Lunar genders, pt II

From: Theo Posselt <tposselt_at_dttus.com>
Date: 02 Mar 2000 22:31:44 -0600

     Ok, this reply is a bit late.  Hopefully it's not too terribly out of date.
     
     Going back to the Lunar discussion:
     
     I say:
     
     << Ok, take two at answering my own questions... everyone please 
     attack me!>>
     
     Keith says:
     

> Initial skirmish would be a comment that your point of view has a 'too
> modern' feel to it.
Definitely true. I have to admit, I have a real weakness for using my modern viewpoint when viewing Glorantha. You might notice how much I refer to RW analogs... sorry for the paucity of imagination. John Hughes said: << For Lunars, sex is both sacred and profane. What Pelorian noble would journey without a fellatrix in his personal retinue? >>
> < Keith criticizes >
I should note that all the remarks within <<>>, like the comment above, were from John Hughes' orginal description. Sorry for any confusion I created. John: << LUNAR SEXUALITY>> Keith:
> I do not believe that their is a 'Lunar' culture anywhere in Peloria
> that's values are represented in the society as you describe it.
> Therefore while:
John:
> "Only a person who has balance is truly healthy. Androgyny is
> encouraged."
Keith:
> may be a valid Lunar POV for an individual, I do not believe that
> this POV would exist in a generally accepted and culturally dominant
> form. I do not think there is a city in Peloria where an outsider
> would say "oh yes, these people think encourage androgyny " but
> rather "in some cities of Peloria some people believe that androgyny is
> good"
Again, the remark that you're responding to in quotes above was John's... however, for me it makes sense, so I'll defend it. My basic view would be that Lunar/Solar cultures I've described represent extremes of views within the empire, or at least within Dara Happa - essentially the liberal/conservative split. It's a continuum, of course, and perhaps the labels are wrong, but to me it makes sense that the impact of the Lunar way on the patriarchal, repressive system of traditional Dara Happa would be to produce this sort of relatively freethinking viewpoint. On the other hand, as someone else said, it makes sense that there aren't clearly distinguished geographic separations. But there might be areas that are seen as more Lunar - Glamour, for instance - or more Dara Happan (Alkoth?), just as within any country there are conservative and progressive regions.
> I also do not think the Lunars are into restricting anything. They
> are inclusive afterall. Thus the 'Lunars' would not restrict kissing
> or public groping but (subgroups such as Dara happan, carmanians, yanafal
> tarnilsites) would
Yes, I agree... but I think the Lunar way would be to enforce, or at least recognize, the restrictions that the subgroups put on their members. So for example Lunar law would delegate authority on certain matters to the subgroups. Clearly the YT's would be bound by military law; in the same way a carmanian would be judged by the viziers (?) and the dara happan by the city judges. So the Lunars in themselves aren't very restrictive, but they do allow and support a lot of restriction. As far as I can tell, this is how all the multi-national ancient empires worked - excuse the RW analog again. Jews in first century Roman-ruled Judea were governed by the Sanhedrin; Christians in the Turkish empire had their own laws in force; etc. At the same time, though, I believe that there's an oligarchy or an aristocracy that mostly floats above such subgroup restrictions. For them (the major merchants, powerful bureaucrats, etc), they are only bound by the core Imperial laws - obediance to the Emperor, respecting the rights of equals - but not much else. This group would be the most 'Lunarized', in the way that I put forward in my original message. Regards, Theo ------------------------------

Powered by hypermail