(urth) Patera Incus

[Roy C. Lackey]

James Wynn quoted and wrote:
> > On top of that, Incus is evidently homosexual, which makes
> > his mission even more ironic. He obviously dares not sign the note, so
the
> > _Myself_ is his way of communicating who wrote it. The other contents of
the
> > note impart enough information for Fulmar to understand who the Myself
is --
>
> Then why include "myself"?

It's "your poor coworker Myself,". The coworker part distinguishes Incus
from Bittersweet or any other invited guests, if any. It had been Incus who
had worked with Fulmar to alter Fulmar's chem valet.

> >> "You know, my friend, yet it might be more thoughtully be said that you
> >> cannot know, how much I have been looking forward to a _plain firsthand
> >> account_ of the marvelous adventures of our mutual acquaintance Bee.
Bee
> >> himself.
> > The _plain firsthand account_ refers to Incus's fervent desire to
witness
> > for himself Bittersweet's new technique, as indicated by his thoughts
right
> > before he first picked up the quill.
>
> The only parallel between the two letters is "myself" (which positively
> refers to Incus) and "himself" (which is a positive misdirection).
> Considering what Incus said in the first letter, "himself" refers to the
> same person.

"Himself" isn't used in the first note. There is no punctuation mark after
"Bee himself"in the second note. Incus just stopped writing at that point,
sure that Fulmar would be thrown by the male pronoun. If Incus believed
Fulmar not sharp enough to understand that "Bee" stood for Bittersweet, how
could he possibly expect Fulmar to unravel an oblique cipher, the purpose of
which was to communicate to Fulmar that his friend Patera Incus was in fact
a she? A cryptic note written in haste is hardly the time or means of
imparting such a bizarre and personal revelation.

> >> Incus thinks, "No, it would not do. Fulmar would be utterly thrown off
> >> the scent by _the male pronoun_." [emphasis mine]
> >> Question how does the male pronoun throw Fulmar "off the scent"? Off
the
> >> scent of what?
> >> Answer: Off the scent of the name _Bee_.
> > I agree with that sentence, anyway. Incus doesn't want to betray the
> > identity of a fellow black mechanic, so he writes "Bee" because that is
the
> > sound of the first letter in Bittersweet as well as the initial.The
masculine
> > pronoun was a further attempt to disguise her identity should the
> > note be intercepted. The altered handwriting was also an attempt to hide
> > Incus's identity, since Remora was familiar with his handwriting.
>
> But now there is no way for Fulmar to know who is writing the letter
> now. That was what was so important before, no?

Bittersweet was not mentioned in the first note, so the "coworker" served to
clue Fulmar in on which of the invited black mechanics wrote it. Bittersweet
is referenced in the second note as Bee, so the writer of the note had to be
another invited guest, but the note was left unfinished. Had it been
finished, Incus may have worked in a way to identify the sender, as he did
in the first version.

> > The first version of the note said what Incus wanted to say, as
indicated by his satisfaction with it, but was too risky. He abandoned both
notes in favor of delivering an oral message to Fulmar's chem valet.
>
> All this fails to address why an elaborate message was required in the
> first place. Incus could have just sent a note saying "I regret that I
> cannot make it tonight due to duties at work".

Incus makes it clear that he wanted to see with his own eyes exactly how
Bittersweet had tinkered with an old porter chem. Hearing about it wasn't
good enough, and he was bitterly disappointed.

A better point to address would be why Incus would use an elarorate message
to make such a personal revelation in the first place. In any event, Incus
did plan to personally deliver "a clear straightforward message" to Fulmar's
valet, and I very seriously doubt that the message to be delivered to a
valet had anything to do with a surprise revelation about gender issues.

> > I don't suppose it matters that masculine pronouns are used to describe
> > Incus in the list of  characters at the front of the book.
>
> No. That would be an utterly trivial argument. Maytera Marble is
> described as "she" in the list of characters in front of the book-- the
> prononun is strictly formal. She is not physically a woman.

Trivial? Then, by that logic, the chapter titles in SHADOW don't mean
anything either, in which case the face on the greasy coins can be
Tzadkiel's or anyone else imagined. No, Marble is not a human woman, but in
Wolfe's Sun Cycle chems are designated male and female and the pronouns just
come with the usage. That is a spurious argument.

-Roy