More Consistency (or not).

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 01:59:46 +0100 (BST)


Carl Fink:
> From your point of view, Glorantha is literature. From a Gloranthan
> character's viewpoint, you can't say that.

But few Gloranthan characters worry about the sort of 'consistency' that you say vexes you. For them, the world _is_ consistent; it's just when you attempt to make it cross-culturally, or cross-viewpoint-ly 'consistent' than any problem arises. I gather your main concerns are the theistic cultures. For most of them, it gets not much more sophisticated than "we're right, you're wrong", with the occassion outbreak of mutual recognition, political detente, and mythic synthesis. For the mystic or the Westerner, things are very different. They do attempt to 'explain everything', though by very different means, and ones that basically eliminate anthropomorphised gods, so the issue of the gods 'saying' different things disappear entirely, those being errors in perception/wish-fulfillment projections/other. (One version of HQing for Malkioni had their fundamental tool for going so being Reduce; as in, you're not Elmal, rather there's simply a large ball of fire here, the sun, and I shall now manipulate it accordingly, as set out by the Laws.)


Powered by hypermail