Santharian Development

Santharian World Development => The Santharian Library => Topic started by: seth ghibta on 24 March 2009, 06:09:46



Title: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 24 March 2009, 06:09:46
Philosophie of the Molluske Race
By Friddriv Alav
Compiled  and annotated by Seth Ghibta.

Suggested Categorization: Library>Essays>Philosophie of the Molluske Race

Taster: Friddriv Alav, an Avennorian of reclusive and decidedly eccentric habits, was a noted authority on the molluskes of Caelereth and beyond. In this, his largest, though still incomplete, work, it’s easy to see the extent to which his obsession ruled his life. Although he was undoubtedly a brilliant mind, he was not without flaws, and it should be noted that some of his ideas will strike readers as strange and even incongruous. The fragments of this text were assembled by a researcher seeking to learn more about this elusive man, and to record the unique glitter of a dedicated but sadly little known scholar.

The molluske  - composed of a blob of clammy, shapeless flesh, perhaps encased within a shell of gritty armour. Yet in this simplicity it holds the mystery and promise of a treasure box, the potential of an egg on the verge of hatching, and a subtle complexity which offers a window into the minds of all sentient creatures. Whilst it is undoubtedly unpalatable for some less humble intellects to contemplate their stature as equal (or, dare I say, lesser) to such lowly creatures, my researches have led me to conclude that there is no plausible alternative to such a viewpoint.

However, I cannot expect the unprepared reader to follow or believe my assertions on this subject without allowing them a glimpse into the meandering pathways by which I myself arrived at this point. I feel I must hasten to collect my thoughts on paper, so that they are not lost on the dark waves, to be collected in the guts of gnackers.

Consider the life of a gnacker, growing all its life in peaceful immobility, still as the pebbles it so resembles, mouth agape. Imagine that all your life were to be spent catching whatever waterborne detritus should pass your way and making use of it, somehow producing from the dregs of underwater life the succulent meat and pearlescent shells that people across the world, with their penchant for such things, so greatly admire. This  transformation, carried out every day by creatures many people barely even view as alive, is something to fascinate the most uninterested of countenances, and in my view it is perhaps the greatest magic ever witnessed. Who but a humble gnacker  can take the effluent of a city and craft a gleaming stronghold for itself?

Thus gnackers and all shellfish derive their nutrition from other creatures, both living and dead, and use this to fashion, by some quiet and mysterious alchemy, their shells in all their fascinating and beautiful variety; shells which are ground down by the natural processes of wind and wave and rain, until they become little more than pale grit, indistinguishable from the sand and the soil.

My travels have revealed places in which the rock itself holds remarkable similarities  to the shells of molluskes. It seems evident that shellfish have ingrained themselves into the very bones of the disc, whilst other creatures crawl crablike and cowering across the surface.

>Enclosed here is an excerpt from Alav’s field notes, as it was glued to the preceding page – I  can’t honestly say whether it was intentionally fixed in this way, as Alav’s experiments with gnacker glue appear to have had successful and widespread results. However, this particular excerpt  seems pertinent to the subject. <

"I finally managed to arrange a guide to show me around the Noarian caves today. The people here do not seem to have any understanding of my intentions – they would not believe that I had travelled so far purely to look for shellfish. Nonetheless, I was certain this unique environment must yield  something notable, perhaps even some entirely new forms.

Unfortunately, it appears that the constant human and elvish traffic through this area, and the various alterations to the cave structure they have wrought, have proven  too great a disruption to the marine fauna, and it is largely deserted. This is most definitely not to say, however, that it is a landscape without  interest to a molluske  researcher such as myself.

On the contrary, I was shown around certain caverns and chambers in which the walls were embedded with the petrified remains of ancient creatures, including several shellfish of extraordinary proportions. Some resembled fragments of trysters, but if my estimates are correct they would be perhaps exceeding a ped in length. There were other forms, multitudinous in number, like beds of small, pen-shaped molluskes  growing in some ancient seabed as grass might grow in a well kempt garden. I can only imagine what might graze on such pastures.

The rock itself was also unusual in texture. I have seen various samples of limestone before, but it is only when I view it in such a massive scale that the strangeness of its textures and properties become apparent. I have taken some samples, but from inspecting the strange formations known as stalactites and stalagmites, and with some questioning of my guide over the formation process, I believe  there are some highly intriguing similarities with the way that certain stationary molluskes  use a specialised secretion to "cement“ themselves to rocks."

I have already mentioned the extraordinary capability of shellfish to build castles for themselves, each more perfect and beautiful than any ostentatious merchant’s kilv, and each apparently made of little more than the scrapings of algae, flesh, or filtered effluent that makes up the creature in question’s diet. How is it possible to build armoured turrets of bone white using the blood and flesh that a parasitic limpet eats? How can a tryster construct its flowerlike palace from only invisible floating waste?

