urth-urth.net Digest, Vol 4, Issue 17

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 08 Dec 2004, 09:59 · from 2004-December.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: danldo at gmail.com (Dan'l Danehy-Oakes)
Date: Wed Dec  8 09:59:39 2004
Subject: (urth) Re: urth-urth.net Digest, Vol 4, Issue 17
In-Reply-To: <20041208034958.09D0E37CF1 at sitemail.everyone.net>
References: <20041208034958.09D0E37CF1 at sitemail.everyone.net>
Message-ID: <1f76173704120809591405c820 at mail.gmail.com>

Turin -

I've been too busy to reply in detail to many of your excellent posts, but 
I want to thank you for bringing a new energy to this list.

I think the various appearances of Thecla (i.e., in the waiting room) are
just another example of Severian's unconscious use of his/the WF's power
throughout the BotNS. Note that many individual incidents of Sev's life
are designed to parallel incidents of Jesus' life (the most blatant being the
Tempting in the Wilderness). These parallels are often twisted, as in the
first sequence, Sev's "baptism," in which the role of John the Baptist 
appears to be taken by Juturna (or one of her sisters).

Anyway, I suspect the appearance of Thecla in the antechamber 
parallels the "Transfiguration," in which Peter and company see 
Jesus walking and talking with some OT figures. (Moses, Abraham 
and Elijah? I'm too lazy to check right now...) One might think the 
appearances of the aquastors a better fit for this, but the point here 
is that _someone else_ sees the dead Thecla.

> ... I understand the metaphor of the logos, but I don't think Wolfe
> is equating it with language.  I do not know if he is equating it with
> communication, possibly, but it's obvious he believes god "talks" to
> us, but I don't know if he would call it communication.  

Based on this and some other things you've said I think it might 
help if you did a little reading up on Catholic ideas about the
Eucharist. You mentioned in an earlier post that "communion is
with God," or something like that - this is true but incomplete; the
idea in Catholicism is that "communion" is an act of "community."
To receive communion is to "communicate" with God but also to
"commune" with the rest of the Chuch and the "communion of
Saints."

--Dan'l

-- 
www.livejournal.com/users/sturgeonslawyer
Freedom has no barcode.
     --J.G. Ballard

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