the Epitome

Chris · 06 Apr 2005, 00:06 · from 2005-April.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: rasputin_ at hotmail.com (Chris)
Date: Wed Apr  6 00:06:54 2005
Subject: (urth) the Epitome
In-Reply-To: <001001c53a70$f21a86a0$e03ec6d8 at rclackey.stic.net>
Message-ID: <BAY102-F21155AE42EA0C259929DA8863D0 at phx.gbl>

Hold up a second. This interpretation of the Hierodules/Hierogrammates is 
something that I find to be surprising, which is not to say it's incorrect 
necessarily, but this was not how I was seeing things. This may be a 
straightforward error on my part; I really ought to buy an electronic copy 
of the books if one is available just to look up things like this.

I thought that what you are calling the creation of the Hierogrammates was a 
"shaping", that is, the men of the previous universe influenced their 
development rather than created them from whole cloth. And in turn the 
Hierogrammates were influencing the humans of Severian's universe to return 
the favor. Rather than being a great sin I thought this was something that 
was supposed to elevate each in turn.

>I don't know if my use of "H's" as shorthand for Hierogrammates is causing
>confusion with Hieros, or what. Anyway, to be clear, the Hieros were the
>humans of a previous universe who caused the eventual creation of the
>Hierogrammates. That creation was their great sin; a sin certainly in the
>eyes of the H's, but also, more importantly, in the eyes of the Increate.

>Finally, if Wolfe didn't intend the destruction of Urth and the birth of
>Ushas to be, in a religious sense, a good thing, why did he write it that
>way? Why write it at all?
>
>-Roy

Do authors intend every event they write about to be interpreted as a good 
thing? Well, that's not quite what I mean. How about: does Wolfe present it 
to us as a good thing, or is it *Severian* who presents it to us as a good 
thing? Again I think this is a shortcut to avoid rationally examining our 
reasons for thinking of the birth of Ushas to be a good thing. 
Unquestioningly accepting the value judgments of the narrator does not 
provide us with solid ground for an interpretation.

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