(urth) The Guild's Revolutionary

[Jerry Friedman]

--- On Sat, 11/21/09, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com> wrote:
...

> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:40 PM, John
> Smith <jsmith2627 at att.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > Isn't Thecla put to the Revolutionary because she is a
> revolutionary?   Or at least associated
> > with her sister, who has joined the revolutionary
> Vodalus.   Those who revolt against the
> > sacred authority have their hands revolt against
> them.
> 
> Well, Vodalus isn't really a rebel,

He's not?  I must have missed something.

> and she's only associated with her sister,

I'm not so sure.  Thecla says at the end of Ch. XII,
"It [the revolutionary, or the part of her that hates
herself] is a thing from Erebus, from Abaia, a fit
companion for me.  Vodalus..."  I think she mentions
those names because they're who she supported or at least
sympathized with.  The self-hatred caused by the
revolutionary may be making her exaggerate, but it seems
significant that she mentions Erebus and Abaia rather
than accusing herself of cowardly loyalty to the
corrupt Commonwealth or selfishly enjoying her position
while others starved, or some such.

> but anyway; that seems like a possible reason, but
> that's
> terrible - the method of execution chosen for a pun?
> But now that I think about it, maybe that works. Just
> before they
> reach the Revolutionary, we read Gurloes say:
            
>    Behind it there .
> > . . if you'll take a step this way you'll be able to
> see it better . . . is what
> > we call the apparatus. It is supposed to letter
> whatever slogan is demanded in
> > the client's flesh, but it is seldom in working
> order.
> 
> Perhaps this is interpreted otherwise by y'all, but to me
> this is a
> very obviously a reference to Franz Kafak's "In The Penal
> Colony"
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Penal_Colony
> If one cannot use the writing machine to engrave 'do not
> rebel!' or
> whatever, perhaps a joke like that is the best that can be
> done.

I agree completely about "In the Penal Colony".  That's
even something I noticed myself, unlike alien-hand
syndrome or Ultan as a tribute to Borges.

However, I think the revolutionary got its name because
that's what it does--it's not a pun at all.  It creates
something that overthrows the mind's governance of itself.
And to the people of the Commonwealth, this is an entirely
fitting punishment for treason (which is probably what
Thecla is condemned for, whether she's guilty or not).
Letting the punishment fit the crime is important to them--
not only does Thecla say that, but Palaemon tells Severian
it would be "fitting" for him to die by the revolutionary
(XIII).

I think this answers David Stockhoff's question about
why they bother to use the revolutionary given that people
don't know about it, so it doesn't have deterrent value.
Many people in our culture, including me, are
consequentialists, but people in the Commonwealth may
not be so much.  The fitness of the punishment is a
good enough reason without any useful consequences.


> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Jerry Friedman
> <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > --- On Sat, 11/21/09, Gwern Branwen <gwern0 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
...
 
> >> Another case of Wolfe cloaking science behind
> >> fantasy ('like a demon')?

"Like a demon" is how Thecla sees something hateful and
hostile.  She doesn't have a scientific outlook, but I
think a lot of people who do would use a similar
description.  So I don't see this as a cloak.

> > I'd say the wires and needle give this definite
> > scientific trappings.
> 
> It definitely does, but it's still coy - 'lightning' rather
> than 'electricity'.

Though they do have a word for electricity, which Gurloes
forgets or pretends to forget.

> I remember in my first reading ever, this
> was the scene
> that made me sure that the author really was working under
> a warped Clarke's 3rd Law.

I can see that.

> >> But the Revolutionary is 'the most hallowed of
> all' the
> >> torture-devices, and Gurloes also "I couldn't
> describe it
> >> [what it
> >> does], Chatelaine. Anyway, I've never had it done,
> you
> >> see.", both of which imply use is very rare.
> >
> > I don't get that any of that implies that its use is
> > rare. Gurloes means he's never had it done to him,
> >  that is, he's never been a victim of it (which is
> >  obvious, hence "you see").
> 
> But Thecla is not stupid; she knows Gurloes can't give her
> any description from having had the Revolutionary used on
> himself. So she couldn't be asking for that,

I partially agree with David Stockhoff here.  Gurloes is
pretending to misunderstand because he has some reason
not to tell Thecla how her punishment works.  (Earlier
she asks whether he plans to explain whatever will be
used on her, and he says, "No, no, I wouldn't do that.")

I'm not sure what his reason is, though.  Maybe it's
some kind of politeness or consideration, as David
suggests, or maybe he's not allowed to, or it's part
of his pretense of being simple, or he's gloating over
his superior knowledge, or he's annoying her by
pretending to misunderstand in a way that makes her
look stupid.

> and Gurloes couldn't be answering that.
> 'had it done' doesn't mean have it done to yourself. One
> can say 'I had the roof done' or, 'My car broke down,
> so I couldn't go, you see';

It's a common phrase, though I don't like it.  I get
72,700 Google hits for "I've had my car break down" and
117,000 for "I had my car break down".  The ones I looked
at have no implication that the person wanted it to happen.

By the way, it's in character for Gurloes to use a non-
standard expression like that.  He says of the khaibits,
"when they're laying down" (VII).  Maybe this is part of
his pretense of being a "dull creature".

> in this case, Gurloes never having actually used the
> Revolutionary explains his reply best,

This may be one of those situations where different
people think different readings are obvious.

> and this also fits with the most-hallowed description.
> 
> > "I couldn't describe it" may mean he's not
> > allowed to; whether that's true or not, he certainly
> > knows as well as Severian what it does.  And I don't
> > think "the most hallowed of all" implies anything
> about
> > how often it's used.
> >
> > Jerry Friedman
> 
> 
> Hallowed things don't get used all the time. The Shroud of
> Turin is
> publicly displayed every decade or so; the relics of Aachen
> Cathedral
> annually; the Ethiopian's 'Ark of the Covenant' never.

But those things have no practical use.

> Not to mention, if they were routinely using it, wouldn't
> it be
> broken? The guns are headed that way, and guns seem more
> reliable than
> whatever the Revolutionary is - the relatively simple
> mechanical
> engraver is already broken beyond their ability to repair.

A piece of electrical equipment might well last longer.
And sometimes the things that don't get used break down.  (I
hope my turntable's ears are burning.)

> (I also searched through the 4 books; the Revolutionary is
> only
> mentioned 3 or 4 times after that, and always in a Thecla
> context.)

But that's true of Allowin's necklace and the kite, too.

Gurloes seems to use "hallowed" as a synonym for "old", which
tells us something about he (and Commonwealth people in
general) see things.  I'm not sure we can draw any
conclusions from it beyond that.

Jerry Friedman