Could this be some form of magic that the mages have yet to unlock? My discussions on the subject with those magicians I have come across have been fruitless. No such person has greeted my ideas with anything more than ridicule, and often they have been angered and affronted by the inference that molluskes practice magic unknown to they, the "higher beings“. They retaliate with angry curses, cynical laughter, or pointedly ignore my presence. They say I am mad-

>the page is torn off at this point, and the notes for some time are in disarray, many badly damaged. Alav seems to have been in some confusion as to how to express himself, and I’m afraid that, given the situation, I had to resort to educated guesses. Therefore any inconsistencies in the ordering of the fragments (if not the fragments themselves, which I have not altered in any way) I take full responsibility for. <

I cannot find any conclusive means by which the shellfish and snails can form their shells. I can only assume it is a process beyond my intellect to discern. Yet my argument still stands. The things that molluskes  do to please themselves and to continue their ways of life are so strange and impressive that they cannot be the  simplistic, uncomplicated creatures they are commonly assumed to be.

If I cannot discern the means by which molluskes  build shells, I can at least have a clearer idea of how they build that most nebulous of treasures, the item for which so many of our shellfish are harvested, the pearl. A staggering amount of effort is put into harvesting pearls, mainly from oysters and trysters, though most aquatic shellfish produce them occasionally. Formed by the coating of a small irritant particle with nacre, or “pearlfather”, they are in effect little more than a reaction to small intrusions on their tiny, intimate world, on behalf of the molluske  concerned.

Yet for we, the supposedly “higher beings”, they hold the attraction of being rare, shiny, and hard to obtain, and so we build them up in our imaginations, carefully allowing ourselves to forget that they are formed of the diseased secretions of a dying molluske, and instead telling ourselves that they are a hidden treasure created by the bounty of nature for our benefit. One can only wonder what the molluskes'  view could be. Are these iridescent beads made purely for comfort, or is there also an element of control? Is it not a basic urge of all living things to alter the things they come into contact with? To absorb them or transform them, even for a short time, into something that can be seen as beautiful? Maybe I am being overly fanciful, viewing things from my indelibly human perspective. Pearls belong, after all, to the molluskes, how can my view match theirs? It is very hard to think straight…

Pearls, as has been confirmed by various attempts to farm them, take a very long time to grow to a “useful” size. This of course requires molluskes  themselves to have considerable life spans, which they do. I have measured shells that I estimate are older than I,  and some that are older than any human could hope to live, but still apparently strong and healthy. In truth I cannot guess how long a shellfish could live, as I expect it varies greatly with the species and conditions. Sadly the majority are caught or killed before reaching the great ages they have the potential for. What do they do for all this time? When trees grow to great size and age, we tend to give them characters, talk of them with reverence and even speak of them as “wise” and “noble”. I see no reason why this should not also, perhaps even more so, apply to molluskes.

So, despite their appearances, it seems shellfish are considerably more complex than commonly assumed. Certainly they exhibit complex behaviour, if only one is willing to search for it. My observations of gnacker colonies have raised some fascinating questions, for instance, the way they react to threats. The investigation in question was carried out on a community living in an isolated rock-pool, so I was able to study them at close quarters, and introduce various new experiences to them to see how they reacted. I would enclose the research notes but I can’t find where they have gone… they are stealing from me, I am certain. They are no longer content merely to watch and laugh….

The experiment. My aim was to find out how gnackers use their eyes, which, as you know, gaze from a small transparent section of the shell. No other shellfish have eyes like this, as far as I know, so why gnackers? They are, after all, perfectly mundane examples of marine shellfish, in every other respect. I began to wonder if perhaps they used the eyes to see predators approaching. To this end, I made several silhouettes which would create shadows and dark shapes analogous to those created by a large fish or other potential predator. And as I expected, whenever this was introduced to the molluskes they bunched up their colonies by shortening their anchor fibres, and any with open shells rapidly closed them.

What I didn’t expect was to see that even those which were completely surrounded, effectively blinded, by the other gnackers clustering around them, reacted. On further investigation the reason for this became clear. When those on the outside of a colony detected danger, they pushed their circulatory valves out of their shells, and seemed to blow jets of water at their neighbours before closing their shells properly. On feeling the water jet, the central shells also blew water at their neighbour and then closed, so that news of the threat travelled extraordinarily quickly through the entire colony.

If gnackers did not warn their “blind” neighbours, and those neighbours were eaten as a result, a hole would open in the centre of a colony, exposing more shellfish to predation. Thus it is in the interests of all to communicate danger, even if this means that individuals have to keep their shells open for slightly longer. It is incredible, really it is. Intelligent behaviour, an example of selflessness and communal thinking more perfect, I could not hope to imagine.  

