(urth) lupine intention

[Lee Berman]

>Jerry Friedman:Of course, this led me to the wrong conclusion (that there were never any abos
>or Shadow Children), and when I learned I was wrong....

Jerry, I've noted there was a significant cadre in your camp before the Wolfe interview came
to light. I assume it is WOlfe's words that made you decide you were "wrong". A couple
conjectures:

What if Wolfe had never said that in the interview. Then your theory of no abos/shadow children
would be just as valid as the others floating around (one, some or all humans on the planets have
been replaced). Right? You are as an intelligent person as anyone else here, so sans interview
the evidence you found for your theory is as valid as anyone else's. Right?

But Wolfe did say those words. So, whether by accidental blurting or by carefully plotted manipulation
we have learned something: Wolfe does have a "right" answer in mind for at least some of his puzzles.
(actually he has said as much in other interviews though he also says many answers are meant to be
indeterminate).

If it was by carefully plotting, I think he meant to tell us that on the mysteries with an intended
solution, the right conclusion is usually going to be the one which is the creepiest, the most outrageous
and fantastical. Sort of ("sort of.." I say) like an anti-Occam principle.

In the real world I am a very skeptical, practical sort of person in understanding the world. But with the
above I feel I was taught a lesson about how to understand the lupine universe. In a way it makes sense. I
am not an author but I would think it would be a HELL of a lot more fun to write an outrageously creepy story
and disguise it as mundane than to write a boring, mundane story and disguise it as horrific.

This is the reason I always seek out the most fantastic answers to Wolfe puzzles and never sneer at amazing
surprising stuff when proposed by others. I just have the sense that I have been instructed to do so by the
author. And I find there are grains (and boulders) of truth in almost everyone's thoughts.

Some attempt reductio ad absurdum on wild theories by implying that if such a theory is considered possible
then ANY theory must be considered possible because all theories are then rendered equally crappy swill or
whatever. 
 
For my part, if someone suggested a theory that was so wild it seemed to have no validity at all, I'd either 
ask a few questions or decline to comment. This rarely happens. I see intelligence, lupine familiarity and 
thoughtfulness in virtually all theories which have been proposed in recent times. I wish everyone could see 
that.