(urth) Re: New Sun dilemna
maru
marudubshinki at gmail.com
Thu Apr 7 15:25:03 PDT 2005
Chris wrote:
> Kieran said:
>
>> Well, as a Catholic and a reader of Wolfe I have found this thread to
>> be rather odd. Your point seems to be that any change in the future
>> of Urth that causes the death of anyone is immoral. The supposition
>> is that the "Frozen Urth" future is the "true future" and that
>> "Reborn Urth" is some choice that Severian makes leading to the
>> deaths of millions.
>
>
> By my reckoning neither is the "true future"; in reality we have no
> such conveniences to fall back on. If that's the case then you are
> left with the immediate effect of your actions on people who already
> exist. The effect, in this case, is devastating.
>
So you are arguing that any decision procedure based on probabilities is
impossible?
>> I always thought that the inhabitants of Urth got to choose their
>> future - that was the point of the battle in UotNS. Those who
>> opposed the New Sun fought those who favored it. The New Sun won.
>
>
> This sounds just a bit too much like "might makes right". But the
> trial is an interesting issue to explore in its own right. Someone
> noted that at the time they held the trial, at least some involved
> already knew that Severian was the one who was going to bring the New
> Sun. What *was* the point of the trial? Well, if I remember correctly,
> for one thing, it somehow sealed the *inevitable* truth of the New Sun
> future.
>
I recall the explanation being that the New Sun, before the trial, was
*probable* but not certain. After the trial it was dead certain. Why
though probably has to do more with consent issues.
> This brings up something odd. I don't bring this up as a rhetorical
> point but as a serious question. Why would the Hierogrammates set up
> such a demanding test for an outcome which was actually *desirable*?
> (Assuming the outcome was, in fact, desirable). Why not, instead,
> offer it to the first Autarch that came along - or just do it on their
> own accord? The idea that they would only put it in motion when it had
> reached the point of inevitability makes the New Sun sound as if it
> were an undesirable outcome for them. Or at least, not an unqualified
> good.
>
If you want to perform some risky, yet necessary surgery (like a heart
bypass), you don't simply do it. You get consent.
>> For me the analogy is a poisoned bog that has some critters eking out
>> some existence in it. You might choose to clean it up, but in doing
>> so you wreak havoc on those already there, or who are adapted to the
>> poisons. So you should just leave it a toxic dump.
>
>
> Or move the critters to new environs.
>
>> Let's say Severian had to go to Briah to *stop* the arrival of the
>> White Fountain and keep the Urth on its current path of freezing in
>> the dark. Are you arguing that that would be a better choice?
>
>
> Are you arguing that these are the only two possible choices?
>
> Civet
Do you see any other choices that don't break down into 'New Sun comes'
or 'New Sun doesn't come'?
Much as I hate to say, this would seem a pretty solidly binary choice.
~Maru
More information about the Urth
mailing list