(urth) Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod
David Stockhoff
dstockhoff at verizon.net
Thu Aug 12 19:01:37 PDT 2010
I don't know.
António Marques wrote:
>
> I don't think I'm confusing you, but I was under the impression you
> agreed here. If not, what's your view of
>
> 1) Who created the Hieorgrammates?
> 2) What's the 'multiverse structure'?
> 3) Is Urth Earth?
>
>> Do you have any thoughts at all about why the Hieromakers were
>> homologues rather than human beings, outside your interpretation of
>> Tzadkiel's speech?
>
> Homologues to Severian's race. My guess is that if *we* work hard
> enough, we'll be them. Not a matter of multiple futures; the fact that
> we may eventually be them doesn't change that we'll have to have all
> the hard work.
>
> As I said, I don't think strong conlusions can be had from the text or
> interviews. I have only the other considerations and as I see it the
> text kind of agrees with them. Urth just looks like an alternate
> rather than the real Earth.
>
>>
>> --- On *Thu, 8/12/10, António Marques /<entonio at gmail.com>/* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: António Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: (urth) Hierogrammates, Briah and Yesod
>> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
>> Date: Thursday, August 12, 2010, 4:28 PM
>>
>> DAVID STOCKHOFF wrote:
>> > Right here, giving reasons ...
>>
>> Which are no more real than their contraries.
>>
>> > I agree that the homologue interpretation is valid. I don't
>> see any
>> > confirming reason for it outside an analysis of Tzadkiel's
>> remarks. All
>> > there is, is pushing the explanation farther and farther away:
>> well,
>> > there's ANOTHER universe with ANOTHER race, and THEY created
>> YESOD, and ...
>>
>> Which actually is said in the text. Of course, the text may mean
>> otherwise.
>>
>> You and Lee seem interested in not having more than two universes,
>> Briah and Yesod. Others see little sense in that idea.
>>
>> Nor do I see where does youse 'Yesod is our universe' fit, unless
>> it's a parallel interpretation.
>>
>> > I think that the homologue interpretation is unlikely and the
>> identity
>> > interpretation correct for the reasons I have given, and is
>> supported
>> > according to the reasons I have given.
>> >
>> > Imagine a ghost story that ends, "The ghost was ... MYSELF!"
>> >
>> > Now imagine one that ends, "The ghost was ... some guy I never
>> met! Over
>> > there ... somewhere."
>> >
>> > Which one does Wolfe pick, over and over?
>>
>> This seems to me to fit into the 'I like this architecture better
>> than others so it is more likely' category. Certainly you're free to
>> think that way, but you'll have to accept it doesn't necessarily
>> constitute evidence for anyone else. I, for one, am simply trying to
>> make sense of the text, not of what I think the text should or
>> aspires to be. The fact that many people don't find your reading
>> convincing doesn't preclude it, but indicates that it is neither
>> universal nor obvious.
>> _______________________________________________
>
More information about the Urth
mailing list