URTH
  FIND in
<--prev V209 next-->
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 08:59:09 -0400
From: Ian Lamont 
Subject: (urth) Out of the office (was Re: Digest from  urth@urth.net)

--=====================_549860==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed


At 07:59 PM 8/29/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Message-ID: <000801c24ef0$d6dfbd60$ddf0c518@robertbo>
>From: "Robert Borski" 
>To: 
>Subject: Re: (urth) Crush's Page and Quetzal
>Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 19:12:56 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>         charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Reply-To: urth@urth.net
>
> > >Crush, have you met Robert Borski? You're both gifted with imagination
> > plus,
> > >and should have much to discuss.
> > >-alga
>
> > I've never met Robert Borski, although I enjoyed his recent Peace article.
>I
> > haven't to my knowledge met anyone on this list, although it is my desire
>to
> > go to WorldCon one day and put a few faces to the names here.
>
>(Extending a right hand blithely across the aether.) How do you do, Crush!
>
>I've never met anyone on the list either, although Nigel Price and I talked
>about getting together last spring; alas, while he was in the American
>Midwest, I was in Central Europe. That being said, however, I fear you've
>misread alga's comments, which were intended not as a suggestion that you
>and I actually meet, but that your work, like mine, is neither valid nor
>substantive, but rather falls into the realm of "fan fiction." Like me,
>you've apparently been "swimming with undines," thus your severe
>intellectual anoxia. Thank the stars she didn't call you my "partner in
>flakiness," like she did Prion (aka Sean Whalen), who promptly left the list
>after the tirade she leveled against him. And heaven forbid your work ever
>find acceptance elsewhere; I fear the six essays I wrote on Wolfe that have
>been published by The New York Review of Science Fiction have forever
>sullied its reputation (obviously Ms. Turner's essays on John Crowley were
>accepted by an editorial cadre in much more command of its critical
>faculties). In other words expect a certain amount of ridicule, scorn, and
>derision to your Long Sun exegeses by what is, thankfully, not a large
>contingent on the list; if you're extremely unlucky, however, as I've been,
>expect a fair amount of shrillness from you-know-who.
>
>Personally, I applaud your efforts. I don't agree with many of your
>conclusions, but rather than take a cheap shot at what has obviously been a
>labor of love, with a fair amount of scholarship  ("Those who have original
>thoughts, post; those who don't, carp"), I thought I'd ask you a few
>questions about your Hyacinth essay. According to you she's a chem. So does
>this mean that she fabricated the story about her father being a head clerk
>at the Juzgado? (Newt by my reckoning.) And again, is she lying (or
>implanted with false memories) when she tells Auk that her father is a
>"pig's arse"? And who is the woman described as her dead mother that
>Hyacinth sees at Mainframe? Nettle seems to know her (I've theorized
>elsewhere she's Lime), but wouldn't she have to be a chem--as must be her
>father? Simply put, are there really that many chems running around outside
>the military and the religious orders, and are they as prone and subject to
>toxic parenting as your average bios? Since you're speculating about someone
>whose life history does not end with SHORT SUN, you also need to read
>Wolfe's followup series because there's an event in there that makes your
>theory even lesss tenable. I won't spoil it for you; suffice it to say I
>don't think rust is the causitive agent.
>
>Robert Borski
>
>
>
>--
>From: "James Wynn" 
>To: 
>Subject: RE: (urth) Crush's Page and Quetzal
>Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:05:38 -0500
>Message-ID: 
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>         charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Reply-To: urth@urth.net
>
>Regarding essays at http://www.visualclick.com/~jwynn/GeneWolfe/LongSun/
>
>Robert Borski  said:
>I fear you've misread alga's comments, which were intended not as a
>suggestion that you and I actually meet, but that your work, like mine, is
>neither valid nor substantive...In other words expect a certain amount of
>ridicule, scorn, and derision to your Long Sun exegeses...
>
>My response:
>Unfortunately, I'm not so harassed by fraternal greetings and compliments
>that I can afford to exegete them when they come my way. I'll presume until
>textually proven otherwise that by "imagination plus" Alga meant merely
>"...plus imagination" rather than "...plus something-else-not-so-wonderful."
>As for receiving derision, I should HOPE to converse with someone who feels
>so strongly about the Long Sun series - that's why I published the essays on
>a website. So deride away! It's up to the derider however to engage me
>enough to respond. I purpose that no shots will be "cheap", I'll do all I
>can to see that they are hard won.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Robert Borski  said
>I thought I'd ask you a few questions about your Hyacinth essay.
>
>My response:
>I'm working on a response to your questions, but I can't finish until can
>check my sources. Still I've received a couple emails offline on the
>chem-Hyacinth theory that follow the same tack, and I'd like to respond to
>that "tack" first.
>
>First if people are responding off-list because they feel more comfortable
>for some reason, yet *really* want to discuss some point, that's fine. But
>if someone responds off-list to keep from *humiliating* me, their concern is
>misdirected. The purpose of this list, I would guess, is to exchange
>opinions.
>
>Second, no matter WHAT one believes about Hyacinth, her impressive bosom is
>bursting with lies and slight-of-hands about her *true* nature. As I say in
>"Thelxepeia's Mirrors," the Hyacinth citation is not really finished and
>won't be until after I re-read the books. I currently ONLY cite the clues
>that she IS a chem rather than explain the (IMO) mis-directions that she is
>NOT a chem. My conviction currently rests only on affirmative proofs. That's
>only half the ballgame, I know.
>
>Consequently,  while I think I allay certain general concerns like those Mr.
>Borski is asking. I can't really address specific problems like "if Hyacinth
>is a chem, how does she cry? or "then why is she CLAIM to be a junkie?" or
>"why does she stuff her face with nectarines?"
>
>At the end of Silk's discussion with Horn on the airship, Silk says of his
>reasons for trying to kill himself, "Isn't it obvious [after all I've told
>you]?" Well it isn't "obvious." It IS (to me at this point), however,
>inexorable. Still, I welcome all challenges to anything I've published on my
>site, including this. Just understand that I can't answer
>everything.....yet.
>
>Third, as to my need to read the Short Sun, I guess I will have to read this
>one if only to have the credentials to discuss Hyacinth. But I've paid
>enough attention to the Urth list discussion to know she's dies and there is
>some ambiguity as to how. This is not a spoiler for me because:
>Since Silk and Hyacinth are Apollo and Hyacinthus -- and there is more
>reason than just her name to suggest they are - it is necessary that Silk
>will directly cause her death - the only question is how.
>
>I'm inclined to disbelieve, though obviously without evidence, that the
>manner of her death insists that she's bio since every person whose brought
>this up, felt the need to supply other (less persuasive?) proofs. Unless
>there is blood all over the walls, it's hard to imagine that it will present
>in more difficult puzzle than why does she produce snot when she cries and
>why is her breath warm.
>
>Does the event in question take place in "On Blue's Waters?" I do have that
>one already.
>
>Curiously, I kind of expected my other (I thought) controversial theory,
>that Incus is a woman, to provoke at least as many challenges as Hyacinth's.
>I feel much on much better ground to defend it. Then again, perhaps I *have*
>defended it better since no one has yet offered a detailed challenge on
>that.
>
>A sole-proprietor in flakiness,
>-- Crush
>
>
>
>
>
>--
I am on vacation during the last week of August. I will get back to you 
after I return on Labor Day.

