(urth) What's So Great About Ushas

[brunians at brunians.org]

Also, Hierogrammate means something like 'Holy Word-carrier' which is
pretty close to the meaning of angel, which is (i believe) messenger....



.



> Paul B, I'm not sure if your last post clarified things for me. I don't
> begrudge you
> dodging my nosy question about your faith but I am still not sure if you
> are saying you don't think Gene Wolfe intended Hierogrammates to be angels
> or if
> it is your opinion they are not a good representation of what angels
> should be like.
>
> John Watkins explicitly states he intends to present arguments for Gene
> Wolfe's intentions
> and gives a list of pros and cons. I think there is a glaring omission in
> the list of pros and a
> mistake in the list of cons which is continually repeated in this
> discussion.
>
> Missing in the list of pros is that the only Hierogrammate we see (Apheta
> and Venant and
> the other larvae are named Hierarchs) is named "Tzadkiel". This name, like
> Michael or
> Gabriel IS the name of a judeo-christian arch-angel.  I don't see how much
> less
> circumstantial the evidence could be. I suppose Wolfe could have called
> them "Angels"
> all through the text instead of Hierogrammates but I can't think he'd ever
> stoop to hitting
> his readers over the head with such a blunt instrument as that. The name
> Tzadkiel seems
> already more obvious than his usual.
>
> The mistake in the list of cons is to say that the Hierogrammates cannot
> be angels or connected
> to God because they engage in the "morally dubious, if not outright evil"
> behavior such as
> genocide (I presume). How can it be ignored that God and angels commit
> genocide left and right in the
> Bible? The Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the 10th Plague, the Red Sea on the
> Egyptian army,
> Jericho, the Midianites, the Amorites, the Phillistines, the list goes on
> and on. How can God and
> angels be re-defined as being incapable of genocide when that's one of the
> main things they do?
>
> I think only a secular humanist could redefine them as gentle caretakers
> of precious human life
> (which is why it would be more interesting if Paul B was Christian or
> Jewish).  I see no evidence
> that Gene Wolfe is a secular humanist and I find it really hard to
> conceive that he meant
> Hierogrammates to represent anything but angels.  They look like angels,
> they act like angels
> they are named like angels, they live in a higher, heavenly plane like
> angels.....
> ah well. Perhaps it's just me that sees it.
>
> -bsharp
>
>
>
>
>>I don't know about Paul, but I'd be more interested if we focus on the
> question of whether the Hierogrammates are intended to be (unfallen)
> angels
> by Gene Wolfe.  Without my books at hand, the argument for this appears to
> be:
>
> 1)  "Holy" is part of their name.
>
> 2)  Tzadkiel has a winged form that Severian identifies as an angel.
>
> 3)  Severian thinks Hierogrammates serve the Increate.
>
> 4)  Wolfe referred to Tzadkiel as an "angel" in an interview.
>
> The argument against the Hierogrammates being angels, as I understand it,
> is
>
> 1)  Catholic theology posits that angels are perfectly moral, but the
> Hierogrammates frequently engage in morally dubious if not outright evil
> behavior.
>
> 2)  Hierogrammates, unlike angels, are not direct creations of God.
>
> 3)  Most of the arguments that Hierogrammates are angels are hearsay.
>
> I think these are both colorable arguments, but I come down on the "not"
> side.  The Hierogrammates are obviously *spoken of *as angels, but they
> are
> just as obviously not two things that are *essential *to the meaning of
> the
> word "angel.">
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.
> http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_family_safety_072008
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>