(urth) This week in Google Alerts

[Dan'l Danehy-Oakes]

Craig Brewer wrote:

> In the end, I prefer it to be "a really
> long time" and not knowing exactly is a more appropriate sense of history
> that Severian has throughout most of the book. This is one of those cases
> where I prefer it when the "clues" don't add up to a consistent picture.

Man's got a point. Perhaps "when" is not one of the mysteries we're
intended to solve -- and really, other than satisfying our SF-nerd,
anal-retentive desire to nail everything down (to which I plead as
guilty as anyone), what difference does it make? Twenty thousand and a
few hundred million years are both (honestly) far enough into the
future that our minds can't really hold them. After all, if you go
only a few thousand years into the _past_ you're into the shadows of
myth and uncertainty.

-- 
Dan'l Danehy-Oakes