There are other puzzling behaviours which seem to whisper of strange and subtle intelligences lurking among the molluskes  and their relatives. Of those that I have endeavoured to study, only a few lived up to my expectations – my methods are haphazard at best, I cannot deny that. Among those not quite so closely related to the quietly beautiful bivalves, such as the cephalopods, I found some intriguing contrasts, such as that between the kraken and the cuttlefish. The kraken is an inordinately variable creature. On one day it will travel the maze with perfect ease, and on another it seems not to even know where it is. At times it sticks itself to the bottom of the tank and sulks, or maliciously destroys all within reach. I wonder sometimes if it is mocking me, breaking my equipment and laughing at the importance I place on such toys. How can this spoiled creature, so different from the noble gnacker, be yet a close relation? It seems to possess all the failings and inconsistencies of humanity.

The inkfish, on the other hand, though still occasionally showing the frailties of temperament to which mobile life is heir, is still of a much more stable outlook. Perhaps this is because it, unlike the Kraken, has the benefit of an internal shell. This bears thought; if man were born with a shell, like a clam or gnacker, would he too have the benefit of their outlook on life? It is notable how humans constantly try to create an artificial shell: suits of armour, clothes, and shoes, all are barriers between ourselves and the world. Even more so, castles and houses are nothing more than attempts to create something like a shell for ourselves, where we can be safe. Are we blindly striving for the blissful passivity of the shellfish? An inkfish gains some of the benefits of  the shell, yet their exterior is still vulnerable. Perhaps this is why, though more stable than the kraken, they still sometimes show fear, anxiety, and ambition, things the gnacker and the barnacle never seem to be troubled with.

I am sure, I cannot help but be sure, that some, if not all, molluskes  are intelligent, albeit in a way which is different and strange to we, the creatures of fleeting fashions and constant hurrying from one fragile wish to another. I have spent many years trying to understand the way that molluskes  must see the world, and although my view is fallible and clouded by the petty demands of the culture I grew up in, I believe I am close to true understanding. That, after all, is what a true researcher craves, more than empty knowledge, which is but a gateway to the deep and fundamental truths that understanding of a subject brings.

I will try my best to explain. A molluske  never has to hurry. If it acts quickly, as does the gnacker on closing its shell  to a potential invader, it does so at exactly the right moment, after dutifully fulfilling an obligation to its neighbours, who in turn, do not panic. For sedentary shellfish such as the tryster, there is no need to move, ever, other than the slow graceful gaping of shells, welcoming with a contented smile the bounty it harvests from the waters. Everything they could ever require is brought to them. It is as if the world is built for their convenience. For those molluskes, such as slugs and snails, and even the kraken, which do move around freely, life is closer to ours, but still holds some of this unhurried, accepting approach to the world. Slugs are never scared of anything, I am sure of it. Fear is a result of stressful, undignified lives.

In this utter ease of life, I believe that I can see a beauty unlike any other. In our society life is a battle, one which we inevitably lose, taking with us a great many other small lives, none of them holding any more worth than the others. We search desperately for nobility of purpose, for great endeavours, like bored children wanting to be given a small task so that we can feel important. Molluskes  know no such triviality. They have no need for purpose. The aim of life is immaterial, the only pleasure not in achievement but pure experience, in a glorious passivity by which one can regard the full panoply of life as one might watch the world from a dream, detached but inspired towards a vague, perpetual awe. There is a whole other side to life, which I am immensely grateful in beginning to discover, which is opened by this “molluske philosophie” of detachment and faith that the world will provide. Is there not a marvellous integrity to the purity of faith that believes, and is right in believing, that everything it could possibly require will be brought to it as a matter of course?

The final stage in my enlightenment came directly from an experiment – I had been studying the habits of the parasitic limpet, a very interesting member of the family. I allowed one to attach to me – causing a fierce pain of the like I have not elsewhere experienced, sharp and visceral – I became intensely aware of the movements of the limpet’s mouthparts through my flesh. This in turn inspired a grisly fascination which, aided I think by substances released by the creature as it burrowed, allowed me to forget the pain and watch with the passiveness I required. There was remarkably little blood, considering that within ten minutes it had embedded itself so firmly in my leg that I could not dislodge it and it seemed immune to any pressure I put on it, though I couldn't say the same for myself.

Eventually the pain returned, as the creature settled in, and soon became too much, despite numbing it with liquor. I believe that my being a terrestrial creature made the limpet’s usual method of feeding more laboured, forcing it to feed more aggressively and thus cause greater pain. In the end I took a long blade and cut the creature out of the well it had made, as task that was, in itself, difficult, involving copious bloodshed and dizzying pain. When the molluske  was finally removed, and I was able to rest, shakily grasping the dying shellfish in my hand, I was overcome with a terrible guilt of the like I have never felt before. I realised, with a clarity that astonished me, that I had wilfully placed my comfort over the life of another creature, killing it for no reason other than it hurt me. I have another leg, do I not? But the limpet cannot live in any other way. Why did I not just give in? If life is such a struggle, then maybe that is all the proof I need that it is not… feasible, in the long term. Molluskes  live a life without struggle. Why can’t I?

