(urth) The mystery of the image of an astronaut cleaned by Rudesind

[António Pedro Marques]

Lee Berman wrote:
> D.S.>Is there anything monkeylike about noses touching chins?
>
> I did previously post this pic of a proboscis monkey

Well, I bet for almost every family of mammals you have members with 
proboscides.

> http://smackamack.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/proboscis-monkey-adult.jpg
> Might look a bit like Rudesind.

I honestly don't think Rudesind looks like that at all.
Rather like this: http://www.galleryoftheabsurd.com/2006/05/celebrity_optic.html

> Here is one of the S. American uakari which makes a notable appearance
> in BotNS
> http://www.konicaminolta.com/kids/animals/library/field/img/bald-uakari_img01-l.jpg

I don't see a nose touching a chin here.

> I could see Wolfe getting the inspiration for Father Inire's
> appearance from one of these critters. I note that both these
> monkeys have reddish hair. As did the Russian/American painter
> Nicolai Fechin. (self-portrait with paintbrush http://www.bpib.com/illustrat/fechin3.jpg)
>
> I think it truly could all be unintended coincidence. But since
> Wolfe took seven years to produce BotNS I can't rule out that he
> used some of that time to interlace the story with such nearly
> imperceptible connections all intersecting at Father Inire. I
> just consider it a very interesting possibility. 		 	   		

But what's interesting about it? That's what I've been asking all along.

And where's the coincidence?

- Rudesind's nose touches his chin.
- Are you claiming Fechin was a monkey? Last time I checked he was a russian 
human being.
- FI is said to have monkey-like features and the one time we actually see 
someone who is all but introduced as FI, he's... a creature that looks like 
a monkey. Not some subtle red-headed person.

You only see coincidences because you want to. As Horn or someone said, 
everything is connected to everything else. By lowering the bar for 
connectedness as has been done here, one can find coincidences everywhere. 
But the 'incidence' part of the coincidences is entirely of yallr own 
making. You are connecting dots that you have put there yourselves. That 
could be interesting if it lead to something, but to what does it lead? What 
does it mean if Rudesind is FI instead of an agent of FI or someone who just 
happens to be there? It actually impoverishes the story.

You're perfectly within your right to think the way you do, and 
congrtulations if it makes the book mor enjoyable to you, but what I'd 
honestly like to know is the value it brings to the reading. Don't tell me 
it explains a lot of coincidences or it's a thematic thing - a story with 
disjoint motivations is better than one in which everything derives from 
some central intension. The story gains nothing from Rudesind being FI, it 
loses. If I sound harsh, it's unintended: I really wish someone would say 
what would be gained if such speculations were correct.

On a related note - what's the deal with saying, for instance, that 'Ultan 
is Borges'? Does it mean Ultan's grandmother was english? That Ultan wrote 
Evaristo Carriego or Facing Moon or the Book of Sand? It's one thing to say 
Ultan is a homage to Borges or an echo of him, but let's not be carried away.