<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<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=dstockhoff@verizon.net
href="mailto:dstockhoff@verizon.net">David Stockhoff</A> </DIV></DIV></DIV>
<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
12/15/2011 9:57 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:<BR><BR>> > That’s not what I’m
saying at all. I’m saying that fairy-tale logic <BR>> > seems to work in
the region of 0%. That’s the opposite of one-to-one <BR>> >
correspondence.<BR><BR>> That's exactly what I said. It doesn't work for you
100%, so it's a <BR>> total failure. You see zero correspondence. But I'm
also addressing the <BR>> fact that you use the 100% correspondence test at
all, while not <BR>> allowing others to do so even
experimentally.</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">I
*don’t* us a 100% test. I explicitly brought up the idea of gradations in
the degree of correspondence. The point I making is that the supposed
fairy-tale correspondences that have been mentioned do not seem to be, to put it
mildly, very high grade.</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>> > > You'd have to be blind not to see it. Terminus Est
DOES have "magic"<BR>> > > powers that are clearly defined in the
text.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>> > What powers?<BR><BR>> I'm sorry, I thought you had read
"the text." Did you not know about the <BR>> sword's "magical" provenance and
construction?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have read the text. The sword was Palaemon’s – it is an
executioner’s sword. It is valuable, made by a famous weapon smith of the
Commonwealth. It is fit for its purpose, with an ingenious and expressly
technological weighting method to aid with decapitations. The inscription
‘Terminus Est’ provides an appropriate pun for its purpose, and is also an
appropriate reference to Severian’s destiny.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>However, it has no obvious magical or even “magical” powers; the only time
we might ascribe such things to it is when Baldander’s energy mace is shattered
(as is the sword) in striking it. The only fairy-tale-like element,
really, is the sword being there for use at the right time; and it’s hard to
think of any story involving adventure that such things don’t happen. We
might wonder whether previous Severians got smashed by Baldander’s mace.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It’s a hero’s sword more than a magic sword, IMO. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> > What does a purported correspondence between Dorcas and the
Sleeping <BR>> > Beauty tell us, or add to the story? Dorcas was under no
enchantment, <BR>> > Severian did not set out to find her, there was no
wall of briars. She <BR>> > was beautiful, she got resurrected – that’s
not enough to equate the <BR>> > stories.<BR></DIV>
<DIV>> And what do you mean, "Dorcas was under no enchantment"? Did you read
<BR>> the book?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes. To what enchantment do you refer? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> > > Fairies live underground in barrows, just like the
House<BR>> > > Absolute, indicating otherworldly power.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>> > And that’s nothing to do with anything. Man-apes live
underground. And <BR>> > miners. And worms. And who says all fairies live
underground, or that <BR>> > fairies correspond to kings? You can’t just
point to a random <BR>> > correspondence and claim it is significant. You
need correspondences <BR>> > with meat on them.<BR><BR>> If you don't
know fairies live underground, then you know nothing of the <BR>> topic upon
which you so boldly discourse.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I know some fairies live underground, as do some men, and some other
creatures. Are you saying that all fairies live underground? Pardon
me if I ask for a reference. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And even if all fairies live underground, I ask again, how does this
constitute a significant correspondence with the House Absolute?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>> > All I’m saying is that if you want to make a viable case for
fairy <BR>> > tales, you need to do more than say there is a girl in the
story who <BR>> > was dead, which is a bit like being under an enchanted
sleep, and she <BR>> > looked okay, and therefore it’s about the Sleeping
Beauty. Buffy the <BR>> > Vampire Slayer was also pretty and blonde and
dead and got resurrected <BR>> > – so was Series 6 of Buffy about the
Sleeping Beauty too? No more so <BR>> > than BotNS, in my opinion. It’s
too easy to find endless random <BR>> > coincidences of that sort in any
large work.<BR><BR>> All you're saying, Gerry, and with as much eloquence and
force and <BR>> conviction as you can muster, is that you're an illiterate
know-nothing. <BR>> This is the entirety of your argument, and it is
overwhelming.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>All you are saying here, David, with all the bluster and pomp you can
summon, is that you have no answer to the point I have raised. Let us
suppose every story to be a thread in a large multi-dimensional space of story
elements. A couple of points on the thread of Dorcas’s story lie
relatively close to a couple of points on the Sleeping Beauty thread, where
‘relatively close’ includes ‘dead’ as being close to ‘under an enchanted
sleep’. As I’ve pointed out, we could find many similarly close threads in
all kinds of works; I just mentioned an example at random.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We could even find more examples in BotNS! Does Valeria not also have
some correspondences to Sleeping Beauty? And what about Typhon?
Shall I waffle on about how in the Typhon scene Wolfe mashes up Sleeping Beauty
and Beauty and the Beast, with Severian taking the part of the Prince in the
former and Beauty in the latter?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Getting back to Dorcas: suppose you argue that even though the
correspondence is weak, it is of some significance. Then it should enhance
our understanding of the story in some way other than just being there. In
what way do you think it enhances it? What does it tell us about Dorcas or
Severian or events? I can’t think of anything. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There has to be some element of rigour in the analysis even of fairy-tales,
otherwise we just end up with a silly jumble of so-called correspondences and
allusions based on nothing but noise. No, we will never get 100%
correspondences – but 1% so-called correspondences are worthless.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Gerry Quinn</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>