>there appears to be a long gap between this fragment and the next, but all the other notes were illegible or impossible to make sense of<

The past few weeks have made me feel very old. I cannot believe I will finish this task in time to see its result. The wound in my leg is beginning to smell, but I cannot call for help or they will hear me, and come… Increasingly I cannot believe I will finish it at all. The only thing I can be sure of is that I had the germ of the truth, for a while, and somewhere among these notes it survives. I do not know if I still have it, it’s so hard to concentrate and I wish only to sleep, though when I do I am roused by terrible nightmares.  I have a recurring dream, which I will describe here, as it seems to illustrate better than reasoned arguments the core of my ideas.

I dream I am a creature made of some soft, pearlescent material, walking on the bottom of the seabed. It is vast and empty and very lonely, and the light comes down in streamers from the surface of the waters, far above. After a while I look down at my feet and realise that they are sinking into the grit of the seabed. I try to pull them out, but they sink further, sending  up tiny puffs of sand in the clear water. With every slightest movement my feet sink further into the seabed, and I begin to realise that my skin is changing. As the grit stirred up by my movement scrapes at it, the beautiful pearlfather sheen is roughened, ground down, until it becomes white and chalky, and begins to flake away. Soon the water is opaque with the smokescreen of grit and chalk, and I can’t see anything but can only feel myself sinking, wrapped tighter and tighter still in the weight of gravel and rock, until it slips over my eyes, and I can’t blink or even breathe, only lie immobile in the crushing blackness under the seabed, which is the same as me: I am in its bones.

Terrifying though the dream is, it offers an uncanny representation of the lifecycle of our earth, claiming the bones and shells of the dead as its own. There is, therefore, immortality, of a kind, at least for shellfish. I feel very tired, and the wound left by the limpet stinks of decay. I wonder if I will be absorbed into the earth. I think I would like that. I can see, now, why we place so much stake on burial rites and ceremonies. Not merely to prevent unhygienic bodies from causing problems, but because it does matter what happens when we die. And in this small, but permanent act, we can have some control over that.




Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: seth ghibta on 24 March 2009, 06:13:01
about halfway through - the rest still needs tweaking. :grin:
hopefully this is reasonably self explanatory, but i'm not really very good at judging whether anything i write makes much sense.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: Ta`lia of the Seven Jewels on 25 March 2009, 16:59:03
Heya Seth!

First I thought - my dear, a philosophy of mollusks and so long - but it is remarkably good to read! (I only encountered though after I started a third time reading ;) )

As I said, I like it very much, but sometimes, as with other entries as well, I question its medieval 'content'. Ok, I have difficulties to express myself again.

let's try this way:

Would a medieval society think about, that its wastes effect other beings?

Quote
mollusks as organisms among the vast and interconnected web of living creatures that make up this world are incredibly influential. They serve not only as food for predatory animals, but more importantly as recyclers of the detritus that larger creatures leave behind them.

Or

Quote
being by and large composed solely of a blob of salty, amorphous flesh within a shell of gritty calcified armour.

Are these medieval thoughts? Do they realise, that the shell is calcified armour?

etc.

However, single individuals like your Friddriv might well have such ideas and educated compendiumists might even grasp what he means.

So, I don't want you to change anything, but I think your teaser needs to be written carefully, pointing out, that what comes are "strange new ideas" which seem a bit bizarre, but nevertheless worthy to be published/conserved in the compendium. Maybe write a sentence or two about Friddriv, suggest that hisideas sound very fantastical and may not taken too seriously. Well, this direction.

But, as I said above, it is beautiful written - I wanted to pick out some examples, but there are just too many, the whole text is great, poetic

Quote
I feel I must hasten to collect my thoughts on paper, so that they are not lost on the dark waves, to be collected in the guts of gnackers.

I love it!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: seth ghibta on 26 March 2009, 02:24:44
thanks Talia!
i know, the title doesnt exactly invite readers, i definitely need to work on a good teaser. as for the whole medieval thing, i've been thinking along similiar lines - i want Alav to be an unusual person, and i think in my enthusiasm for that i've overdone the language and ideas a bit. i'll change some stuff once i've got the whole thing up where i can think straight. hopefully that'll happen before the end of this week - i was hoping to get it done yesterday, 'cos i had a study day, but someone >grumblegrumblegrumble< decided to be off sick and spent the entire day on the computer stopping me from gatting any work done. :angry:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: Tharoc Wargrider on 28 March 2009, 04:56:58
Hi Seth......

Have you been eating cheese at bedtime again?

I was immediately intrigued by the unusual title, wondering just where you were going to take me. I wasn't disapointed. I picture you writing this with tongue firmly wedged in cheek.

