(urth) Typhon's concessions

[Dan'l Danehy-Oakes]

...except, again, that we have auctorial statement that Jesus *is* absent
from the Solar universe.

That doesn't actually bother me a great deal, as I am inclined to "the text
is the text and the author has no privileged position in its
interpretation." But only inclined...

Dan'l Danehy-Oakes

When faced with two alternatives, I always like to choose the fourth.


On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:36 AM Marc Aramini <marcaramini at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have several textual reasons to really not like part of the interview
> with Jordan where Wolfe  goes all in on this previous cycle explanation.
> One is the universe has Lewis Carroll (direct quotes!), Theseus, the
> monitor and the Virginia, rudyard kipling, Marcus Aurelius, Christian
> missionaries, a Catholic Church with Christ voided syncretized with
> paganism, and most of all the key statement by isangoma that Agia and
> Severian are the results of the choices we make now, the ghosts of the
> future in a free universe. Also, in eschatology and genesis nod is told
> when he looks for the children of Adam and Eve that he is 50,000 years or
> so too late. Textually the emphasis on New Sun as our future is very
> present in Shadow and I feel that it is Just as present in Long and Short
> Sun with the statements about Allah and the unrecognizable figure of the
> goddess of purity on green (Mary, for those Catholics out there).
>
> Against that ... well, a flood. Time travel backwards exists in this
> world. If the cycles are this similar why have more than one? I really
> don’t think Jesus is absent at all in the solar cycle.
>
> On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually I think of the Solar Cycle as a *previous* cycle of the
>> Universe. This explains the "archaeological" approch in the BotNS
>> afterwords, and I believe that Wolfe would say that in a Universe _after_
>> ours, no Fall would take place because Jesus.
>>
>> This also explains things like Baldanders/Frankenstein: Mary Shelley
>> didn't premember Baldanders, it was a haunting from the previous Universe
>> cycal.
>> Dan'l Danehy-Oakes
>>
>> When faced with two alternatives, I always like to choose the fourth.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM <incanto at mtecom.net> wrote:
>>
>>> *I don’t know how much we want to insist that this scene has the same
>>> theological implications as Christ’s human triumph over temptation*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Agree. I think GW used his Catholicism as a template but created the
>>> Solar Cycle universe a "quarter turn" (who knows the exact geometry?)
>>> further and into a fresh creation. Thanks for this dialog.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Urth Mailing List
>>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20180905/cf518271/attachment.html>