Urth Net

Index · 5 messages · 3 voices · 21 Nov – 23 Nov 2011

Like a good Neigbor

Download this conversation
Lee Berman21 Nov 2011, 02:56as archived
Like a good Neigbor
↰ answers James Wynn · by quotation
3 quoted lines
James Wynn: But if Seawrack did not truly believe Horn was dead--because she had some genuine reason solid reason for believing he was dead--then I have never read a Wolfe story. I honestly cannot imagine
why there is any debate on this issue. This is about as emphatic a signal
that Wolfe offers.
There should not be any debate. It simply isn't very hard to see. The chapter title, the text formatting, the dialog; they all make it as clear as you could hope to get from Wolfe. Horn died in the pit. I fear we are seeing a self-destructive side of Marc which is painful to watch. He is devoting so much time and effort and emotion into changing the minds of people who are 1. genetically programmed to never admit changing their mind and 2. devoted heart and soul to ridding this board of posters like Marc. Gawd, its like smoking crack. You know it will never bring satisfaction but you keep going back one more time and one more time thinking this time maybe it will work. Crack is not your friend Marc. Crack is your enemy and you should be willing to recognize friend from foe. Don't feed those who seek your destruction. ;- )
Gerry Quinn21 Nov 2011, 12:56as archived
↳ in reply to Lee Berman
From: Lee Berman
1 quoted line
There should not be any debate. It simply isn't very hard to see. The chapter title, the text formatting, the dialog; they all make it as clear as you could hope to get from Wolfe. Horn died in the pit.
I think that view is untenable, and I support my contention with events described in the text, not chapter titles and formatting.
4 quoted lines
I fear we are seeing a self-destructive side of Marc which is painful to watch. He is devoting so much time and effort and emotion into changing the minds of people who are 1. genetically programmed to never admit changing their mind and 2. devoted heart and soul to ridding this board of posters like Marc. Gawd, its like smoking crack. You know it will never bring satisfaction but you keep going back one more time and one more time thinking this time maybe it will work. Crack is not your friend Marc. Crack is your enemy and you should be willing to recognize friend from foe. Don't feed those who seek your destruction. ;- )
If I were Marc, I should be far less offended by those who honestly disagree with his theories [which indeed to many of us are seriously out to lunch, and we honestly say so] than by your apparent belief that he can be manipulated into becoming a proxy warrior for your attempts to render this list a comfortable environment for torrents of un-thought out drivel. I have noted also your recent attempts to get Marc to change his theory so it becomes vague, ambiguous, meaningless, and therefore hard to falsify. If you were honest, you’d instead have told him what you think is right about it and what you think is wrong with it. - Gerry Quinn
Lee Berman21 Nov 2011, 19:47as archived
↳ follows Gerry Quinn · by subject
2 quoted lines · depth 2
James previously argued that he was a Neighbour who replaced Horn, and that fits okay with his theory. But if it can’t be that Neighbour, it must be someone else, and the question is who?
Sort of a silly question if the beings in question are plural in nature, not individuals. We have a clear example of such in Tzadkiel.
2 quoted lines
One body per soul, that kind of thing. Sure, you can argue around it, and say the Neighbour made a copy of himself and injected it into Horn as a new soul.
Not a copy. A shared portioning. Soul is like fire, maybe. A plasma-like substance. It can be shared without losing any of itself. Surely when Tzadkiel breaks him/her island-sized self into smaller giant, man, monkey and fairy sized portions, each one has a full measure of the original soul without loss by the original. Horn died in the pit. No worries there. The discussion ought to be more on whether a Neighbor shared its soul to facilitate the resurrection. I think James makes a good case for this. Especially when a hooved, horned animal is involved. Please no more talk of "which Neighbor". It clearly doesn't matter much. They share a soul which burns about the same in all of them. Including within SilkHorn it would seem. This shared soul would help explain dream travel.
David Stockhoff21 Nov 2011, 19:59as archived
↳ in reply to Lee Berman
4 quoted lines · 1–2 deep
On 11/21/2011 2:47 PM, Lee Berman wrote:
One body per soul, that kind of thing. Sure, you can argue around it, and say the Neighbour made a copy of himself and injected it into Horn as a new soul.
Not a copy. A shared portioning. Soul is like fire, maybe. A plasma-like substance. It can be shared without losing any of itself.
I am unsure of this, but I agree that such sharing is far from fatal.
4 quoted lines
Surely when Tzadkiel breaks him/her island-sized self into smaller giant, man, monkey and fairy sized portions, each one has a full measure of the original soul without loss by the original. Horn died in the pit. No worries there. The discussion ought to be more on whether a Neighbor shared its soul to facilitate the resurrection. I think James makes a good case for this. Especially when a hooved, horned animal is involved.
Versus a tusked one .... there is a reason why Horn's boys are Hoof and Hide.
1 quoted line
Please no more talk of "which Neighbor". It clearly doesn't matter much. They share a soul which burns about the same in all of them. Including within SilkHorn it would seem. This shared soul would help explain dream travel.
Perhaps, although Nettle is not a Neighbor. But that could be considered an evolutionary step up.
Lee Berman23 Nov 2011, 15:53as archived
↳ follows David Stockhoff · by subject
1 quoted line
Marc Aramini: Well, my problem with this assessment of Silk is that he has no real power to heal the sick and the dying, as Severian occasionally showed. He can only spiritually abet them - he seems much more like an individual who might become a saint to me than a Jesus. Sergei seems right on the money on that one.
Yes. (sorry for my previous disagreement Sergei. I misread your post). Severian is more like Jesus with his healing and his resurrection. Silk is more like a saint and he does die. (I guess he is resurrected too, but not in a Jesus- or Severian-type way). Moreover, Silk is unequivocally a "nice guy" like a saint (Francis of Assisi?) while Severian has much more of an edge to him, like Jesus who was not really a "nice guy". Jesus was sarcastic and harsh in his criticisms, in a way Silk would never be. Plus Jesus used a whip on people to punish them, a comparison Wolfe has made for Jesus explicitly to Severian, in an interview.
1 quoted line
David Stockhoff: Is it impossible to equate a clone with a son? After all, if you or I cloned ourselves, we would raise the result as a son. All we'd be doing is cutting out the middle, er, middlewoman (at least her genetic contribution).
Which is exactly what happens in 5HoC. It has been noted before but again I'll say that every major theme in 5HoC is present and elaborated on in the Sun Series. I think it cannot be ignored. (identity, cloning, father-son, faerie, unreliable narrator etc.)

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