A fascinating start, young Seth. I look forward to readinging more of Alav in the coming weeks.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: seth ghibta on 28 March 2009, 05:08:10
i shun rotted bovine lactation in favour of jellybabies and caffeine. :D

thanks Tharoc, and glad you like Alav, i'm becoming quite attached to him, which is probably another reason why it's taking so long to finish this thing... :cry:

it is honestly nearly done, but i've caught something venemous off my little brother and looking at this screen is currently giving me an even worse headache. so not finished tonight. soon. :trust_me:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: Shabakuk Zeborius Anfang on 30 March 2009, 00:18:28
Hi Seth,

I hope both you and your brother are feeling better.

I enjoyed this text a lot - it's very elegantly written, and expresses rather well some of the sentiments that I sometimes have while watching octopus, cuttlefish and nudibranchs on scuba diving excurions (I also have such thoughts about other animals, though).

I'll make sure to read the full version once it's done. Meanwhile, your text has made me think of a story that you might find interesting. It's by Peter S. Beagle, and it's called "The Fable of the Octopus", published in a collection of stories called "The Line Between" (2006).


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: seth ghibta on 31 March 2009, 02:19:38
there. i know, i'm sorry, it is, i am aware, a very long entry about shellfish. i will make it shorter, and neater, and more beleivable, and hopefully even a bit more readable, as i go along.
i'm leaving up the WIP icon because i've not yet got round to doing anything about Talia's comments, and also because i've spelt mollusc in just about every possibly way. any advice about that? in the category name it's got a "c", like the terran spelling, but the actual entries have a "k".  :huh:

and thanks Fu, much better now, mainlyas a result of going to see Watchmen on Saturday. that story sounds interseting, i'll definitely try and read it. :thumbup:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: Shabakuk Zeborius Anfang on 01 April 2009, 09:12:10
Quote
Molluscs ... have no need for purpose. The aim of life is immaterial, the only pleasure not in achievement but pure experience, in a glorious passivity by which one can regard the full panoply of life as one might watch the world from a dream, detached but inspired towards a vague, perpetual awe. There is a whole other side to life, which I am immensely grateful in beginning to discover, which is opened by this “molluske philosophie” of detachment and faith that the world will provide. Is there not a marvellous integrity to the purity of faith that believes, and is right in believing, that everything it could possibly require will be brought to it by fortune?

A fascinating passage (one of many in this text)! It made me think about the more mobile molluscs. From Friddiv's point of view, would snails, slugs, kraken, etc. represent less fortunate or less wise cousins, as they are deprived of the gnacker mollusc's paradise of serene passivity? Of course, I don't know whether a Santharian researcher would necessarily see the relation between a Kraken and a Gnacker - but he may notice similarities between snails and Gnackers? I don't want to make things unnecessarily complicated, though. It's a fine entry. If I'm around when you're ready, I'll make sure to give it a look over.

Oh yes, "pearlfather". Clever.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race: WIP
Post by: seth ghibta on 02 April 2009, 01:19:44
pearlfather's not mine, i scavenged it from the tryster and oyster entries. :)
and thanks for that point, it reminded me of something i was gonna try to work into it, pretty much as you said, though i hadn't thought of bringing kraken into it. to be honest, i've not read the kraken entries - really really should.
but yeah, i'm in the process of trying to get this at a commentable standard. may be some time...

edit: can't think of anything to change here, so i think i'll leave it at that. do your worst. :)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 18 April 2009, 03:05:41
I don't suppose anyone's got a spare moment to glance at this? on Tuesday I go back to school for a particularly hellish week (three days of art exams, oh ye Gods...), and it'd be great if I could get this underway before then, as I'll be knackered next week and might not be on much. :undecided:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Shabakuk Zeborius Anfang on 01 May 2009, 09:02:59
Hi again, Seth,

I felt disinclined to sleep and decided instead to enlighten my feeble mind through the perusal of Friddriv's Molluske Philosophie. It's a text that rewards repeated reading, and I enjoyed the method in the madness, and the madness in the method. I think you've done brilliantly here; your originality, quirky humour and knack (gnack?) for storytelling shine in every paragraph. I've only really found a few spelling mistakes (in orange), and the limegreen comments are mostly praises, with a few ignorable suggestions mixed in. Whether I'll sleep better now, I don't know. I shall endeavour to think like a Gnacker and approach the night with 'glorious passivity'.

One general issue: you've got to resolve the spelling of 'molluske' (you also have mollusc, and mollusk). I prefer 'molluske' myself, as in your title.


Philosophie of the Molluske Race
By Friddriv Alav
Compiled and annotated by Seth Ghibta.

The mollusc – plainest of creatures by many accounts, being by and large composed of a blob of clammy, shapeless flesh, perhaps encased within a shell of gritty armour. Yet in this simplicity it holds the mystery and promise of a treasure box, the potential of an egg on the verge of hatching, and a subtle complexity which offers a window into the minds of all sentient creatures. Whilst it is undoubtedly unpalatable for some less humble intellects to contemplate their stature as equal (or, dare I say, lesser) to such lowly creatures, my researches have led me to conclude that there is no plausible alternative to such a viewpoint.

