Meschia and Meschiane

maa32 · 28 Mar 2002, 06:12 · from urth-v0203.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: maa32 <maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu>
Subject: (urth) Meschia and Meschiane
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 23:12:58 -0700
Message-ID: <urth-v0203-493 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0203/493.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I thought I'd just throw this out here at you guys.  I believe I owe this=20
information to Mantis, so thanks!
We all agree that the play Eschatology and Genesis closely echoes what real=
ly=20
goes on, with the first man and first woman getting dropped off to recoloni=
ze=20
the planet or whatever, and the threat of flood and all that good stuff.
The names Meschiane and Meschia are persian ... they spring to new life out=
 of=20
a golden tree instantaneously after that demon wench Jahi fools Mainyu into=20
poisoning Gaya.  Once again we have life simlutaneously springing into bein=
g=20
from foliage after the poisoned Urth is reborn.  (Opposing the story of=20
Hyacinth from mythology, the closing quote of the book: flower springs from=20
dead man).

People seem to be primarily arguing about the indentity of Blue as Urth - a=
nd=20
I use the trees to justify it.  Is it the trees that are one step too far f=
or=20
most people, or do most people agree that the trees can eat people and spit=20
out copies sans Blue=3DUrth? Is it the actual hybridization between plant a=
nd=20
human that is too hard to accept, or is it the idea of sentient trees? =20
Whatever else I may have done, I have made a huge case for the carnivorous=20
sentience of these trees, and I have tied them to the vanished people=20
regardless of whether eating humans creates new neighbors. Does anyone want=
 to=20
argue that vital first step? Trees =3D or approximate primitive neighbors; =
vines=20
=3D or approximate primitive inhumu.

Blattid said I should drop Blue=3DUrth.  I'm not, but let's pretend for a s=
econd=20
that I did.  Where does my argument then go too far?  As far as I can see,=20
it's all tied together inextricably - just say Horn is in Babbie? My only=20
mechanistic proof (I mean, how it was done) for that transfer is the presen=
ce=20
of the huge tree at the end of On blue's Waters where Horn/Silk has a visio=
n=20
of being Babbie. This of course explains a lot about the narrative changes =
and=20
Babbie's later behavior, as well as the changes in the narrator at this poi=
nt.
 I just don't see how I could back off from one position and keep anything =
at=20
all of my theory. All the way back to "Seawrack is a spy"? (Nicely confirme=
d=20
by GW, I might add.)
Marc Aramini

--=20

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