Gene Wolfe

Although I would not call myself a science-fiction aficionado, two of my favorite authors are Frank Herbert and Gene Wolfe.

Two days after my father died, Wolfe followed (April 14, 2019), two lights dimming together, oddly twinned in my memory.

Wolfe’s obituaries appeared in the Washington Post, The New Republic, and The New Yorker.

The Modern Melville

Wolfe’s The Book of the New Sun (1980-1983, 1987) comprises The Shadow of the Torturer, The Claw of the Conciliator, The Sword of the Lictor, The Citadel of the Autarch, and The Urth of the New Sun. Set in the far future when the Sun itself is dying, it is on the surface a bewildering chronicle of an exiled torturer. He has been rightly called “the Modern Melville” for his narrative density, theological depth, and intertextual brilliance.

As may be evident from some of the footnotes in these posts, I like to find connections among disparate sources. Recently I read an article in Nature that reminded me of Wolfe. That article reported on a paper published in 2011, entitled “Observation of the Dynamical Casimir Effect in a Superconducting Circuit.” Its abstract distilled a revelation:

One of the most surprising predictions of modern quantum theory is that the vacuum of space is not empty. In fact, quantum theory predicts that it teems with virtual particles flitting in and out of existence. While initially a curiosity, it was quickly realized that these vacuum fluctuations had measurable consequences, for instance producing the Lamb shift of atomic spectra and modifying the magnetic moment for the electron. This type of renormalization due to vacuum fluctuations is now central to our understanding of nature. However, these effects provide indirect evidence for the existence of vacuum fluctuations. From early on, it was discussed if it might instead be possible to more directly observe the virtual particles that compose the quantum vacuum. 40 years ago, Moore suggested that a mirror undergoing relativistic motion could convert virtual photons into directly observable real photons. This effect was later named the dynamical Casimir effect (DCE). Using a superconducting circuit, we have observed the DCE for the first time.

The existence of these particles is so fleeting that they are often described as virtual, yet they can have tangible effects. For example, if two mirrors are placed extremely close together, the kinds of virtual photons that can exist between them can be limited. The limit means that more virtual photons exist outside the mirrors than between them, creating a force that pushes the plates together. This ‘Casimir force’ is strong enough at short distances for scientists to physically measure it.

The ancients called mirror-divination catoptromancy (Gk. κάτοπτρον, katoptron, “mirror,” and μαντεία, manteia, “divination”). [The Forgotten History of Mirrors] Wolfe re-enchants that forgotten science with physics.

In Chapter 20 of The Shadow of the Torturer, “Father Inire’s Mirrors,” Severian recalls Thecla’s story of her friend Domnina visiting the court magician after witnessing something impossible in glass.

She realized when she see saw them that the wall of the octagonal enclosure through which she passed faced another mirror. In fact, all the others were mirrors. The light of the blue-white lamp was caught by them all and reflected from one to another as boys might pass silver balls, interlacing and intertwining in an interminable dance. In the center, the fish flickered to and fro, a thing formed, it seemed, by the convergence of the light.

The interposed mirrors conjure being from absence. Whether or not Wolfe knew of the 1947 Casimir proposal, Father Inire’s experiment parallels the DCE precisely; light summoned from the void parallels Inire’s summoning a ‘fish’ with his mirrors. The passage continues:

‘Here you see him,’ Father Inire said. “The ancients, who knew this process at least as well as we and perhaps better, considered the Fish the least important and the most common of the inhabitants of specula. With their false belief that the creatures they summoned were ever present in the depths of the glass, we need not concern ourselves. In time, they turned to a more serious question: By what means may travel be effected when the point of departure is at an astronomical distance from the place of arrival?”

Father Inire dismisses summoning a denizen of the mirror as less interesting than the more serious question of achieving faster than light travel. Respecting that nothing can achieve speeds greater than light, Father Inire explains to Domnia that, with concentrated light and optically exact mirrors, “the orientation of the wave fronts is the same because the image is the same. Since nothing can exceed the speed of light in our universe, the accelerated light leaves it and enters another. When it slows down, it reenters ours, naturally at another place.” So, the mirrors effect time dilation or perhaps fold space (like Guild Navigators in the Dune saga).