However, I cannot expect the unprepared reader to follow or believe my assertions on this subject without allowing them a glimpse into the meandering pathways by which I myself arrived at this point. I feel I must hasten to collect my thoughts on paper, so that they are not lost on the dark waves, to be collected in the guts of gnackers.

Consider the life of a gnacker, growing all its life in peaceful immobility, still as the pebbles it so resembles, mouth agape. Imagine that all your life were to be spent catching whatever waterborne detritus should pass your way and making use of it, somehow producing from the dregs of society (instead of ‘society’ consider ‘underwater life’, or even ‘underwater society’?) the succulent meat and pearlescent shells that people across the world, with their penchant for such things, so greatly admire. This transformation, carried out every day by creatures many people barely even view as alive, is something to fascinate the most uninterested of countenances, and in my view it is perhaps the greatest magic ever witnessed. Who but a humble gnacker can take the effluent of a city and craft a gleaming stronghold for itself?

Thus gnackers and all shellfish derive their nutrition from other creatures, both living and dead, and use this to fashion, by some quiet and mysterious alchemy, their shells in all their fascinating and beautiful variety; shells which are ground down by the natural processes of wind and wave and rain, until they become little more than pale grit, indistinguishable from the sand and the soil.

My travels have revealed places in which the rock itself holds remarkable similarities (spelling) to the shells of molluscs. It seems evident that shellfish have ingrained themselves into the very bones of the disc (consider adding: ) ‘on which each of us is granted but a brief sojourn’ (or something like it?).

>Enclosed here is an excerpt from Alav’s field notes, as it was glued to the preceding page – I  can’t honestly say whether it was intentionally fixed in this way, as Alav’s experiments with gnacker glue appear to have had successful and widespread results. However, this particular excerpt seems pertinent to the subject.<

"I finally managed to arrange a guide to show me around the Noarian caves today. The people here do not seem to have any understanding of my intentions – they would not believe that I had travelled so far purely to look for shellfish. Nonetheless, I was certain this unique environment must yield something notable, perhaps even some entirely new forms.

Unfortunately, it appears that the constant human and elvish traffic through this area, and the various alterations to the cave structure they have wrought, have proven too great a disruption to the marine fauna, and it is largely deserted. This is most definitely not to say, however, that it is a landscape without interest to a mollusc researcher such as myself.

On the contrary, I was shown around certain caverns and chambers in which the walls were embedded with the petrified remains of ancient creatures, including several shellfish of extraordinary proportions. Some resembled fragments of trysters, but if my estimates are correct they would be perhaps exceeding a ped in length. There were other forms, multitudinous in number, like beds of small, pen-shaped mollusks growing in some ancient seabed as grass might grow in a well kempt garden. I can only imagine what might graze on such pastures.

The rock itself was also unusual in texture. I have seen various samples of limestone before, but it is only when I view it in such a massive scale that the strangeness of its textures and properties become apparent. I have taken some samples, but from inspecting the strange formations known as stalactites and stalagmites, and with some questioning of my guide over the formation process, I believe there are some highly intriguing similarities with the way that certain stationary molluscs use a specialised secretion to "cement“ themselves to rocks."

I have already mentioned the extraordinary capability of shellfish to build castles for themselves, each more perfect and beautiful than any ostentatious merchant’s kilv (what’s a kilv?), and each apparently made of little more than the scrapings of algae, flesh, or filtered effluent that makes up the creature in question’s diet. How is it possible to build armoured turrets of bone white using the blood and flesh that a parasitic limpet eats? How can a tryster construct its flowerlike palace from only invisible floating waste?

Could this be some form of magic that the mages have yet to unlock? My discussions on the subject with those magicians I have come across have been fruitless. No such person has greeted my ideas with anything more than ridicule, and often they have been angered and affronted by the inference that mollusks practice magic unknown to they, the "higher beings“. They retaliate with angry curses, cynical laughter, or pointedly ignore my presence. They say I am mad-

>the page is torn off at this point, and the notes for some time are in disarray, many badly damaged. Alav seems to have been in some confusion himself as to how to express himself, and I’m afraid that, given the situation, I had to resort to educated guesses. Therefore any inconsistencies in the ordering of the fragments (if not the fragments themselves, which I have not altered in any way) I take full responsibility for.< 

I cannot find any conclusive means by which the shellfish and snails can form their shells. I can only assume it is a process beyond my intellect to discern. Yet my argument still stands. The things that molluscs do to please themselves and to continue their ways of life are so strange and impressive that they cannot be the simplistic, uncomplicated creatures they are commonly assumed to be.

