Vision Clash / Is the Goddess Just?

From: John Hughes <nysalor_at_primus.com.au>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 00:31:35 +1000


Heys folks

VISION CLASH / CHOOSE YOUR ERRORS WISELY The discussions of the last two weeks, (which could be characterised as Martin Laurie vs. the rest of the universe and himself) have impressed me in several ways. Some of the lessons are obvious, perhaps the clearest being, 'if you're in a hole, stop digging.' However, I do applaud Martin for raising the issue, and yes, I've very glad the issue is being discussed
*before* rather than *after* publication.

The central issue of fact (as opposed to feeling) - scholarly opinions on the Red Emperor's Masks and succession - are of little interest to me personally. I know that he's gonna fall and he's gonna fall hard, that the past is another country and the future is one heck of a thunderstorm. I mention this because I believe such an opinion might be fairly typical of a large minority of potential SGU buyers. 'Souls' I do have an interest in, because I'm playing around with parallel Heortling concepts. My concrete questions and comments below reflect this.

First however, my general observations. One is that Gloranthan scholarship is alive and well, and I mean *real* scholarship, thinking and creative assimilation, with an understanding for the entertainment as well as the mythological needs, not just dry grey sage repetition and referencing. Another regards the so-called 'fannish' TOTRM work. I found Chris Gidlow's explanation of the thinking behind the Soviet analogue fascinating. Whether or not you find the surface analogues useful (and its never been a single metaphor: elsewhere Nick has described the Lunar Empire as 'Graeco-Roman Byzantine Islamic Soviet Englishmen') you cannot fault the scholarship, the care, creativity and real *love* for Glorantha that have gone into the crafting of the various TOTRM visions.

The standards they set (and that David Dunham has set in KODP) are ones that all HW publications will be striving to match. I believe that there wouldn't
*be* a Glorantha today if it wasn't for the work of David Hall and the TOTRM
team: no rq Renaissance, no RQ/Gloranthacons, no KOS and no Hero Wars. At best it would be going the way of Empire of the Petal Throne. (I understand there are one or two list members familiar with Tekumal, but I've *never* met an Australian who has played it - even in the mid eighties).

Every 'fan' (Why the sudden pejorative connotations?) who has contributed to Glorantha has given their best and is proud of what they have created: this should be respected even in the most robust and cavalier of exchanges. In the same way, I didn't find MOB's comments about 'po-faced mythological journeying up Greg's bottom' particularly helpful, though I *do* understand his growing exasperation.

I guess the lesson that has really been driven home to me is that none of us can afford to work in isolation.

At one stage Martin compared his thinking to the philosophy of the dualistic baddies in a (superior) B-grade space opera. (All that exposure to myth and diverse spiritual tradition has obviously sunken in. :) ) I was surprised that he didn't use a more Gloranthan metaphor, one perhaps we'd be more comfortable exploring: Arkat. Arkat had a habit of tearing up worldviews and traditions and moving on to something different. Greg's self-identification as an Arkati is perhaps an acknowledgement of his own tendencies in this area: constantly reworking and fiddling with material, looking for another perspective and insight. Of course, Arkat was careful to *master* each tradition before moving on. And he's not remembered for making friends along the way. It's very much a case of choosing your errors wisely.

As for the Gloranthan perspective...

IS THE GODDESS JUST? There's been at least a partial failure of imagination here. Alex is the only person so far to try and expand the issues by burrowing down the levels. If we can get away from the tin soldier cults and top-down absolute answer stuff for a bit, what does all this guff about the Emperor and his masks *mean* to your typical Pelorian peasant? To what extent do the scholarly documents on 'parts' or souls reflect popular belief? How are such beliefs utilised? Do Lunars treat the discourse on souls as literally and as unpoetically as our own debate has thus far? (Just because myths are real doesn't mean myths aren't myths). Can normal people lose parts of their souls? What happens when they do? Can they get them back/regrow them? What are the scenario hooks?

And at the most fundamentally, what does this soul/reincarnation lore tell us about the Lunar view(s) of reality? Is the Goddess Just? What *is* the Justice of the Goddess? How does this reflect on the reality of human suffering? Can the Emperor err? What does it tell us about the Lunar concept of divinity? Is social status related to reincarnation? Is reincarnation for all, or just for the elect (the Moses and Elijah analogy)? What is the ultimate goal of the reincarnation cycle? What does it say about
*individual* survival? Is belief in reincarnation reflected in the justice
system? Will people remember past lives? What does it justify or condone or excuse? Does it encourage fatalism? Hedonism? What are the divinatory and cultic systems that have sprung up to predict or explain the geographical fluctuations in the Emperor's appearances? Have these systems been extended to other reincarnations? Might you go on a pilgrimage to find the rebirth of your father or mother? Etc. Etc. Etc.(I've just been reading John Dominic Crossan on one of our own central organising myths. Does it show?)

I always had the impression Greg's stuff was meant as a springboard, not as a rulebook.

BELL AND BEER STUFF Secret message to Alex:

Rapper dancing. RETIRED. Tyler's Oz, being mainly expatriate Tyler's Men (London) and Oz friends daft enough to get roped in. Cotswold dances, and Adderbury, Bampton, Bledington, Fieldtown Border: The Tyler's dances, from the borders of Greenwich and Lewisham.

We now return you to your usual program.

Cheers

John


nysalor_at_primus.com.au                   John Hughes
johnp.hughes_at_dva.gov.au

Relativism is an Absolute: there can be no certainties. There are at least four and a half correct explanations for anything. Everything you believe is only a prelude to initiation into gnosis. Arkat made but half the journey. Only baboons know the truth, and only Lunars are aware of this. Godlearner documents are memic land mines. Epistemology and ontology consciously arise only when cultures clash (and twice on Godsdays). Choose your errors consciously and wisely. Praxis before Doxis


Powered by hypermail