The Best Introduction to the Mountains

Adam Stephanides · 03 Feb 2002, 15:35 · from urth-v0202.mbox · original

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: Adam Stephanides <adamsteph at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) The Best Introduction to the Mountains
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 09:35:37 -0600
Message-ID: <urth-v0202-61 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0202/61.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

on 2/1/02 4:08 PM, Thomas Bitterman at tom at bitterman.net wrote:

> Michael Straight wrote:
>=20
>> Nor do I think it makes much sense to pull a few quotes from the
>> Catholic Encyclpedia and think that gives you enables you a complete
>> understanding of Wolfe's political ideas.
>>=20
> Complete, no.  But Wolfe is a dedicated, intellectual Catholic.  It
> seems prudent to assume that
> he's read both the Encyclopedia and Aquinas (and agrees with them on
> such an important
> matter) until proven otherwise.

The Catholic intellectual tradition is wide and diverse.  The Catholic
Encyclopedia may state the "mainstream" position, but that doesn't oblige
Wolfe to agree with it.  Catholics are obliged to accept papal ex cathedra
proclamations of dogma, but there aren't too many of those.

> To give some relevance to this discussion I'd predict that none of
> Wolfe's characters ever
> approves of a rebellion except when the ruler is clearly tyrannical in
> the narrow sense used
> in the Encyclopedia.

You quoted the Encyclopedia earlier as quoting Aquinas describing a "a
tyrannical law" as "not being according to reason."  I don't see that the
rulers of Dorp fall under this definition.  They're corrupt and unjust, but
probably no worse than the average medieval ruler or lord; and presumably
Aquinas would not give a definition of tyranny which would justify rebellion
against most rulers.

And when Silkhorn gives reasons for rebellion, he says nothing about
tyranny.  First he explains it on the grounds of necessity for himself, and
to keep Beroep and Aanvagen from being ruined; and because the judges are
corrupt. (181)  Later he tells Capsicum "The judges had taken advantage of
their [the people of Dorp's] good qualities, and so the judges had to go; if
I had not removed them, the people themselves would have within a few
years."  He also says, rejecting the idea of overthrowing Gyrfalcon, that
New Viron would probably be worse off without him. (275)  Silkhorn's
criterion, it seems to me, is pragmatic.  If rebellion would make people
better off, then it's justified; if it wouldn't (which he probably thinks is
most of the time), then it's not.  I suspect this is Wolfe's criterion as
well.

--Adam

--=20

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