Because the characters in Wolfe’s epic do not have equal familiarity with technology, the words they use to describe space travel are archaic metaphors – emphasizing the rareness of exposure and the knowledge deficit.

One space sailor that Severian meets, Hethor, describes his ship being:

Sometimes driven aground by the photon storms, by the swirling of the galaxies, clockwise and counterclockwise, ticking with light down the dark sea-corridors lined with our silver sails, our demon-haunted mirror sails…

For Wolfe, technology is a fallen form of miracle, a material echo of divine power misunderstood by men. The mirror-sails that catch light are both engines and icons: they suggest a world where even propulsion depends upon reflection. This is the theology of incarnation: grace moving through matter.

More prosaically, the “mirror sails” recall Clarke’s Sunjammer (1972) and NASA’s 2011 solar-sail tests, but their demon-haunted quality implies risk of summoning. Hethor’s imagery of ticking, spiraling light hints at time dilation and the constant c: corridors of light itself. We learn that these ships (or is there only one?) travel faster than relativistic corridors.

Wolfe doubles the mirror’s function: transport and drive, invocation and motion. Even as Autarch, Severian never masters their nature. Proof that miracle is merely misunderstood engineering.

Beneath the machinery of time travel and the fading Sun [2] lies Wolfe’s Catholic architecture. Severian’s arc parallels the Passion: he is both torturer and victim, executioner and Christ. His memory, fallible yet absolute, functions as conscience made flesh. Expelled from the guild, he descends through suffering, claims the relic of the Claw (a symbol of grace), and finally dies and returns as the New Sun, the Conciliator who renews the world.

In Catholic eschatology, the Second Coming is both judgment and restoration; Wolfe renders it astrophysical. The dying star is creation under original sin; Severian’s resurrection as the New Sun is the redemption of the cosmos itself.

That duality, cruelty redeemed through compassion, reflects Wolfe’s conviction that salvation operates through the fallen. Grace is mediated by imperfection. The torturer becomes the savior because no one else understands pain so well.

___________________

Other textual connections to explore: When first introduced, Tzadkiel is an animal-like apports, evolves to a caveman, then a normal sailor, to a god-like Adonis figure, a giant angel (first male, then female) and as a tiny tinker-bell sized fairy, but Tzadkiel’s true form is likely a star. This alludes to Frank Herbert’s Whipping Star (1970).

___________________

The cloak worn by the Guild: Fuligin and vantablack.

Fuliginous derives from “fuligo,” the Latin word for “soot.” English speakers have been using the sooty connotation since the early 1620s to describe dense fogs, malevolent clouds, and overworked chimney sweeps. “Fuliginous” can also be used to refer to something dark or dusky. In an early sense (now obsolete), “fuliginous” was used to describe noxious bodily vapors thought to be produced by organic processes.

___________________

Wolfe shows the long history of human inhabitation of Urth in numerous and subtle ways – the city of Nessus has migrated along the Gyoll and people scour the abandoned sections for artifacts, mines are cities buried where metal is reclaimed and repurposed, Serverian’s tower is an abandoned rocket. Given the span of time this is only logical. Even now anthropogenic mass exceeds that of all life on Earth.

Visual Capitalist

The immense volume of human-made materials is inescapable in Severian’s Urth because it has been continuously inhabited. A related paper (The Silurian Hypothesis) examines whether it would be possible to detect an industrial civilization in the geological record if that civilization had not persisted:

If an industrial civilization had existed on Earth many millions of years prior to our own era, what traces would it have left and would they be detectable today? We summarize the likely geological fingerprint of the Anthropocene, and demonstrate that while clear, it will not differ greatly in many respects from other known events in the geological record. We then propose tests that could plausibly distinguish an industrial cause from an otherwise naturally occurring climate event.

The inverse of Wolfe’s forward postulating – the Silurian Hypothesis considers the potential that humanity was not the first intelligent species – inspiration for early-Earth sci-fi settings.

___________________

[1] Casimir effect also mentioned >here< in the potential for warp drives.

[2] Severian’s Urth has a terraformed Moon so it is green and larger in the sky because it is closer. The sun is red-hued as it burns the last of its hydrogen. The continents have also continued to drift (but probably not enough given the implied millions of years).

