<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=crushtv@gmail.com
href="mailto:crushtv@gmail.com">James Wynn</A> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">On
11/10/2011 4:07 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:B95E7C4BB54A489F9CCC49FC77415C2E@Rover type="cite">
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">And
while Mamelta was a bit out of it during her time with Silk, she was fresh
from Urth, at least in her own mind. If the Whorl had gravity much less
than Urth-standard, she’d surely have noticed.</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none"> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">It’s
possible to argue around these things, but surely they make an initially
unlikely hypothesis recede further in the direction of
impossibility?</DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>> Actually, I would think the fact that she could stand at all after
300 years of immobility </DIV>
<DIV>> would (if anything) suggest that the gravity on the Whorl was much
lighter than Urth's. </DIV>
<DIV>> If one has decided to argue against an explanation, a
"failure-to-mention-something" </DIV>
<DIV>> will always be close at hand. It is not the lowest level of literary
criticism, but it is </DIV>
<DIV>> below the median. It's surely the least most boring.<BR></DIV>
<DIV>Like I said, it’s possible to argue around it. You can ignore the
fact that lots of people travelled from Blue to Green and nobody mentioned that
their weight tripled, you can ignore the fact that Mamelta and Marble (and
Quetzal?) don’t mention it, you can ignore the fact that soldiers talking about
artillery don’t mention it, and that the lander monitor doesn’t mention it when
asking them to choose a destination. You have to desperately ignore that
Gene Wolfe clearly doesn’t intend to mention it despite dozens of
opportunities.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And then again, I think it’s a little bit unfair to criticise me for using
negative evidence to evaluate a theory that doesn’t really have any positive
evidence and is pretty much impossible to boot.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Gerry Quinn </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>