(urth) Gummed-Up Works or Got Lives?

[David Stockhoff]

I just saw this...

On 12/16/2011 9:02 AM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
> *From:* David Stockhoff <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>
> On 12/15/2011 9:57 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> > > That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that fairy-tale logic
> > > seems to work in the region of 0%. That’s the opposite of one-to-one
> > > correspondence.
>
> > That's exactly what I said. It doesn't work for you 100%, so it's a
> > total failure. You see zero correspondence. But I'm also addressing the
> > fact that you use the 100% correspondence test at all, while not
> > allowing others to do so even experimentally.
> I *don’t* us a 100% test. I explicitly brought up the idea of 
> gradations in the degree of correspondence. The point I making is that 
> the supposed fairy-tale correspondences that have been mentioned do 
> not seem to be, to put it mildly, very high grade.

Sure. They're ALL 1% to you. Yet you dive in ....
>
>
> > > > You'd have to be blind not to see it. Terminus Est DOES have "magic"
> > > > powers that are clearly defined in the text.
>
> > > What powers?
>
> > I'm sorry, I thought you had read "the text." Did you not know about 
> the
> > sword's "magical" provenance and construction?
> I have read the text. The sword was Palaemon’s – it is an 
> executioner’s sword. It is valuable, made by a famous weapon smith of 
> the Commonwealth. It is fit for its purpose, with an ingenious and 
> expressly technological weighting method to aid with decapitations. 
> The inscription ‘Terminus Est’ provides an appropriate pun for its 
> purpose, and is also an appropriate reference to Severian’s destiny.

Technological. Yes. "Magical" too (note the notation). Huh.
> However, it has no obvious magical or even “magical” powers; the only 
> time we might ascribe such things to it is when Baldander’s energy 
> mace is shattered (as is the sword) in striking it. The only 
> fairy-tale-like element, really, is the sword being there for use at 
> the right time; and it’s hard to think of any story involving 
> adventure that such things don’t happen. We might wonder whether 
> previous Severians got smashed by Baldander’s mace.
> It’s a hero’s sword more than a magic sword, IMO.

No question. It runs against the cliche, but carries it through 
nevertheless. Just as Elric's sword marks, determines, and hurts and 
even betrays him, so does Severian's.

Interestingly, in _Viriconium_, a hero has a "plain steel sword." WIth 
all the Vancean technological "magic" of his world, this sword seems 
almost magical in its unmagicalness. But like any Elven blade, when it 
is broken it is forged anew, with no more powers than before.

I would call this a powerful "fairy" reference, but not a deep one. It 
echoes certain conventions and signals what the author is doing 
stylistically with the character and his world, but does not "reveal" 
anything deep about the universe. Why should it? How could it? No 
fictional universe is deeper than its author---something we might do 
well to remember.

>
> > > What does a purported correspondence between Dorcas and the Sleeping
> > > Beauty tell us, or add to the story? Dorcas was under no enchantment,
> > > Severian did not set out to find her, there was no wall of briars. 
> She
> > > was beautiful, she got resurrected – that’s not enough to equate the
> > > stories.
> > And what do you mean, "Dorcas was under no enchantment"? Did you read
> > the book?
> Yes. To what enchantment do you refer?

That which kept her preserved and asleep for some 20 years. (You can 
argue that this did not happen, and I agree. But then there are two 
narratives here, aren't there? And one of them is informed by various 
tales about preserving sleep underground, and women in lakes.)
>
> > > > Fairies live underground in barrows, just like the House
> > > > Absolute, indicating otherworldly power.
>
> > > And that’s nothing to do with anything. Man-apes live underground. 
> And
> > > miners. And worms. And who says all fairies live underground, or that
> > > fairies correspond to kings? You can’t just point to a random
> > > correspondence and claim it is significant. You need correspondences
> > > with meat on them.
>
> > If you don't know fairies live underground, then you know nothing of 
> the
> > topic upon which you so boldly discourse.
> I know some fairies live underground, as do some men, and some other 
> creatures. Are you saying that all fairies live underground? Pardon me 
> if I ask for a reference.

Again? Try the Mabinogion.
> And even if all fairies live underground, I ask again, how does this 
> constitute a significant correspondence with the House Absolute?

I already stated this. But to expand briefly, putting the House 
underground is not just explained---is not even primarily explained---by 
the threat of air/space attack, just as a threat from the sea 
inadequately explains the Wall.

What do you mean by "significant"? I'm getting the idea that your 
definition is fairly unique. BNS doesn't hold the secret of the 
universe, you know. Not everything discussed on this forum has to be a 
Key to a Mystery. If that's what you're looking for, you're not going to 
get high readings here.
>
> > > All I’m saying is that if you want to make a viable case for fairy
> > > tales, you need to do more than say there is a girl in the story who
> > > was dead, which is a bit like being under an enchanted sleep, and she
> > > looked okay, and therefore it’s about the Sleeping Beauty. Buffy the
> > > Vampire Slayer was also pretty and blonde and dead and got 
> resurrected
> > > – so was Series 6 of Buffy about the Sleeping Beauty too? No more so
> > > than BotNS, in my opinion. It’s too easy to find endless random
> > > coincidences of that sort in any large work.
>
> > All you're saying, Gerry, and with as much eloquence and force and
> > conviction as you can muster, is that you're an illiterate 
> know-nothing.
> > This is the entirety of your argument, and it is overwhelming.
> All you are saying here, David, with all the bluster and pomp you can 
> summon, is that you have no answer to the point I have raised. Let us 
> suppose every story to be a thread in a large multi-dimensional space 
> of story elements. A couple of points on the thread of Dorcas’s story 
> lie relatively close to a couple of points on the Sleeping Beauty 
> thread, where ‘relatively close’ includes ‘dead’ as being close to 
> ‘under an enchanted sleep’. As I’ve pointed out, we could find many 
> similarly close threads in all kinds of works; I just mentioned an 
> example at random.

You're comparing Buffy to Wolfe? Is there a question?
> We could even find more examples in BotNS! Does Valeria not also have 
> some correspondences to Sleeping Beauty? And what about Typhon? Shall 
> I waffle on about how in the Typhon scene Wolfe mashes up Sleeping 
> Beauty and Beauty and the Beast, with Severian taking the part of the 
> Prince in the former and Beauty in the latter?

Now you're getting it! Yes, Valeria is a princess in a tower. Typhon is 
a king sleeping under a mountain. But these don't quite work, do they? 
Hmm. Hmm. Maybe they aren't supposed to, quite. But given how little we 
know of Valeria, it's a sound pattern if not a solid data point. 
Whatever could it mean?

If you have serious thoughts about Wolfe and Disney, lay them out 
here---don't save them for your therapist.
> Getting back to Dorcas: suppose you argue that even though the 
> correspondence is weak, it is of some significance. Then it should 
> enhance our understanding of the story in some way other than just 
> being there. In what way do you think it enhances it? What does it 
> tell us about Dorcas or Severian or events? I can’t think of anything.

Of course you can't. This is like explaining color to a cave fish. Some 
things are best learned on our own.
> There has to be some element of rigour in the analysis even of 
> fairy-tales, otherwise we just end up with a silly jumble of so-called 
> correspondences and allusions based on nothing but noise. No, we will 
> never get 100% correspondences – but 1% so-called correspondences are 
> worthless.

I agree. When will you start? or at least leave others alone to do this?