This map from Plan(e)t Engineering

Gene Wolfe provides clues to how far in the future Urth is from us, but never to a level of precision.

Modern stellar physics paints a very different future from Wolfe’s dim red sky. The Sun, a main-sequence G-type star about 4.6 billion years old, is still in its stable hydrogen-burning phase. As it converts hydrogen to helium, the core contracts slightly, raising pressure and temperature, which in turn increases luminosity, about 10 percent every billion years.

In one billion years, that extra heat will trigger a runaway greenhouse effect: oceans will boil, the atmosphere will collapse, and the biosphere will end in blinding light, not twilight. Roughly five billion years from now the Sun will expand into a red giant, swelling hundreds of times its current size and engulfing Mercury and Venus, possibly Earth itself. After that convulsion, it will shed its outer layers to form a planetary nebula and contract into a white dwarf, hot but dim, cooling for trillions of years.

The cosmology is clear: Earth dies by fire long before the Sun fades. Entropy in the stellar sense ends in glare, not darkness. Any world orbiting the Sun in its final age would be scorched, not frozen.

Wolfe knew this. By the early 1980s stellar evolution was textbook knowledge. His choice to imagine a cooling, crimson Sun was deliberate: a symbolic inversion, not scientific ignorance.

He draws instead from H. G. Wells’s “The Time Machine” (1895), whose final pages show the traveler on a frozen shore beneath a blood-red, dying star. Wells wrote before nuclear fusion was understood; he conceived the universe as running down into heat-death and cold. Wolfe retains that outdated image because it harmonizes with his deeper theme of Augustinian decline. In The City of God, Augustine describes the fallen world as light dimming into shadow, awaiting renewal. Wolfe re-casts that theology in cosmological form: the Sun itself is fallen, and its rebirth as the New Sun becomes a literal apocalypse.

If one insists on physical coherence, the text still allows a speculative loophole. A civilization capable of planetary terraforming and interstellar mirrors could, in principle, alter its star’s evolution: siphoning hydrogen for fusion fuel, surrounding it with vast collectors, or dimming its output through Dyson-scale engineering. Such manipulation could extend a star’s lifespan at the cost of luminosity, leaving a system bathed in weak red light; stars visible by day, atmosphere thinned and iron-dust tinted. Urth’s red spectrum and day-visible stars would then mark a technologically-induced senescence, not natural decay.

Wolfe begins where astrophysics ends. He accepts the scientific death of worlds, then reverses it to dramatize the moral death of man. The New Sun promises not a correction of physics but the restoration of grace. The universe, in Wolfe’s telling, obeys thermodynamics only until it remembers God.

___________________

Audiobook links

The Shadow of the Torturer

The Claw of the Conciliator

The Sword of the Lictor

The Citadel of the Autarch

Urth of the New Sun (part 1)

Urth of the New Sun (part 2)

___________________

The Spanish Inquisition

The abstract is all I have access to:

Empirical evidence on contemporary torture is sparse. The archives of the Spanish Inquisition provide a detailed historical source of quantitative and qualitative information about interrogational torture. The inquisition tortured brutally and systematically, willing to torment all who it deemed as withholding evidence. This torture yielded information that was often reliable: witnesses in the torture chamber and witnesses that were not tortured provided corresponding information about collaborators, locations, events, and practices. Nonetheless, inquisitors treated the results of interrogations in the torture chamber with skepticism. This bureaucratized torture stands in stark contrast to the “ticking bomb” philosophy that has motivated US torture policy in the aftermath of 9/11. Evidence from the archives of the Spanish Inquisition suggests torture affords no middle ground: one cannot improvise quick, amateurish, and half-hearted torture sessions, motivated by anger and fear, and hope to extract reliable intelligence.

Ron E. HassnerSecurity StudiesVolume 29, 2020 – Issue 3

Re-read that conclusion: “torture affords no middle ground: one cannot improvise quick, amateurish, and half-hearted torture sessions, motivated by anger and fear, and hope to extract reliable intelligence.”

I am not willing to pay for full access to the article, but does this mean that professional torture extracts reliable and actionable intelligence? Was the CIA training curriculum simply not sufficiently advanced?

