(urth) Typhon's concessions
marcaramini at gmail.com
Wed Sep 5 09:20:00 PDT 2018
Whereas I believe in the absolute authority of the author and the terrible
lies and misdirections of his interview habits. What a dilemma!
On Wednesday, September 5, 2018, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com>
> ...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>
>>> 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
>>> 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...
More information about the Urth