Inhumechanics

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes · 28 Mar 2001, 12:17 · from whorl-v0012.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: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Subject: RE: (whorl) Inhumechanics
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:17:39
Message-ID: <whorl-v0012-0503 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/whorl/archives/v0012/0503.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Black Jacques Shellac a =C3=A9crit:

> I had come to think of the Inhumi in their natural state as a kind of
> shapeless bat. =20

Whereas I had been thinking of them as looking like, well, leeches.

> I'm imagining a "radial" design, a kind of soft umbrella
> shape which might give them as many possible "limbs" as
> they need, though the shaping of hands, even poorly-
> functioning ones seems dicey as does any kind of walking,
> though it seems that the Inhumi can do both, if badly. =20

H'mmm. Leeches are kinda-sorta radial. At least their mouths are.

> There's also the seeming "telepathic" component.  Wasn't it
> Borski who thought that this may well be their primary mode
> of "shape-shifting".
=20
Actually, I think it was Krait -- He says something to Horn
about people seeing what they expect to see and the inhumi
exploiting that, which struck me as one of those "I mean more
than I'm saying" things.

> > Is this yet another case of Wolfe playing Lysenko games?

> Lamarck games I hope. =20

Uh, yeah. That. Oops. That's right. I meant Lamarck. It
was a typo, honest. Lamarck.

The point of my question being, of course, that the inhumi's
kids seem to inherit the characteristics their mummsies (and
poppsies?) acquire from the various sentients they suck on.

Okay, inhumi life cycle basics. They lay eggs in water. Baby=20
inhumi come to a certain amount of development, apparently
even including some degree of consciousness, in the eggses,
precioussss. They hatch in some kind of aquatically correct
shape -- little crocogaters? Awww, cuuuuute.=20

H'mmm.  Wolfe describes them as reptilian; I think they're
more amphibious. Anywho, eventually they go on land and=20
start looking for something sentient to snack on.

Now, how about this proposal: An inhumu (or inhuma) does not=20
get his(her) smarts from who he(she) feeds on, but on who=20
his(her) mother (parents?) fed on.

No; that won't work -- viz. Fava having to feast on children=20
now and then to counteract the effects of feeding on Granny.
Or is that just physical appearance? I'm so confused...

--Bbbbblattiddddd

*This is WHORL, for discussion of Gene Wolfe's Book of the Long Sun.
*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.moonmilk.com/whorl/
*To leave the list, send "unsubscribe" to whorl-request at lists.best.com
*If it's Wolfe but not Long Sun, please use the URTH list: urth at lists.best.=
com

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