Silkhorn's memory; Sev's book

Charles Reed · 15 Jul 2003, 03:44 · from urth-v0307.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: Charles Reed <jazzy_jeeves at att.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) Silkhorn's memory; Sev's book
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 22:44:20 -0500
Message-ID: <urth-v0307-3680 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0307/3680.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Howdy Crush.  It's been a long time since I've posted to the group, but=20
I've been following the discussion intermittently (as my limited time=20
allows) and wanted to point something out:  You quoted On Blue's Waters=20
(hardback page 43) as follows:

>"A copy of our book, which I meant to read during calms and the like, not =
so
>much to relearn the facts we had set down as to gently persuade my memory =
to
>dwell upon our conversations, and the conversations I had with Nettle, Mol=
y,
>and others about him. You that read will not credit it, but I do not belie=
ve
>I have forgotten anything that Nettle and I put into our book, or that I
>ever will."
>
You then go on to say in pointing out the parallel with Severian that:

>. . . Horn limits his perfect memory to *events* [my emphasis] in his book=
 . . .
>
This might be nit-picky in the extreme but I feel compelled to point it=20
out anyway.  Horn is not claiming his memory of *events* in the book to=20
be infallible; he is merely claiming that he has forgotten nothing of=20
what he *wrote* in the book.  These are two entirely different things.=20
 The actual events that occurred in Horn's final days and weeks aboard=20
the Whorl are most likely a confused jumble in Horn's mind.  And there=20
are major, gulf-sized holes in Horn's actual memory since he pieced the=20
story together from his and Nettle's memories, plus a variety of other=20
sources, including his memories of what Silk (and others) told him.=20
 Some of the conversations, I believe, he even admits to making up=20
wholesale based on who he knew to be present, and what those people most=20
likely said. =20

I think the only real similarity between Horn and Severian (at least as=20
far as their abilities to remember) is a thematic one.  Horn's memory=20
isn't perfect -- he just claims to not have forgotten anything which he=20
put into his book.  That sounds almost oxymoronic, but I don't think it=20
is.  I don't even see is as abnormal, given the fact that he spent=20
nearly every evening for (what I would guess to be) well over a decade=20
writing it and re-writing it and re-writing it again.  It is his life's=20
work -- as opposed to being his vocation.  There are stories I wrote in=20
junior high that I still recall with extraordinary vividness because of=20
the energy I invested in them at the time.  Writing something down on a=20
piece of paper is extraordinarily powerful in its ability to imprint=20
something strongly in memory.

Severian, on the other hand, does indeed make the claim of having an=20
infallible memory of *events* -- not merely an accurate memory of=20
something he wrote down.

Take that for what it's worth. :-)

Charles

--=20

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