Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Diane Duane's Young Wizards series has some really interesting theology attached to it, and I hold Duane responsible for some of my early development of a social consciousness and commitment to not being afraid to change.
One of the more interesting bits, introduced in So You Want to Be Wizard and referenced (and sometimes portrayed directly) is the concept of Timeheart, a sort of heaven analog:

So You Want to Be a WIzard p42 "[Nita] read about Timeheart, the unreal and eternal realm where the places and things people remember affectionately are preserved as they remember them, forever."

This sound seriously like something I just read in Charles Hartshorne's Reality as Social Process about the memory of God.

"The value [ of the lives of people who died young in war] does not even depend necessarily upon "immortality" in the conventional sense. It depends rather upon this, that all the beauty of their past experience, all the delights and shades of feeling, none exactly duplicating those of any other child or youth, are added once for all to the store-house of beauties which is the divine memory, wherein all that we are is destined, in spite of our faults, to be imperishably loved by the cosmically social being, the one whose zest for the varieties of life is inexhaustible, and from whose consciousness nothing can die away and be lost." p42

*blinks* Holy crap, the page numbers match up.

Seriously, am I the only one who saw this??


( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 16th, 2010 08:48 pm (UTC)
Had I read Charles Hartshorne's Reality as Social Process I am sure that I too would have seen it!

That said, I never felt altogether comfortable with the concept of Timeheart. I think it's in the phrasing for me: that what is preserved seem to be memories, not actualities. Are Fred and Ed and the Lotus Esprit still "alive" in Timeheart? Or only Nita's idea(l)s of them? Are they as she remembers them, or as they remember themselves because...because they are themselves, and remain themselves, I guess I'm trying to say.

It's kind of like Plato's Forms. Would I rather have the eternal Form of the horse? Or would I rather have my beloved horse Sparky with the speckled hindquarters and the ragged mane? (This last may be too far afield.)
May. 16th, 2010 09:13 pm (UTC)
Hmmm. I don't have the books in front of me, but I believe one of the correlate qualities of Timeheart was that its occupants continued to grow and change and experience all the benefits of life in time without the downside of entropy. That suggests to me that they cannot be static memories that are preserved according to their rememberer's focus and good opinion, but rather the whole being, warts and all.

But the idea of them being caricatures of themselves, to be pulled out for the benefit of another's good opinion *shudders* awful idea, and one that I've seen played out recently in television. See the Supernatural episode "Dark Side of the Moon" for a truly offputting depiction of a Heaven that's just the recordings of your best moments with NPC's as the other people, in total seclusion from anyone else's version of Heaven. Really, really creepy.

( 2 comments — Leave a comment )


spectacular spider-man.hammerhead.this i

Latest Month

May 2010
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow