(urth) Like a good Neighbor

[Lee Berman]

>Antonio Pedro Marques: But there's an intelligent, sound-minded bloke here 
>saying that he (Horn) died and never came back... 

Yes. So what to do with that? You can try to discuss the evidence you see that
Horn is still there. Perhaps he will see that he has missed some things and say 
he was wrong (heh. how often does THAT happen?). 
 
If he doesn't change his mind, the question has changed. It is no longer whether
Horn is gone or not. The question becomes, "why does Marc think he is gone". Review
his evidence. Perhaps you will see you have missed some things and say you were 
wrong. 
 
But if neither changes their mind then we have still all benefitted from the dialog.
We now all have access to all the relevant evidence that people see and we are free
to come to our own conclusions based on that full range of evidence.
 
The problem comes when some people insist on continuing the argument after this point.
 All the evidence is out there for review but some people still insist that they know 
the right way to interpret it and that other ways are simply wrong.
 
>A big problem in SS is that while the setting is much closer to us than in 
>LS - real planets, real people, real societies, real technology, instead of 
>the artificiality of most things aboard the Whorl - there are definitely 
>truly alien elements which we can make little sense of - Babbie, the Mother, 
>Seawrack, giant rays, the island of the pit, Neighbours, the Inhumi.
 
I think the whole Sun Series (and Soldier and Wizard/Knight, actually) has a sameness of
underlying message. That message does take on a different feel when put into different
packages but the continuity can be discerned. The relationships between gods, monsters
and humanity are similar on Earth, Urth, Ushas, Whorl, Green and Blue.
 
This does not imply Gerry is completely wrong to focus solely on the package and ignore 
the inner contents. Consider the creative process: Gene Wolfe's religious and social
philosophy are a part of him. He doesn't have to work hard to include them in his stories;
they flow easily and naturally from him.
 
The real work and effort Wolfe puts into his stories IS in the packaging. Gerry and others
are quite right to devote the majority of their efforts winnowing out the complex and 
detailed features of each package. I don't even consider it Gerry's mistake to ignore the
contents of the package. His mistake is incessantly telling others there is nothing in the
box and making fun of them and calling them names for seeing what is inside.
 
Of course Gerry is free to use such terms as "worst theory ever", "out to lunch", "purile",
"thoughtless", "drivel" etc. But does he have a valid right to complain when others are 
offended by such language and lash back? Nobody else (currently) talks like that. Why 
should Gerry get a free pass to do so?
 
*We are represented in here by our ideas*. Disagreement is one thing. Using derrogatory labels 
for other people's ideas is another. In here, that is a form of personal attack. I join Mo and 
Ryan and Antonio in their distaste for it and their denouncement of it.