Dragaera

The Phoenix succession (was: The Jhereg)

Mon Dec 30 10:36:40 PST 2002

On Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:21:35 -0800 (PST), you wrote:

>To: dragaera at dragaera.info
>Subject: The Phoenix succession (was: The Jhereg)
>From: Greg Rapawy <grapawy at yahoo.com>
>Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:21:35 -0800 (PST)
>
>(Spoilers for _Paths of the Dead_.)
>
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>6
>7
>8
>9
>10
>11
>12
>13
>14
>15
>16
>17
>18
>19
>20
>21
>22
>23
>24
>25
>26
>27
>28
>29
>30
>31
>32
>33
>34
>35
>36
>37
>38
>39
>40
>
>Peter H. Granzeau [I think] wrote:
>
>> The situation of the Phoenix puzzles me, and Chapter
>> Eighteen of _The Paths of the Dead_ don't help me a 
>> single bit.  Parthenogenesis?
>
>Is anyone up for a close reading of the passage on
>page 195 of _The Paths of the Dead_ where Verra and
>her two sisters discuss the problem?  I'll reproduce
>it here for easy reference.
>
>]   "You explain it," said Verra to Kéurana.  "The 
>] breeding of humans is your domain; I cannot explain 
>] why two that are hidden can produce one that is 
>] seen."
>
>]   "Let Moranthë explain, because she understands the
>] phoenix and its significance, and how it lives when 
>] it dies, and creates when it destroys, and 
>] prophesies while making its prophecies come to 
>] pass."
>
>]   "No, let Verra explain," said Moranthë, "because 
>] she comprehends the Cycle better than I, and
>] moreover knows how, to preserve itself, it can 
>] summon the phoenix, and even cause people to fall in
>] love who otherwise might not have met."
>
>I suspect that this exchange will turn out to describe
>the solution, although we may not have enough
>information yet to figure out how, and it may also be,
>as others have commented, that SKZB never intends to
>nail all the details down.  
>
>I will present a few wild speculations.
>
>1.  In the first passage, at first I thought the "two
>that are hidden" were the two living Phoenixes.  On
>reflection, the theory that I like better is that
>Verra is referring to Mendelian genetics: crossing two
>carriers of a recessive gene ("two that are hidden")
>may result in an offspring that displays the recessive
>trait ("one that is seen").  This reading makes sense
>of the "breeding of humans" reference.  That could
>mean either that a Phoenix can be produced through
>genetic engineering, which is plausible but not
>elegant, or that a Phoenix can be produced through
>sufficiently methodical breeding of Dragaerans of
>other Houses.

One additional twist to this "hidden" business.  Forgive the
fuzziness, but I'm AFB right now:  I recall Vlad discussing souls and
genetics with Aliera, and Aliera saying all this stuff interacts
"oddly".  So possibly a reincarnation could subtly alter the genetics?



-- 

lazarus

 "Therefore, my Harry, Be it thy course to busy giddy minds with
 foreign quarrels; that action, hence borne out, may waste the memory
 of the former days." -- King Henry IV, Part ii Act 4, Scene 5