> I disagree. For me, what is being missed is that the incest taboo applies to human beings. But for the pagan gods, incest was the norm and sexual activity outside the family, (with humans) was the more shameful act.
>
>
>

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