The phrasing of Ron E. Hassner’s abstract invites the question: if Inquisition torture produced reliable information, does that imply that professionalized torture can yield actionable intelligence? The answer, drawn from Hassner’s data and wider research, is more nuanced.

Hassner’s quantitative review of over 1,000 Inquisition trials (1575–1610) shows that roughly 12 percent involved torture; confessions under torture occurred in about 29 percent of those cases, while non-tortured confessions reached 42 percent. The apparent reliability noted in the archives reflects correlation, not causation. Tortured and non-tortured witnesses sometimes corroborated each other, but inquisitors had already accumulated extensive independent evidence before resorting to coercion. Torture, in practice, confirmed what was already suspected; it seldom uncovered new leads. In other words, its epistemic value was supplementary, not revelatory.

This bureaucratized and highly regulated system differs radically from modern “ticking-bomb” fantasies. The Inquisition’s procedures were conducted by trained officials, under procedural guidelines refined over centuries, within a quasi-judicial framework. Even then, inquisitors treated the results with formal skepticism, cross-checking and often discounting testimony given under duress. Hassner’s conclusion “torture affords no middle ground” underscores that the only circumstances under which torture yielded even partial reliability required institutional control, documentation, and time-intensive verification. These are precisely the conditions absent from emergency intelligence operations.

Contemporary research amplifies the same conclusion. Neuroscientific studies (e.g., Shane O’Mara, Why Torture Doesn’t Work, 2015) demonstrate that acute stress impairs hippocampal memory consolidation, distorts temporal sequencing, and increases confabulation, the creation of false but sincerely believed memories. Psychological analyses of coercive interrogation likewise find that fear, pain, and exhaustion accelerate compliance but degrade accuracy. The 2014 U.S. Senate Select Committee report on CIA interrogations concluded that coercive methods produced little unique, verifiable intelligence and often delayed cooperation or encouraged deception.

Thus, if “professional torture” ever achieved partial reliability, it did so within a framework of obsessive bureaucracy, a system so slow, resource-intensive, and morally corrupting as to be incompatible with modern intelligence needs. The historical record and scientific consensus converge: torture can confirm but rarely discover truth. The epistemic cost is too high, and the moral corrosion total.

For further perspective, NPR’s Fresh Air (Terry Gross, 2012) interviewed former interrogators and psychologists, all emphasizing that rapport-based, evidence-driven methods consistently yield more reliable intelligence than coercion.

Father, Son, Grandson

___________

There are several permutations of the story. A Zen-priest is asked to provide a blessing, and he obliges, “Father dies, son dies, grandson dies.” The beneficiary is confused and angry, “What kind of blessing is THAT?!” And the wisdom is revealed: “Would you rather it happened another way?”

With the received wisdom of the natural order, I submit that the continued sequestering in Oregon is nonsense. The official posting for today (6/13/2020):

And the deaths are invariably the 60+ age range

Grandfather with underlying medical conditions dies. Possibly a sad event, but depending on the underlying medical condition, probably a blessing! Americans have always confused life extending technology with quality of life.[1] Just because you can do a thing doesn’t mean you should do a thing. For Fuck Sake People – we now have sufficient data to make a rational decision here! Those most at risk are those near the end of life. We are all held hostage to “save” the elderly with pre-existing medical conditions? My recently dead father knew the difference between quantity and quality of life, and given the choice, would gladly have risked accelerating his death for benefit of his grandchildren, and probably even yours, because he knew that quality of life was more important than quantity of time.

My children are staring down the imminent possibility of a no-contact-sport, no-in-classroom instruction year. Stultifying conditions for their development into fully actualized adults. How is that social cost justified? To save the essentially-dead and non-contributory? Yes, it has to be said: not all life has equal value. That is why there is medical triage and actuarial tables. If we want to play this metaphor that we are at war with a virus, then we need to have the testicular fortitude to accept the increased death rate of the marginal to save the sanity and economic future of the majority. That is the calculus of war. The media needs to understand the metaphor it uses. War isn’t hiding in the castle; that is being besieged. You cannot win by defending! Prevailing requires active engagement: taking risks and accepting consequences.