Thanks,

Ian Lamont
Assistant Web Site Manager
Harvard Alumni Affairs and Development Office
124 Mount Auburn Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Tel: (617) 495-8183
Fax: (617) 495-0521

-- 
--=====================_549860==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

At 07:59 PM 8/29/02 -0400, you wrote:
Message-ID: <000801c24ef0$d6dfbd60$ddf0c518@robertbo>
From: "Robert Borski" <rborski@charter.net>
To: <urth@urth.net>
Subject: Re: (urth) Crush's Page and Quetzal
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 19:12:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: urth@urth.net

> >Crush, have you met Robert Borski? You're both gifted with imagination
> plus,
> >and should have much to discuss.
> >-alga

> I've never met Robert Borski, although I enjoyed his recent Peace article.
I
> haven't to my knowledge met anyone on this list, although it is my desire
to
> go to WorldCon one day and put a few faces to the names here.

(Extending a right hand blithely across the aether.) How do you do, Crush!

I've never met anyone on the list either, although Nigel Price and I talked
about getting together last spring; alas, while he was in the American
Midwest, I was in Central Europe. That being said, however, I fear you've
misread alga's comments, which were intended not as a suggestion that you
and I actually meet, but that your work, like mine, is neither valid nor
substantive, but rather falls into the realm of "fan fiction." Like me,
you've apparently been "swimming with undines," thus your severe
intellectual anoxia. Thank the stars she didn't call you my "partner in
flakiness," like she did Prion (aka Sean Whalen), who promptly left the list
after the tirade she leveled against him. And heaven forbid your work ever
find acceptance elsewhere; I fear the six essays I wrote on Wolfe that have
been published by The New York Review of Science Fiction have forever
sullied its reputation (obviously Ms. Turner's essays on John Crowley were
accepted by an editorial cadre in much more command of its critical
faculties). In other words expect a certain amount of ridicule, scorn, and
derision to your Long Sun exegeses by what is, thankfully, not a large
contingent on the list; if you're extremely unlucky, however, as I've been,
expect a fair amount of shrillness from you-know-who.

