(urth) Fwd: Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy

[Marc Aramini]

--- On Sun, 11/20/11, António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: António Pedro Marques <entonio at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: (urth) Fwd: Babbiehorn?: Was: a sincere question mostly for roy
> To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
> Date: Sunday, November 20, 2011, 7:34 AM
> No dia 20/11/2011, às 14:56, David
> Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
> escreveu:
> 
> > On 11/20/2011 9:50 AM, António Pedro Marques wrote:
> >> No dia 20/11/2011, às 13:53, David
> Stockhoff<dstockhoff at verizon.net> 
> escreveu:
> >> 
> >>> On 11/19/2011 10:01 PM, António Pedro Marques
> wrote:
> >>>> No dia 19/11/2011, às 21:03, David
> Stockhoff<dstockhoff at verizon.net>   escreveu:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On 11/19/2011 3:54 PM, Marc Aramini
> wrote:
> >>>>>> I was reading shakespeare today
> and the term huswife came up, and I realized it was just a
> form of house: I think Babbie is like a spirit house.
> >>>>> Considering the references to houses,
> and that Wolfe originally wanted to use the name "hushog" (I
> don't know who pointed that out), meaning house-pig, I'd say
> that case is nailed shut. And it strengthens your idea that
> What was left of Horn went into Babbie,
> >>>> It gets me a bit miffed that people keep
> repeating this in disregard to the fact that Hide takes the
> time to mention the Rajan looks more like Horn in (some)
> dream travels than in real life.
> >>> So why don't you point out the passages? I
> haven't gotten there yet.
> >> I'll give you some more time, then.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> > I guess I really don't understand when people get
> miffed at all. If you have counter-evidence or a
> counter-pattern in response to an identified pattern, voice
> it. Saying "evidence X strengthens theory Y" doesn't mean
> nothing else exists. I never said all of Horn is gone at the
> end of OBW and in fact have stated repeatedly that I think
> he is not all gone.
> 
> Marc thinks he's all gone and James thinks he was never
> there (fsvo 'was': apparently, sometimes James makes a point
> of saying he isn't there, others he makes of point of saying
> he is there in a way and it's all a bit cloudy anyhow).
> 
> _______________________________________________

Mostly gone, there is ALWAYS a residue after possession.  Now Silk is the dominant personality, but for all intents and purpose he has said goodbye and is only a memory in Silk.