Review my Covid-19 post – I was fully on board with coerced cloistering to prevent a pandemic with what could have been a broad mortality rate. Absent reliable data, that was the logical response: stop the spread. But the evolution of my perspective is dictated by data which clearly shows Covid-19 isn’t a broadly distributed risk – it is highly concentrated to a population that is ready for palliative care.

And if you need to assuage your easily-offended liberal conscience, then pile on to the BLM narrative and recognize that continued confinement will be most devastating to low income families. Disproportionately low-wage earners are in higher-risk jobs, have no savings, and both parents must work. So what happens to all those unsupervised kids who cannot attend school? The earnings and education gap is decried as institutionalized racism, so now it gets exacerbated by these Nanny State policies?

Covid has been politicized to the exclusion of an honest discussion of the social and economic costs. But perhaps I’m too much a libertarian confused by Enlightenment logic and utilitarian theory. I fume in impotent rage. I don’t agree with how they come to their conclusion, but I’m about to join with the gun-wielding, anti-vaccination nut jobs who see a grand conspiracy at play.

__________

Of course there is always the enlightened perspective of the great Cthulhu

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is capture-3.jpg

He is the universal panacea against institutionalized, structural individualism. He is voracious.

Update 7/13/2020

The pesky unpredictability of the mortality is problematic. Those Covid-deniers are providing an experimental set that shows that there will always be a segment of the younger population at risk: “Man, 30, Dies After Attending a Covid-Party.”

____________

[1] Mark Manson wisely considers Who Wants to Live Forever? in Mind F*ck Monday #48 (copied in full below with original links). That phrase for me conjures a scene from Highlander (1986)

Christopher Lambert
 
Who wants to live forever?
 
Welcome to another Mindf*ck Monday, the only weekly newsletter that’s even cooler than it sounds. Each week, I send you three potentially life-changing ideas to help you be a slightly less awful human being. This week, we’re talking about topics that are a matter of life and death. No seriously, we’re talking about life and death this week: 1) the scientific progress in “treating” aging, 2) what a vastly longer lifespan would mean for culture and society, and 3) why do things die in the first place?

Let’s get into it.

(Note: If you enjoy this email, please consider forwarding it to someone who would get a lot out of it. If you were forwarded this email, you can sign up to receive it each Monday morning. It’s free.)

1. Can aging be reversed? – One of the more quietly controversial and interesting areas of scientific progress today is around the idea that biological aging can be treated as a disease and potentially be reversed. For years, researchers have been pioneering methods to limit cellular deterioration, stave off chronic diseases, and help older individuals stay healthy and independent as life expectancies rise.

Last week, a new study found that a cocktail of drugs not only slowed biological aging (measured by markers on the individual’s genome), it reversed it by approximately 2.5 years. To my knowledge, this is the first time an aging reversal has been shown in human subjects. This is a stunning result that even the researchers did not expect.

(Note: it was a small study and had no control group, so don’t wet your panties just yet. As always, more studies need to be done.)

As with most bleeding-edge technologies, the idea that we can defeat aging, like most controversial ideas, has inspired reactions from experts that range from utopian to apocalyptic.

I was first exposed to the idea that aging could potentially be conquered by science in Ray Kurzweil’s book The Singularity is NearIn it, Kurzweil’s’ views are beyond utopian. They’re like the religious rapture. In the book, Kurzweil makes the argument that not only will we cure death, but it will likely happen in most of our lifetimes.

Kurzweil points out that over human history, not only has life expectancy been increasing, but the rate at which it increases has been increasing as well. So, maybe centuries ago, life expectancy increased at a rate of 0.01 years per year. Then, it increased to 0.1 per year. Then 0.2 per year. Then 0.3 per year.

He argues that eventually, life expectancy will hit a tipping point where it increases by at least one year per year, meaning that for every year that goes by, humans are expected to live at least one year longer.

Ergo, we all become immortal. The end.

Maybe Kurzweil hasn’t spent much time investing in financial markets, otherwise, he’d be aware of the ubiquitous warning that accompanies every exciting chart:

“Warning: Past performance is no guarantee of future results.”

Indeed, there seems to be a “low-hanging fruit” effect on human longevity. It turns out that giving most of the world running water, sewage treatment, and, you know, food, vastly increases lifespan. So that “exponential curve” of increasing life expectancy that forever increases into the future is more likely an “S-curve” where life expectancy jumps massively as countries industrialize and modernize and then begin to level off at around 75-80 years old.

