(urth) The Typhon-Severian Family Tree

[Chris]

MSG asked:
> >1)Why would Severian, who has
> >never heard of Princess Cilinia, assume that she is buried in the little
> >crypt he has so come to favor over the years?

Crush responds:
>Yes, and that was my expectation. But there is something "off" about the
>narration in this case. They don't "search" for a mausoleum,
>he *takes* them to one. I would have expected Cilinia, actually, to
>find it. That's not the way it happens, and if the crypt is not Severians
>the telling is all wrong.

If we take Severian's memory for granted, then he should remember *all* of 
the tombs he's been around with a high degree of detail, and could lead them 
to one of those just as easily as he could lead them to his own, given a 
basic description (and one can assume that Typhon's tomb will be distinctive 
in some way). And I think this is a fairly unproblematic answer.

Aesthetically I prefer a slightly less unproblematic answer. I like to think 
that there is a deep (and possibly unplanned) logic to the way things work 
in Nessus. Thus the passage of time can be inferred by the movement of the 
border between populated/unpopulated areas of the city, etc. It wouldn't be 
unreasonable to suggest that burials follow a pattern as well, such that 
given certain details of a person and when they lived, you might predict 
where they'd be buried. I admit this is unlikely, but it presents a picture 
of a sort of well-ordered Library of the Dead that somehow feels in accord 
with my overall impression of the city.

>Ouch.
>The "size of the crypt" is not described in the text, however Hoof's
>overall take on the number and his description of the layout of the coffins
>is a difficult (although not insurmountable) difference. It would be 
>cheating
>for me to say "well, Wolfe made a mistake, here". I don't have answer to
>this. Nor can I relinquish my discomfort with the description of how the 
>crypt
>was found. However, you have proven that fingering Severian's crypt as
>Cilinia's is not as obvious as I asserted.

I do find this point entirely convincing. I do not see any way you can 
reasonably hold on to the idea that the two tombs are the same. On the other 
hand I also don't see why you should need to hold on to it. Severian may 
well have several crypts (or unmarked burial plots) within the city, not to 
mention Apu Punchau's, etc. This element seems to be one that you like 
because it adds depth to your interpretation, rather than being a necessary 
support.

>of making from Wolfe's answer regarding Silk's "ancestry". If the hints of
>connection between Severian and Typhon, the giant undersea wall on Blue,
>and the Rajan's fasting (until the Spring) are misdirections, then they are
>red-herrings. If they are clues, then they have narrative import.
>And vice versa vice versa.

Apropos of nothing (much), I wasn't aware there was even a controversy 
regarding the Rajan's fasting. It always seemed to me straightforward that 
he was disciplining his appetites, out of awareness that the inhumi picked 
up their excessive appetites from us.

>But if it is cheating for me to wave my hands and say "Wolfe goofed here",
>how can we permit every reference that gives us serious difficulty to be
>chunked in the "red-herring" bin?

With great trepidation? I don't know, I don't think there's a good answer 
for this. All we can do is try to be as sensitive as possible to how serious 
a goof we are ascribing to him, and how likely/unlikely it is for such a 
thing to be deliberate or not. On one end of the scale I would put items 
like the "Garsecg/Garvaon" typo. Beyond that I don't think there is any 
place we can draw the line with full confidence.

With the case of the tombs, if there is an error it is non-trivial; there is 
no flat textual contradiction involved; and even with the theory-bound 
objection you have, the objection itself is non-critical to the theory. So I 
don't see any real motivation to say that the tomb description is a goof.