Swearing Kinna to secrecy, Fenn tells her that she must not say a word to anyone, not even to her parents, to her robot pet:
"'...or the wind.'" (p. 278)
The wind is becoming incorporated as a character.
To seal the secret:
"She made a curious gesture, right forefinger flitting from left to right shoulder, then from brow to breast.'" (ibid.)
Gestures outlast their origins.
"...Harpagus drew the sign of the cross, which was a Mithraic sun-symbol."
-Poul Anderson, "Brave To Be A King" IN Anderson, Time Patrol (Riverdale, NY, December 2010), pp. 55-112 AT 5, p. 77.
A neighbour made the sign of the cross when I informed her of another neighbour's death.
During a pause in their confrontation, we are told that Fenn and Kinna:
"...could not hear the Martian wind, and the dust devils afar spun in silence." (pp. 279-280)
Could not hear them? But wind and devils must have been in their minds or the text would not have mentioned such inaudible outdoor phenomena.
I have written more than I expected to this evening but with Poul Anderson that is always possible.
What was the secret? Read The Fleet Of Stars.
12 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Alas, Anderson erred having Harpagus making that sign of the Cross in "Brave to be a King." The origins of Mithraism was not as well understood in the 1950's as it became later. We now know Mithraism did not exist in the Persia of Cyrus the Great--it only took the form familiar to us several centuries later in the Greco-Roman era.
Ad astra! Sean
Yeah, Mithraism was a -development- of Zoroastrianism, but not the same thing.
Sounds like Judaism and Christianity.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I think of Mithraism as more of a spin-off of Zoroastrianism, with Greco-Roman stuff mixed in. I was also reminded of how Chesterton, in THE EVERLASTING MAN, had the most respect, after Judaism/Christianity, for Zoroastrianism, far more so than all other religions.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: well, Zoroastrianism was one of the first monotheisms.
I look on monotheism as a phase. Abrahamic traditions insist on monotheism as against polytheism, atheism or monism whereas contemplative traditions can be any of those options! In Hinduism, the ultimate reality can be He (or She for the Goddess) or THAT. I don't think it makes sense that the absolute can be a person (persons are relational) but many people do see it as that. We all practice what we believe.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling and Paul!
Mr. Stirling: Technically, Zoroastrianism is a dualistic faith, teaching a good God, Ahura Mazda is opposed by the evil god Ahriman. Functionally, however, Zoroastrians are monotheists, not believing Ahriman should be given any honor or worship. Of course you know that!
Paul: Judaism/Christianity was God's revelation of Himself to mankind. Only a Being, a Person, can be the Absolute. Thus, I dont believe in monism.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Why can only a Person be the Absolute? The Absolute is that which exists independently of any external relationships and therefore can only be everything, all that is. Thus, it incorporates all persons. A person is a self-conscious being and self exists only in relation to other, therefore cannot be the Absolute.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I looked up the long article about monism taken from the 1911-13 CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA at the New Advent website--and monism does not convince me. It seems to be just another form of materialism, which I don't believe in. I suggest discussing this with another philosopher, John Wright, at his blog. He is far more competent than I am with such issues.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Sure, monism is the belief that there is a single reality and, if we believe that that reality has become conscious, then we are materialists. Materialism, supported by empirical evidence that life has evolved and has become conscious, has to be given serious consideration, not dismissed a priori.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I don't believe in monism/materialism. Nor do I believe that they have been vindicated as you say. No, dualism makes more sense, as that article I mentioned also discussed. But Wright can discuss such issues far better than I can.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
You simply state that you believe one proposition and not another without giving reasons. Dualism makes no sense. A single organism is psychophysical. Its sensitivity becomes sensation - one of many qualitative transformations within the single reality.
Paul.
Post a Comment