<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=entonio@gmail.com
href="mailto:entonio@gmail.com">António Pedro Marques</A> </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 (08-03-2012 14:42):<BR><BR>> > The big problem I see with this
interpretation is not the interpretation<BR>> > itself but that Wolfe
mentions Jesus and yet seems to give no indication<BR>> > at all that this
is the interpretation he is promoting. Suppose you were<BR>> >
writing an alternate history where Hitler became a monk and WWII never<BR>>
> occurred. Would you gratuitously insert a clear reference (and old
piece<BR>> > of newsreel, say) to Hitler orating at a Nuremberg Rally,
while never<BR>> > ever making any reference to Hitler taking vows? To me
that seems<BR>> > analogous to what you are proposing as a ‘secret
history’ behind the<BR>> > Solar Cycle.<BR><BR>> I don't know that I
like to see *this particular* comparison between Jesus<BR>> and Hüttler. For
some reason I can't explain, I find that more offensive<BR>> than, say,
comparing religion to belief in the tooth fairy.</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
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"> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f5f5">I’m sorry you found it offensive. I
wasn’t trying to make a comparison as such, just giving an </FONT>example of how
one would not write an alternate history. Hitler frequently features in
alternate histories, and I selected him more or less at random.</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">Is
it so terrible to posit that Hitler might have been redeemed by faith,
though?</DIV><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma; BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5"><BR><BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>But aside from
that, I think Lee has a point. Taking 'our' Jesus for granted<BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>just because there
seems to have been *a* Jesus on Urth is legitimate but<BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>not
unquestionable. I find it unchristian to think the 'real' Church could<BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>have failed (but
of course that's a catholic view). Rather, either the Jesus<BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>was the same but
Humanity was fundamentally worse, or Humanity was more or<BR><FONT
face=Calibri><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>less the same but
the Jesus wasn't really Jesus.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f5f5">We don</FONT>’t really know it has
failed, though certainly it is a legitimate speculation. New Sun simply
doesn’t deal much with religion. In a previous post I suggested that
putting Christianity centre stage would be problematic because New Sun is based
on an SF conceit that to some extent mirrors the Christian story, with a
physical New Sun (technically, the old sun renewed I suppose) mirroring the
Christian promise of Salvation. </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f5f5"></FONT> </DIV><FONT size=3
face=Calibri></FONT><FONT size=3 face=Calibri></FONT><FONT size=3
face=Calibri></FONT>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma; BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5"><BR><FONT face=Calibri><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>Think of it - if God has already come
to this world and it still ended up <BR><FONT face=Calibri><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>the way Urth did, then what hope is
there of it ever becoming right, Ushas <BR><FONT face=Calibri><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">> </FONT></FONT>or no Ushas?<BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f5f5">Would you have argued the same
during the Roman persecutions? Christianity w</FONT>ent through a bad time
then and it might again. There are suggestions that Typhon may have done
something similar.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You might even argue that it would be *worse* if the Church were visibly
presiding over Urth in Severian’s time!</DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f5f5"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma; BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5"><FONT size=3 face=Calibri>-
Gerry Quinn</FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt tahoma; BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5"></DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>