<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:F0460D9F70CB4425949F36BBC3259473@Rover"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: 'Calibri'; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-size: 12pt;">
<div>
<div style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline;
FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small;
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<div style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<div style="font-color: black"><b>From:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true" title="crushtv@gmail.com"
href="mailto:crushtv@gmail.com">James Wynn</a> </div>
</div>
> No. *According to the text* Silk saw *Oreb*. He only
doubted himself <br>
> based on the fact that "it made no sense" since Oreb
couldn't fly. Then <br>
> he collects a series of other rationalizations.</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">Gerry Quinn
wrote:<br>
In the darkness. In the faint skylight from a curtained
window. But he “saw” him so it must have been Oreb no
matter what absurdly contrived explanation we have to make
to justify it. That’s just silly literalism.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
"Silly literalism"? Is this sarcasm? Because taking a statement like
this from you as said earnest is really too much.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:F0460D9F70CB4425949F36BBC3259473@Rover"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: 'Calibri'; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-size: 12pt;">
<div>
<div> <br>
<div>> If none of your theories explains the second
Oreb (or the something that <br>
> looked an awful lot like Oreb flying out the
window) then they explain <br>
> nothing. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>A bird possessed by Mucor explains it, IMO. It’s the
best I can do at the moment.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Not even good enough for you, huh?<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:F0460D9F70CB4425949F36BBC3259473@Rover"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family: 'Calibri'; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);
font-size: 12pt;">
<div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now, how do you explain how a time travelling
one-eyed Rajan looks like a 70+ year old Pike?</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Having had posited a theory that Silk misidentified Oreb for an
alternate bird for which there is no foreshadowing or further
mention in the text, and having called it "silly literalism" to
imagine that Silk actually saw Oreb when he awoke and "saw
Oreb"....I don't know why you have a problem with it. Obviously Pike
looks a lot like an older Silk. He has long white hair like the
older Silk. The older Silk has been through it. So he has a few
less wrinkles. Big deal. Unless he pulled his eye socket open, Silk
would not have noticed the missing eye. So I don't get that
objection. For that matter we don't KNOW how old the Rajan is when
Silk sees him. Maybe he's spent 20 years on the Whorl by the time
Silk sees him. Night choughs are clearly long lived. <br>
<br>
</body>
</html>