From: Alex Ferguson (abf@yeats.ucc.ie)
Date: Thu 28 Jan 1999 - 03:22:05 EET
Simon Hibbs:
> Perhaps I should have taken a copy of the myth of the month, but I don't
> think that's playing the game.....
You're right, I'd have to Sternly Reprimand you if I thought you'd done
such a thing! Don't let me catch _any_ of you doing this, or, eh...
um... Let me get back to you once I ask Greg whether my Official Expert
Rocker Launcher is in the post.
> Accepted, but [ShangHsa] does this several times, manifesting in several
> forms some of which by implication were not antigods.
The story basically says he becomes an antigod when he did this to
Gilamdestau's son (i.e., his own) son. Prior incarnations weren't
antigods, or at least not _self-evidently_ antigodly.
> The implication I took
> was that a transcended being could manifest as a god or an antigod -
> i.e. they are above such distinctions.
I understand that rather, the 'gods' are those who are 'on track' to
becoming transcended beings, and 'antigods' are entities who are 'off
message'. Antigods may be redeemed, though (the Dogsalu myth has also
been previewed on the web site, hasn't it?). In a sense, the _truly_
transcended beings, the High Gods, _are_ above the distinction, but
that's not what's happening here, I don't think.
Note that the terminology of High Gods, Gods, and Antigods is of
'Vithelan' (i.e., East Isles) origin. A Kralori would probably
recognise the terms, and know what you _meant_, but would insist that
these were misperceptions of a draconic reality.
Slan,
Alex.
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 19:26:15 EEST