(urth) Ceryx (answer to Lee)

[Lee Berman]

>Sergei SOLOVIEV:  To me, in Wolfe's books is very important the brilliant rendering of 
>human psychology and human existential problems. The presence of aliens, miracles, strange
>world serve this purpose. What you are trying to do, is to transform  everything
>into myth about demi-gods, aliens etc and if you push it to the extreme, it will
>have for me no human interest.
 
This is a very personal objection to my view, Sergei and I respect it. I wouldn't try to 
diminish your enjoyment of Wolfe's work by insisting my view is in any way superior to 
yours or others.
 
I will say this. I spent quite a few years enjoying BotNS simply as a wonderful SF/Fantasy 
story and a pleasant excursion within the thoughts of a passably bright heroic figure who
only partially understands what is going on around him as he engages in a series of planetary 
and cosmic adventures. But I always felt there was more to it, which is why I came to this 
List.
 
The ideas found here and in a study of Gene Wolfe interviews have also lead me to view the 
story from a psychological perspective. But not my personal psychology nor some generic
view of the psychology of all humanity.  Aside from my initial enjoyment of this story, my
interest is very specifically in the psychology of Gene Wolfe. What motivated him to write
this story (and others) the way he did? Though I don't expect all other to agree with my 
conclusions, I think my posts are best interpreted if my true goal is understood.
 
My broad conclusions are that Gene Wolfe is a very religious man, but not in the traditional
Catholic sense. I think he (like Rudesind) is an advocate for the dead, meaning that he 
considers the ancients to have been just as smart and aware of reality as we are today. Thus
the mythology of the past was simply the best way our ancestors had to describe their world
and our current religions (including Catholocism) are neither better nor worse than Greek or 
Norse mythology in describing cosmic/divine reality. Thus the pagan gods are, in some sense, 
real.
 
I believe (again, from interviews) that Wolfe did not intend Urth to be Earth but rather sort
of a parallel place a..."gnostic parody of Earth" is how David recently put it.  A place where
there was no Jesus, resulting in the primacy of mythological sorts of beings rather than 
Christianity. I think it is meant to be unclear whether Earth legends of people like "Typhon" 
are the result of earthian analogs or the leaking of mythology from Urth to Earth. Doesn't 
matter. They are real somewhere.
 
Does it diminish human psychology and experience if we find there are longer-lived, more 
powerful, more intelligent, more sighted, perceptive beings than we? I don't think so, nor does 
Wolfe, I think. It isn't that "aliens" have no psychology. But rather that their thinking is 
both too different and too superior for humans to grasp. I think we get enough conversation from
Inire, The Cumaean, B, F and O, and Tzadkiel (and The Mother, and Neighbors and Inhumi) to grasp 
a bit of their psychology.  But if the idea ruins BotNS for you, then it is an idea you should 
scrap.
 
 
Okay, specifics objections-
 
>Sergei: Look - the old guy looking for Cas is interesting because it is a poor old guy, living in 
>a slum and looking for his lost wife and love all fifty years or so. If he is father Inire in 
>disguise - it is not interesting.

Well, tastes differ. The Gene Wolfe quote below suggests to me that it would be interesting to him
 
>GW: in fact there is one place in the Acts where Paul and another one of the apostles are mistaken...
>for Zeus and Hermes in human form because people in those days expected that you could see Zeus and 
>Hermes in human form. I am not so sure they were wrong. I am not convinced that they were wrong. We 
>love to think how much smarter we are than people of ancient times or biblical times or so forth but 
>I am very dubious about that.
 
 
>Sergei: The Old Autarch is interesting because he is a weak old guy castrated by aliens and he suffers. 
>He failed as a representative of Humankind. He would be not interesting, if he would himself be an alien.
 
The failure of the old Autarch is never really explained. He seems be everything Severian is: a servant to
the Throne elevated to Autarch, he has the memories of all the previous Autarchs, he is a kindly and decent
good-hearted guy. He fights the Ascians, he cooperates with Father Inire. Why does he fail?
 
My explanation is that he is too human to be the New Sun. To be the New Sun one needs a super-human
capacity for energy, which Severian shows. And one needs to be both Son of Man and Son of God(s). A
half-breed as I think Severian, like other Conciliators of legend, is.

>Sergei- And with all his (Inire's) power he cannot find Dorcas (who, as you believe, was his wife!).
 
No. Just the opposite. I think Inire knows exactly where Dorcas' body is. He has arranged this meeting
with a purpose. No accident that another seeker of dead bodies is also there (Hildegrin). Of all the 
thousands of bodies which might float up and be resurrected by Severian, the one that arrives
is Dorcas? Not a coincidence. What I think Inire (like Ceryx, like Tzadkiel even) cannot do is a true
resurrection. That power is reserved for a Christ-figure. And I think Inire hopes to both use Severian's
nascent power of resurrection on his long-dead wife and to learn how to use it himself.