Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 15:13:48 -0700
From: maa32 
Subject: (urth) pale face

Roy commented that the pale face under water in chapter 6 might have been 
seawrack.  Wasn't he already with Seawrack by then?  Is that a flashback? He 
should know that she plumbs the depths in her swim - I don't know.  Seawrack 
seems to be such an odd answer to an event that disturbs the narrator a great 
deal.  He reacts strongly to the face and thinks it might be driftwood, 
providing a weird rationale when he already has an excuse in the form of 
Seawrack.  Why would she scare him so much?

Let's not argue about misrepresentations: when I said immediately, I mean in a 
three or four page span unseparated by any spaces or whorls in the text, a 
"section" that is included as one unit, in this case a section of only three 
pages in the SFBC edition.  That would seem to be immediately following.  I 
apologize if my semantics were obscure in any way.

Any comments about the stuff I said about the "scarcely" business in IGJ and 
how the narrator can't believe that a creator would make two related species 
in two different places?   Wasn't that important to the context: if you can 
posit a direct relationship between the vanished people and normal people, 
then the narrator is in effect saying they would not have sprung up in two 
different places, when one would do.  This is the sentence immediately 
preceding the one you quoted on p 349, I believe. Right?

Marc Aramini



--