<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTikzo5aYhQTBfmXcjU5GRqgNq=t=JN5+YY4ox_pg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"> </blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Me-
while I agree
that there is an intended to connection between Spring Wind and Mars--
the connection between the terms March and Spring Wind is not nearly so
sweet as the alias for Juno and Rhea. The name has been retrofitted,
presumably for another purpose.[snip]
When I read all the names together, it tells me that Spring Wind is the
odd man out. There are other features of the story of Romulus's birth
that don't quite fit either. One must ask...why not?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Andrew Mason-
I think March is quite strongly associated with winds ('March winds,
April showers..'). Given the need to find a name for Mars which isn't
_too_ obvious, and fits in with 'Early Summer' and 'Bird of the Wood',
it doesn't seem too suprising to me.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Let me try to deconstruct just how much worse "Spring Wind=Mars" is
than the other two. June is ACTUALLY named after Juno and, assuming
you didn't have a parallel month, it could be literally translated
"Early Summer". Rhea Silvia could reasonably be literally translated
Bird of the Woods. The bird in question was ACTUALLY named for the
goddess. <br>
<br>
March comes in the Spring. That's it. It's sometimes described as a
windy month? Okay. But the name "Mars" is not in any way associated
with the WINDS of March. The character's name was not Windy Time or
Early Spring. It is Spring Wind. "WIND" is the relevant cognate.
"Spring" is the qualifier. In contrast to Juno and Rhea, Mars' alias
sucks. <br>
<br>
For Typhon, Wolfe could have logically gone with Great Wind (Chinese
"taifeng"). After all, typhoons come in Autumn as well. That would
have worked. But, as you pointed out Wolfe, wanted the name to be
connected to Mars. Thus "Spring Wind". Very nicely done. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTikzo5aYhQTBfmXcjU5GRqgNq=t=JN5+YY4ox_pg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Once again, Shere Khan to smilodon is a pretty tight fit. A god to
/merely/ someone on another planet? Particularly in a science fiction
story? Not so tight.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Not merely someone on another planet, but the son of the ruler of that
planet. And in any case, I don't think the word 'planet' is used; it's
a mountain beyond the shores of Urth, which to me conveys a sense of
mystery. During the first empire, when people were jumping between the
stars all the time, perhaps another planet wouldn't convey this sense
(though at that time, if we can trust Cyriaca, they weren't interested
in mythology anyway). But at a later period, where contact with other
planets isn't a regular thing, why not?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
In mythology, "mountain" typically refers to the heavens overhead.
Same with "tree" (which Wolfe refers to in Quetzal's story about Al
Lah and Aman). Anyway, Severian seems to strongly imply to Little
Severian that the mountain is another planet (a great rock in the
heavens), unless you think Hethor's slug came from another
dimension.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTikzo5aYhQTBfmXcjU5GRqgNq=t=JN5+YY4ox_pg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The Story of Frog is in chapters 17-19.
That's a lot of space given to a lark. And as a pure free associating
confabulation of myth and literature, it's not an especially good lark.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">I don't see it as just a lark. I am happy with the idea that it has
application to the events in the books; what worries me is the idea of
it as an encoded representation of those events, from which it's
possible actually to reconstruct them. We can't know in advance which
bits of it relate to events in the books and which don't - I can't
believe (and I don't think you're saying) that _everything_ in it is
an elaborate allegory of Typhon, so we have to guess at which bits
apply to him (or Severian, or whoever).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
No. This is an elaborate, rather occulted, _telling_ (not allegory)
of the deeds of the SON of Typhon. How do the sons of Typhon relate
to Severian? That's for the reader to figure out. <br>
<br>
I have no doubt in my mind that if Wolfe had written out this story
in plain terms, we would see a cognate for every little thing in
story. Because, essentially, the story is "true" even if Wolfe
didn't bother detail every little bit. I think it is impossible to
divine (from this particular novel) things like Spring Wind's
mother's real name or that of Bird of the Woods. Nor the name of the
planet where Typhon was born. That's not the point. Bird of the
Woods is a straightforward translation of the name of the mother of
Romulus and Remus and her role is no more significant than Rhea
Silvia's. <br>
<br>
HOWEVER that doesn't mean there wasn't a such a person as Bird of
the Woods whose circumstances were fundamentally as described. The
tone of the actual events would be different however, than the
telling. I reiterate: this is NOT a retelling of the story of
Romulus and Remus. Nor is it Kipling's Jungle Book story. Romulus
kills his brother. It was not his followers who killed him. And
Mowgli had no brother. The mythological elements that the reader can
easily recognize merely confirms that the mythology is "true" as
well. We recently discussed the Emerald Tablet here. <br>
<br>
"2. That which is below is like that which is above <a
title="Hermeticism">that which is above is like that which is
below</a> ."<br>
<br>
That concept is a subtle backdrop that reappears in Wolfe's fiction.
Or as Green put it in "There Are Doors":<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:AANLkTikzo5aYhQTBfmXcjU5GRqgNq=t=JN5+YY4ox_pg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I like the idea of these very ancient stories, going so far back that
their origin is lost - where we, the readers, can see their origin,
and also see how time has changed them. I think it would spoil them
rather to link them too closely to actual events in future history.
(In the same way I don't like the thought that Holy Katharine is an
actual character in the history of the Commonwealth; I think she is
the Catherine of Christian legend, her story having been preserved and
changed.)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, that's a philosophical issue. I can't convince you to change
your preferences. <br>
<br>
u+16b9<br>
</body>
</html>