Personally, I applaud your efforts. I don't agree with many of your
conclusions, but rather than take a cheap shot at what has obviously been a
labor of love, with a fair amount of scholarship  ("Those who have original
thoughts, post; those who don't, carp"), I thought I'd ask you a few
questions about your Hyacinth essay. According to you she's a chem. So does
this mean that she fabricated the story about her father being a head clerk
at the Juzgado? (Newt by my reckoning.) And again, is she lying (or
implanted with false memories) when she tells Auk that her father is a
"pig's arse"? And who is the woman described as her dead mother that
Hyacinth sees at Mainframe? Nettle seems to know her (I've theorized
elsewhere she's Lime), but wouldn't she have to be a chem--as must be her
father? Simply put, are there really that many chems running around outside
the military and the religious orders, and are they as prone and subject to
toxic parenting as your average bios? Since you're speculating about someone
whose life history does not end with SHORT SUN, you also need to read
Wolfe's followup series because there's an event in there that makes your
theory even lesss tenable. I won't spoil it for you; suffice it to say I
don't think rust is the causitive agent.

Robert Borski



--
http://www.urth.net/
To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to urth-request@urth.net
From: "James Wynn" <crushtv@HotPOP.com>
To: <urth@urth.net>
Subject: RE: (urth) Crush's Page and Quetzal
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 18:05:38 -0500
Message-ID: <PLEFLJEIBGPANKPDCAMPAEKECEAA.crushtv@HotPOP.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: urth@urth.net


Robert Borski  said:
I fear you've misread alga's comments, which were intended not as a
suggestion that you and I actually meet, but that your work, like mine, is
neither valid nor substantive...In other words expect a certain amount of
ridicule, scorn, and derision to your Long Sun exegeses...

My response:
Unfortunately, I'm not so harassed by fraternal greetings and compliments
that I can afford to exegete them when they come my way. I'll presume until
textually proven otherwise that by "imagination plus" Alga meant merely
"...plus imagination" rather than "...plus something-else-not-so-wonderful."
As for receiving derision, I should HOPE to converse with someone who feels
so strongly about the Long Sun series - that's why I published the essays on
a website. So deride away! It's up to the derider however to engage me
enough to respond. I purpose that no shots will be "cheap", I'll do all I
can to see that they are hard won.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Borski  said
I thought I'd ask you a few questions about your Hyacinth essay.

My response:
I'm working on a response to your questions, but I can't finish until can
check my sources. Still I've received a couple emails offline on the
chem-Hyacinth theory that follow the same tack, and I'd like to respond to
that "tack" first.

First if people are responding off-list because they feel more comfortable
for some reason, yet *really* want to discuss some point, that's fine. But
if someone responds off-list to keep from *humiliating* me, their concern is
misdirected. The purpose of this list, I would guess, is to exchange
opinions.

Second, no matter WHAT one believes about Hyacinth, her impressive bosom is
bursting with lies and slight-of-hands about her *true* nature. As I say in
"Thelxepeia's Mirrors," the Hyacinth citation is not really finished and
won't be until after I re-read the books. I currently ONLY cite the clues
that she IS a chem rather than explain the (IMO) mis-directions that she is
NOT a chem. My conviction currently rests only on affirmative proofs. That's
only half the ballgame, I know.

Consequently,  while I think I allay certain general concerns like those Mr.
Borski is asking. I can't really address specific problems like "if Hyacinth
is a chem, how does she cry? or "then why is she CLAIM to be a junkie?" or
"why does she stuff her face with nectarines?"

At the end of Silk's discussion with Horn on the airship, Silk says of his
reasons for trying to kill himself, "Isn't it obvious [after all I've told
you]?" Well it isn't "obvious." It IS (to me at this point), however,
inexorable. Still, I welcome all challenges to anything I've published on my
site, including this. Just understand that I can't answer
everything.....yet.

Third, as to my need to read the Short Sun, I guess I will have to read this
one if only to have the credentials to discuss Hyacinth. But I've paid
enough attention to the Urth list discussion to know she's dies and there is
some ambiguity as to how. This is not a spoiler for me because:
Since Silk and Hyacinth are Apollo and Hyacinthus -- and there is more
reason than just her name to suggest they are - it is necessary that Silk
will directly cause her death - the only question is how.

I'm inclined to disbelieve, though obviously without evidence, that the
manner of her death insists that she's bio since every person whose brought
this up, felt the need to supply other (less persuasive?) proofs. Unless
there is blood all over the walls, it's hard to imagine that it will present
in more difficult puzzle than why does she produce snot when she cries and
why is her breath warm.

Does the event in question take place in "On Blue's Waters?" I do have that
one already.

Curiously, I kind of expected my other (I thought) controversial theory,
that Incus is a woman, to provoke at least as many challenges as Hyacinth's.
I feel much on much better ground to defend it. Then again, perhaps I *have*
defended it better since no one has yet offered a detailed challenge on
that.

A sole-proprietor in flakiness,
-- Crush





--
http://www.urth.net/
To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to urth-request@urth.net
I am on vacation during the last week of August. I will get back to you after I return on Labor Day.

Thanks,

Ian Lamont
Assistant Web Site Manager
Harvard Alumni Affairs and Development Office
124 Mount Auburn Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
Tel: (617) 495-8183
Fax: (617) 495-0521
--=====================_549860==_.ALT--

<--prev V209 next-->