(urth) Gender and creation myth

[David Stockhoff]

On 9/23/2012 10:15 PM, Marc Aramini wrote:
>
>
> --- On *Sun, 9/23/12, David Stockhoff /<dstockhoff at verizon.net>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: David Stockhoff <dstockhoff at verizon.net>
>     Subject: (urth) Gender and creation myth
>     To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
>     Date: Sunday, September 23, 2012, 5:59 PM
>
>     I'm just curious. Has anyone noticed that
>
>     (1) The Long Sun Whorl bears a number of systemic resemblances to
>     Eden, including gender-based naming systems
>
>     (2) The Neighbors presumably introduced the inhumi to the Whorl as
>     a sort of test, much like another well-known reptilian character
>
>     (3) The Neighbors withdrew from both Green and Blue, essentially
>     giving them to humanity to make their own (and in Marc's word,
>     "make better"?)
>
>     ???
>
> Also, note quetzal's tree planted on the Long Sun: man has climbed up 
> the tree, but has not yet climbed down it.
> From chapter 1 of Calde of the Long Sun
> "A god called Ah Lah bared Wo-man and her husband from the garden. ... 
> We seem to have lost sight of Ah Lah, by the way. ... No one ever asks 
> why the cobra wanted Wo-man to eat his fruit" ...
> "In order that she would climb his tree, Patera. The man likewise. 
> Their story's not over because they haven't climbed down yet."
> and later, thinking of the tamarind he planted: "Their parent tree, 
> nourished by his own efforts, was of more than sufficient size now, 
> and a fount of joy to him: a sheltering presence, a memorial of home, 
> the highroad to freedom. ... Even in this downpour the tree was safer, 
> though he could fly"
>
>

Passages which of course raise more questions . . . The "not yet climbed 
down" suggests that the wisdom sought by humans is attainable but is not 
yet attained or put to use. That's clear enough for the scene but not 
terribly enlightening.

I always thought of the woman/man in the tree metaphor as a sort of joke 
told in terms of human evolution, i.e., arboreal apes coming down from 
trees to walk on two feet. (Otherwise why twist Genesis to have BOTH go 
up the tree?)

But is Quetzal thinking of inhumu evolution and applying it to Genesis? 
Does this tell us more about how the inhumi evolved than about humans? 
(Marc, I know you're the guy to ask!)