(urth) Horn's ability

[Lee Berman]

>Jerry Friedman:He hasn't said that, but certainly questioning why people 
>don't agree with you is rude, as if they couldn't have a rational reason.  
>And if one were to go farther and suggest psychological obstacles to people's 
>agreement with one's theories, that would be rude and annoying whether one's 
>guesses were right or wrong.  I'm glad Lee didn't do that.

Well, yeah, of course. It make perfect sense to me that this Father Inire stuff
might be questionable to anyone. It is pretty bizarre. But some people are 
interested in it and they ask me questions about it and I answer. 
 
My only confusion would be on why Gerry feels the need to express his disagreement 
again and again after every post, for two or three years now.  Who doesn't know, already, 
that Gerry Quinn doesn't like the Father Inire theory?
 
But, as you suggest, his motivations are none of my business and I can ignore his posts as 
easily as he could ignore mine. Apparently there is some mutual interest in each
other's ideas after all ;- ).
 
>I thank people for looking at these theories, as I'd never have noticed on my own that 
>the cowled servant or the jungle guide could be Inire.

Yes, that is my attitude also. When I was on my own with Wolfe, I thought the cowled
servant was the only cameo appearance and that it was just a cute literary peek-a-boo.
 
But in reading Borski's book I found his arguments for numerous other (though not all) 
appearances of Inire to be rather compelling. OTOH, I found his Inire + Cumaean= 
Mr. and Mrs.Moses interpretation to be sorely lacking, which is what drove me here. 
But it was he who got me thinking and looking and I owe him an eternal debt for that.
 
Perhaps the Father Inire theory has allowed other people to look into nooks and crannies
of the story and find previously undiscovered trains of thought. I do notice a general
perception of the pervasive gnostic undercurrent in the Sun Series which was not present
a few years ago.
 
But other people's thoughts and theories are their own. I don't much believe in Roy C. Lackey's
recognition of an "accepted lupine gospel" that we all must adhere to. Nor do I think the
pursuit of such a thing is fruitful. I think reading a book is a unique experience for each
reader. If there is enough overlap of understanding with other readers that discussion may
occur, that can be nice. But the individual understanding and experience is always what is
most important. We read alone.