If I cannot discern the means by which molluscs build shells, I can at least have a clearer idea of how they build that most nebulous of treasures, the item for which so many of our shellfish are harvested, the pearl. A staggering amount of effort is put into harvesting pearls, mainly from oysters and trysters, though most aquatic shellfish produce them occasionally. Formed by the coating of a small irritant particle with nacre, or “pearlfather”, they are in effect little more than a reaction to small intrusions on their tiny, intimate world, on behalf of the mollusc concerned.

Yet for we, the supposedly “higher beings”, they hold the attraction of being rare, shiny, and hard to obtain, and so we build them up in our imaginations, carefully allowing ourselves to forget that they are formed of the diseased secretions of a dying mollusc, and instead telling ourselves that they are a hidden treasure created by the bounty of nature for our benefit. One can only wonder what the molluscs' view could be. Are these iridescent beads made purely for comfort, or is there also an element of control? Is it not a basic urge of all living things to alter the things they come into contact with? To absorb them or transform them, even for a short time, into something that can be seen as beautiful? Maybe I am being overly fanciful, viewing things from my indelibly human perspective. Pearls belong, after all, to the molluscs, how can my view match theirs? It is very hard to think straight… This is one of the passages I liked best, within a generally excellent and highly interesting text! It’s a fascinating insight into a Caelarethian mind wondering about the world it lives in (in contrast to the description of observed facts).

Pearls, as has been confirmed by various attempts to farm them, take a very long time to grow to a “useful” size. This of course requires molluscs themselves to have considerable life spans, which they do. I have measured shells that are older than me (consider ‘older than I’, since you’re generally writing in rather erudite style?, and some that are older than any human could hope to live, but still apparently strong and healthy. In truth I cannot guess how long a shellfish could live, as I expect it varies greatly with the species and conditions. Sadly the majority are caught or killed before reaching the great ages they have the potential for. What do they do for all this time? When trees grow to great size and age, we tend to give them characters, talk of them with reverence and even speak of them as “wise” and “noble”. I see no reason why this should not also, perhaps even more so, apply to molluscs. Another excellent passage, I find. Some readers may wonder how Friddriv can be so sure about his age calculations. How does he infer, from his measurements, how old a mollusc is? Myself, I don’t mind being left in the dark here, though. You do make clear, after all, that you are presenting fragments of his notes. And anyway, who says that Friddriv is right …

So, despite their appearances, it seems shellfish are considerably more complex than commonly assumed. Certainly they exhibit complex behaviour, if only one is willing to search for it. My observations of gnacker colonies have raised some fascinating questions, for instance, the way they react to threats. The investigation in question was carried out on a community living in an isolated rockpool, so I was able to study them at close quarters, and introduce various new experiences to them to see how they reacted. I would enclose the research notes but I can’t find where they have gone… they are stealing from me, I am certain. They are no longer content merely to watch and laugh….

The experiment. My aim was to find out how gnackers use their eyes, which, as you know, gaze from a small transparent section of the shell. No other shellfish have eyes like this, as far as I know, so why gnackers? They are, after all, perfectly mundane examples of marine shellfish, in every other respect. I began to wonder if perhaps they used the eyes to see predators approaching. To this end, I made several silhouettes which would create shadows and dark shapes analogous to those created by a large fish or other potential predator. And as I expected, whenever this was introduced to the molluskes they bunched up their colonies by shortening their anchor fibres, and any with open shells rapidly closed them.

What I didn’t expect was to see that even those which were completely surrounded, effectively blinded, by the other gnackers clustering around them, reacted. On further investigation the reason for this became clear. When those on the outside of a colony detected danger, they pushed their circulatory valves out of their shells, and seemed to blow jets of water at their neighbours before closing their shells properly. On feeling the water jet, the central shells also blew water at their neighbour and then closed, so that news of the threat travelled extraordinarily quickly through the entire colony.

If gnackers did not warn their “blind” neighbours, and those neighbours were eaten as a result, a hole would open in the centre of a colony, exposing more shellfish to predation. Thus it is in the interests of all to communicate danger, even if this means that individuals have to keep their shells open for slightly longer. It is incredible, really it is. Intelligent behaviour, an example of selflessness and communal thinking more perfect, I could not hope to imagine. Yes, fascinating. You probably know more than I do about Hölldobler & Wilson’s idea of the superorganism, as applied to social insects …

I am sure, I cannot help but be sure, that some, if not all, molluscs are intelligent, albeit in a way which is different and strange to we, the creatures of fleeting fashions and constant hurrying from one fragile wish to another. I have spent many years trying to understand the way that molluscs must see the world, and although my view is fallible and clouded by the petty demands of the culture I grew up in, I believe I am close to true understanding. That, after all, is what a true researcher craves, more than empty knowledge, which is but a gateway to the deep and fundamental truths that understanding of a subject brings.

