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

[brunians at brunians.org]

That is seriously a matter of opinion.

.

> So it wasn't a complete waste! ;)
>
> --- On Wed, 7/7/10, John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) The mystery of the image of an astronaut cleaned by
> Rudesind
> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
> Date: Wednesday, July 7, 2010, 1:25 PM
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 1:23 PM, DAVID STOCKHOFF <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "
>
>
> As for the (ultimately, failed) theory I built concerning Agia, I made the
> narrative implications very clear. That was indeed the point of the
> exercise---to take the perceived possibility of a connection between Agia
> and the doll and test it against the principle that it must add meaning.
> But it required making up too much stuff---more than it explained---which
> is a different principle entirely.
>
>
>  
> Actually, it at least gave me the insight that the "things" Agia "does"
> for Hethor probably involve lying very, very still...(shudder)
>  
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 7/7/10, António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) The mystery of the image of an astronaut cleaned by
> Rudesind
>
> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
> Date: Wednesday, July 7, 2010, 12:39 PM
>
>
>
> Tim O'Donnell wrote (07-07-2010 17:13):
>> From: Ant?nio Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com
>> <mailto:entonio at gmail.com>>
>
>>
>
>
> And that is precisely my beef with the drive to reduce characters to some
> specific trait that doesn't mean anything by itself.
>
> - Agia must be a robot because blablabla - but at a certain point, what is
> the relevance of her precise nature?
>
>
> - Rudesind must be FI in disguise because Fechin is a ranga - but what
> does that gain us?
>
> If there is a common theme in the GW works I've read so far - I'm not
> fortunate enough to have done significant rereading already - is how
> characters break free from their native, starting conditions. Trying to
> pin down exactly what those conditions are, and trying to come up with (or
> outright invent) a definite answer, as if it had in itself a deep
> significance, is in my view misguided - and harmful when it blinds the
> mind to the rest. Their precise nature may be explanative of something
> else, but I just can't see that it can be an interesting fact all by
> itself.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
>
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net