Horses, humans -- though not yet centaurs.

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 22:07:42 +0100 (BST)

Greg:
> >I don't have my copy of the Roster to hand, but are you saying that
> >"animist horses" are one species, and "theist horses" are another?
>
> Yes, absolutely.

And can't (or don't) interbreed?

And the difference between, say, Yelmic and Rendelan horses, are of a lesser order (if they exist at all)?

> >Incidentally, how come no-one has mentioned centaurs, by that token?
>
> >I was curious as to whether that was indeed someone's bugbear, and if so,
> >whose. Thanks. If this isn't true of _humans_, though (or bears, or
> >whatever else), I must say I find it hard to "get" the importance of
> >this.
>
> It IS TRUE for humans as well. Different human peoples come from different
> Otherworlds. I thought that was clear, too.

I do hope you're not about to tell me that Warerans and Kralori are different species... Even people whose origin myths come from the _same_ otherworld, can in many cases have very different mythic origins, come to that. But it doesn't seem to make them terribly "inherently" different, on all evidence to date. They can still practice magic of a different "system" from that of their parents, for example. (Uh-oh. Impending magical nature vs. nurture debate...)

This still doesn't strike me as being at all similar to the "all bobcats are associated with animism, and all alynxs are associated with theism", unless the situation is _nothing at all_ like RW biology.

Trotsky:
> Not that it's an unreasonable question, I grant you. I suppose its
> possible that the Vanchite god saw Lotara's racoons, and decided he
> wanted to make some of his own. That way there *is* a mythic link (even
> if its not openly acknowledged by the Vanchites) but the creatures and
> their creators are still quite separate as entities.

You seem to be implicitly assuming that there's either zero or one "mythic links". Or if there's more, that only one of them is "true"...

> I think I may have been unclear in my typing there (too many double
> negatives) - I mean to say that Rathor black bears and Ertelenari black
> bears are unrelated, and for the same reasons as Lotari and Vanchite
> racoons.

Oh. Not very interesting at all, then, my mistake. ;-) (Or, ours jointly, perhaps.)

> >It equally seems odd to me if "different systems" is a (near-)absolute,
> >and "different gods" (within a (theist in that case) system) counts for
> >very little -- though there are such cases too, right?
> >
> Sorry, you've lost me there...

Cases where there are different-but-related (same genus, different species, say) associated with different entities in the same otherworld.

Basically it strikes me as more than a little cheesy that differences in system are being given such primacy, and common or garden differences in _myth_ seem to be playing second fiddle, at best. And I know which I find the more compelling, and narratively/gamicly useful.

Oh well.

Cheers,
Alex.

--__--__--

Powered by hypermail