All is Shadow and dust

David Duffy · 07 Apr 2005, 23:59 · 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: David.Duffy at qimr.edu.au (David Duffy)
Date: Thu Apr  7 23:59:55 2005
Subject: (urth) All is Shadow and dust
In-Reply-To: <4255F0CE.3020208 at gmail.com>
References: <BAY102-F25FBC99316ACEAB01F46BA863A0 at phx.gbl>
	<4255F0CE.3020208 at gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0504081624530.6718 at moonboom.qimr.edu.au>

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, maru wrote:

> Chris wrote:
>
>> To summarize before trying to answer, what I take it you're asking is 
>> (shifting the focus from Severian to the Hieros, since on this view 
>> Severian is just a tool of the Hieros) whether the Hieros, as higher 
>> beings, are above judgment with regard to their plans for Urth. (Although 
>> to be honest I'm not sure that the Hieros plan for things to be this way, 
>> or if they simply accept it as an inevitability and willingly play their 
>> roles).
>> 
>> Following Aquinas, God is beyond human judgment and the Hieros could be 
>> themselves just tools of God, or else beings who operate, like God, in a 
>> sphere where our judgments are not qualified to reach. Theologically 
>> speaking once you've taken this first move, of allowing that Sev is really 
>> a tool of a higher power with no choice in the matter, you've mooted the 
>> whole question before you begin; this way of looking at Sev is not a 
>> perspective which allows us to *ask* ethical questions in the first place.

> ... Personally, I see little of the normative claim in UOTNS- 
> things *are* explained and justified, if not well or completely, and the Hs 
> do not act utterly superior; they go so far as to repeatedly test Autarchs 
> and get some semblance of permission from Urthians (the battle), so they 
> definitely don't believe in the normative claim, and if the Hs don't accept 
> it, who could have the right? The Increate? But the Increate never 
> intervenes.
>

In _Soldier_, Short Sun and Wizard-Knight, Wolfe spends a bit of time on 
judgement by humans of gods.  The Giants-proper (not the little ones ;)) 
are of Skai, and as such should be respected, but not admired or 
worshipped; Loki is more ambiguous.  And on multiple occasions, we hear 
the argument about demons taking over the role of God becoming 
indistinguishable from the real thing (cf _The Day after Judgement_). And 
the real thing (righteous authority deriving ultimately from the Increate) 
is recognizable, presumably using ethical criteria.

After saying that, Wolfe's worlds are all high mortality settings: not a
lot of happy immortal uploads here ;).  To a medieval Christian viewpoint,
and perhaps to the Hieros, death and suffering are ubiquitous, *mysterious*,
necessary waystations on the infinite journey.  The offering up of
suffering to the Increate comment by Apheta comes right out of tradition.

David Duffy.
-- 
| David Duffy (MBBS PhD)                                              ,-_|\
| email: david.Duffy at qimr.edu.au   ph: INT+61+7+3362-0217 fax: -0101 /     *
| Genetic Epidemiology Lab, Queensland Institute of Medical Research \_,-._/
| 300 Herston Rd, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia  GPG 4D0B994A      v

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