Some problems if the Pancreator/Outsider is theHoly

James Jordan · 10 Jun 2002, 21:02 · from urth-v0206.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: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) Some problems if the Pancreator/Outsider is theHoly
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:02:15 -0500
Message-ID: <urth-v0206-1187 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0206/1187.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 03:08 PM 6/10/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>James Jordan wrote:
>
> > .... remember that Urth is a universe-cycle before ours. These events
> > predate the promise to Noah by about 50 billion years maybe. We don't k=
now
> > that such a promise had been given to any Urnoah in Urth history. Nor,
> > returning to the first point, do we have to assume that God managed Bri=
ah
> > precisely the same way He manages our cycle.
> >
>
>I've come across this stated in the archives before; is the source an
>extra-textual Wolfe interview or the like?

         Yes.

>The reason I ask is because it seems
>odd that in a whole different cycle of creation you'd still get the Apollo=20
>moon
>landing whose picture is recognizable as such.  And as someone else mentio=
ned,
>how would Severian's box with BOTNS make it through the singularity?

         Well, the fact that is does somehow pass through the singularity,=20
on board the Ship perhaps, or in the Yesod Library, is the intra-textual=20
indicator that these events are in our past. That's always the problem with=20
Wolfe: which of the tiny hints are important and which of the hints are not=20
hints at all?


>That aside, what's going on with that window into the 20th c. in the botan=
ical
>gardens?

         Protestant missionaries of the Theoanthropos. Well, like the=20
Apollo picture, somehow this earlier BangganB of the cosmos is much like=20
ours, but not quite the same. I do think we have an incarnation of the 2nd=20
person of God in this earlier cosmos, the aforementioned Theoanthropos, the=20
original Conciliator of which Severian is an application, but as=20
Dan'l  mentioned, from some Roman Catholic perspectives the atonement of=20
the Son is "eternal" so it could "happen" in time more than once. If this=20
was not in Wolfe's mind, then I doubt if we are supposed to press the=20
problem of a repeated crucifixion.
         But then, if we allow Wolfe the "liberty" to have a previous=20
incarnation and atonement-of-infinite-worth in the Briah cosmos, then how=20
are we to "know" that Severian's manuscript is from a previous cosmos and=20
has made it into ours? Which "hint" do we take as simply a liberty we grant=20
the author, and which "hint" we take as internal to the argument of the=20
narrative? After all, maybe Wolfe just "somehow" got Severian's book from=20
the future and "somehow" (golden spectacles?) was able to translate it, and=20
we are not supposed to ponder further? Or, maybe it fell back to him=20
through the corridors of time, instead of proceeding forward to him from=20
the previous BanggnaB. Is there another "hint" that resolves the question?=20
This is the problem and frustration when reading Wolfe!

JBJordan Nutria


--=20

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