Whoah, the list is getting spicy! Russian! 

But now here's a request in English (so that everyone can understand - sorry, 
but I'm trying to be practical).

We've got a group in Vancouver reading the Glass Bees together once a week and 
we're quite unable to satisfy ourselves on the nature of Zapparoni's automatons 
and the film genre as it is visualized by Juenger in this book. The uncertainty 
regards the tangible reality of these creatures. On the explicit level Juenger 
is describing a level of physical robot technology which we can only suppose at 
this point could be possible in the future. (Or are we further than that, 
Gary?) Yet the suggestion has recurred within the group that perhaps his vision 
was of our emerging virtual reality ..... Here, with my emphases, is a 
particularly relevant passage: 

    "Prognoses have been made which contend that our technology will terminate 
in pure necromancy, If so, everything we now experience would be only a 
departure and mechanics would become refined to a degree that would no longer 
require any crude embodiment. Lights, words, yes even thoughts would be 
sufficient. Clearly the Zapparoni films had very nearly realized such a future. 
The dreams of old Utopians were coarse-grained in comparison. With the freedom 
and elegance of dancers, the automatons had opened up a world of their own. 
Here a principle operative only in dreams - namely, that matter thinks- seemed 
to be realized."  
        Pg. 28-29, from the Noonday Press 1991 translation.

A couple of our members are computer game animators and  they instinctively 
assigned these "actors" to the virtual world they "create" in. Do these 
"perfect" human models not remind one of the ever-more perfect virtual 
creations we see on video games, music videos, cartoons, movies? (What really 
surprised them was Junger's vision of the deep power that these images have on 
their viewers, young and old - but this is different point...)

One thinks back to Man's age-old attempts to attain immortality through the 
creation of his likeness in an automaton - Frankenstein, etc - and one imagines 
that Juenger gave Zapparoni a similar ambition.  At the time of this glimpse 
into the future computers had barely been invented and so Juenger conceived his 
creatures with the most logical technological "flesh" that was known to him 
back then - robotics. Yet he saw clearly enough to give these "robots" an 
ethereal, insubstantial nature. (The Luminar in Eumeswil is certainly a virtual 
reality synthesizer but then this novel came much later.)

What do you all think - is this reasonable, or are we to still await perfect 
material automatons from technology? An interesting question arises from this 
line of thought: if the robots are in fact virtual, then what of the glass bees 
who have the same creator and seem to share the same technology and physical 
nature? If they are not robots, what are they? Do they have a corresponding 
virtual form, as we are imagining for the robots? Or are mechanical bees an 
analogy for a new type of human and human society, the type Zapparoni is in 
some mysterious way fostering with his robot role-models: "In this place, 
however, a mind was at work to negate the image of a free and intact man. The 
same mind had devised this insult: it intended to rely on man power in the same 
way that it had relied on horsepower. It wanted units to be equal and 
divisible, and for that purpose man had to be destroyed as the horse had 
already been destroyed." Pg. 141. This last idea has some terrifying 
implications.

If anyone would care to shed their own light on these questions we would be 
grateful  -  these do seem to be questions of importance, and not just to an 
isolated group in Vancouver or on the Internet. Actually we'd love to hear any 
thoughts on the Glass Bees at all. 


Thomas Friese
Association Eumeswil Vancouver

Can't resist a last comment: why so much discussion on the old Junger and so 
little on the recent works, which are surely the product of an even wiser and 
more mature author - force of habit? 



<<application/ms-tnef>>

Antwort per Email an