But regardless of the murky science and controversial implications, the lure of immortality is too strong for many to ignore. Companies have emerged that offer to cryogenically freeze your body when you die, promising to keep you frozen until the technology to “cure death” emerges in the future.

No, I’m not making this shit up. Apparently, some notable people such as Larry King and Peter Thiel have signed up for it. But don’t get too excited. Freezing your body indefinitely after death starts at around $200,000 USD. Better start saving today!

2. Who wants to live forever? – In my book, Everything is F*cked: A Book About Hope, I argued that one of the dangers of consumer culture is that we often equate “giving people what they want” with progress. Given that we so often want things that are terrible for ourselves (not to mention others), I point out that this is a pretty flimsy standard for measuring the social good.  

To me, curing aging (and maybe even death) is the ultimate question of, “Okay, we definitely want it… but should we?”

It’s hard to imagine the social and psychological repercussions of a population where the average life expectancy is, say, 250 years old. Would we overpopulate the planet? When would the retirement age be? Would our healthcare systems collapse? Would bridge and bingo become Olympic sports?

I joke, but I do think there are some serious philosophical questions here. Our ability to value things is driven by scarcity. We often care about things in our lives because we have an abiding sense that we will never experience them again. If we live forever, all experience becomes abundant, therefore much of it loses its meaning. Everything becomes more superficial—there’s no sense of legacy, no sense of, “I lived for that.

Or what about family? Will it become standard for everyone to have half a dozen marriages and a dozen kids? Will people have brothers and sisters 70 years younger or older than themselves? Will we appreciate our parents more or less knowing that we’re stuck with them for another two centuries and will end up sharing them with dozens of other people?

The perceived costs of things like traffic accidents, disease, and war would become much larger. Far fewer people would want to risk getting shot or dying in a car accident if they know they’re giving up hundreds of years of life. People would oddly become much more risk-averse. Pandemics would be waaaay scarier. The power of compound interest would become far more valuable, creating much more of a culture around saving and learning rather than spending and doing. Expertise would reach a point where people spend 30 or 40 years getting educated before starting their careers. Forty really would be the new twenty!

3. The evolutionary value of death – You might read all this and throw your hands up in the air and shout, “What are they doing? This isn’t natural!”

But you’d be wrong.

Although they are rare, there are “immortal” species on the planet (in this case, “immortal” means that they do not biologically age.) The jellyfish Turritopsis dohrnii doesn’t die. Neither does the bristlecone pine tree. Many species of lobster technically don’t age and could theoretically live forever, the problem is that they outgrow their shells which then decay and fall apart, leaving them vulnerable to predators (talk about tragic).

Lifespans vary widely across the natural world. Some sharks and tortoises live for half a millennia. There are species of apes that only live to be about 15 years old. There are several species of flies that live for 24 hours or less.

It turns out that death is not inevitable. In fact, death exists for a specific evolutionary purpose.

Ideally, by mixing and matching genetics, a species becomes more robustly adapted to its environment. The quicker individual creatures die, the faster they must procreate new generations, and the faster the rate of genetic mutation and adaptation within the species.

Therefore, each species has a “sweet spot” for lifespan based on the necessary evolutionary adaptation to its environment. If a species needs to adapt quickly and often, it dies quickly and often. If it needs to adapt slowly (or never), then it dies slowly (or never).

That “sweet spot” for humans seems to be every 2-3 generations, or every 80-100 years. The telomeres on our chromosomes appear to “run out” soon after that, effectively putting a limit on how long we can live naturally. This sweet spot probably exists because it’s short enough to stay ahead of the quickly mutating infectious diseases that threaten us, but long enough to have some grandparents around to help raise kids (for more on this idea, see Matt Ridley’s excellent book, The Red Queen).  

A lot has been said about the scientific potential to alter our own species—genetic engineering, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, etc. But perhaps nothing would be so fundamental as altering our ability to age and die. Our psychology, our biology, and our societies seem to be largely based on it. Changing it could change everything.

The question is, will we be around to see it?

Until next week,
Mark