I will try my best to explain. A mollusc never has to hurry. If it acts quickly, as does the gnacker on closing its shell to a potential invader, it does so at exactly the right moment, after dutifully fulfilling an obligation to its neighbours, who in turn, do not panic. For sedentary shellfish such as the tryster, there is no need to move, ever, other than the slow graceful gaping of shells, welcoming with a contented smile the bounty it harvests from the waters. Oh, beautiful sentence. I’ll think of that when I next see a clam underwater. Everything they could ever require is brought to them. It is as if the world is built for their convenience. For those molluscs, such as slugs and snails, and even the kraken, which do move around freely, life is closer to ours, but still holds some of this unhurried, accepting approach to the world. Slugs are never scared of anything, I am sure of it. Fear is a result of stressful, undignified lives.

In this utter ease of life, I believe that I can see a beauty unlike any other. In our society life is a battle, one which we inevitably lose, taking with us a great many other small lives, none of them holding any more worth than the others. We search desperately for nobility of purpose, for great endeavours, like bored children wanting to be given a small task so that we can feel important. Molluscs know no such triviality. They have no need for purpose. The aim of life is immaterial, the only pleasure not in achievement but pure experience, in a glorious passivity by which one can regard the full panoply of life as one might watch the world from a dream, detached but inspired towards a vague, perpetual awe. There is a whole other side to life, which I am immensely grateful in beginning to discover, which is opened by this “molluske philosophie” of detachment and faith that the world will provide. Is there not a marvellous integrity to the purity of faith that believes, and is right in believing, that everything it could possibly require will be brought to it by fortune? ’by fortune’? Seems to me the molluscs don’t even need to rely on luck? Maybe say: ‘as a matter of course’? But the passage as a whole is fantastic. I can’t help imagining what would have happened if Friddriv had met Lao-Tse. Next time I read the Tao-te-ching, I don’t doubt that I shall think about the question whether molluscs may not be the better Taoists.

The final stage in my enlightenment came directly from an experiment – I had been studying the habits of the parasitic limpet, a very interesting member of the family. I allowed one to attach to me – causing a fierce pain of the like I have not elsewhere experienced, sharp and visceral – I became intensely aware of the movements of the limpet’s mouthparts through my flesh. This in turn inspired a grisly fascination which, aided I think by substances released by the creature as it burrowed, allowed me to forget the pain and watch with the passiveness I required. There was remarkably little blood, considering that within ten minutes it had embedded itself so firmly in my leg that I could not dislodge it and it seemed immune to any pressure I put on it, though I couldn't say the same for myself.

Eventually the pain returned, as the creature settled in, and soon became too much, despite numbing it with liquor. I believe that my being a terrestrial creature made the limpet’s usual method of feeding more laboured, forcing it to feed more aggressively and thus cause greater pain. In the end I took a long blade and cut the creature out of the well it had made, as task that was, in itself, difficult, involving copious bloodshed and dizzying pain. When the mollusc was finally removed, and I was able to rest, shakily grasping the dying shellfish in my hand, I was overcome with a terrible guilt of the like I have never felt before. I realised, with a clarity that astonished me, that I had wilfully placed my comfort over the life of another creature, killing it for no reason other than it hurt me. I have another leg, do I not? But the limpet cannot live in any other way. Why did I not just give in? If life is such a struggle, then maybe that is all the proof I need that it is not… feasible, in the long term. Molluscs live a life without struggle. Why can’t I?

>there appears to be a long gap between this fragment and the next, but all the other notes were illegible or impossible to make sense of<

The past few weeks have made me feel very old. I cannot believe I will finish this task in time to see its result. Increasingly I cannot believe I will finish it at all. The only thing I can be sure of is that I had the germ of the truth, for a while, and somewhere among these notes it survives. I do not know if I still have it, it’s so hard to concentrate and I only want to sleep, or else wake with terrible dreams.I don’t understand. Why does he escape his terrible dreams by sleeping? I have a recurring dream, which I will describe here, as it seems to illustrate better than reasoned arguments the core of my ideas.

I dream I am a creature made of some soft, pearlescent material, walking on the bottom of the seabed. It is vast and empty and very lonely, and the light comes down in streamers from the surface of the waters, far above. After a while I look down at my feet and realise that they are sinking into the grit of the seabed. I try to pull them out, but they sink further, sending up tiny puffs of sand in the clear water. With every slightest movement my feet sink further into the seabed, and I begin to realise that my skin is changing. As the grit stirred up by my movement scrapes at it, the beautiful pearlfather sheen is roughened, ground down, until it becomes white and chalky, and begins to flake away. Soon the water is opaque with the smokescreen of grit and chalk, and I can’t see anything but can only feel myself sinking, wrapped tighter and tighter still in the weight of gravel and rock, until it slips over my eyes, and I can’t blink or even breathe, only lie immobile in the crushing blackness under the earth (consider ‘under the seabed’), which is the same as me.

Terrifying though the dream is, it offers an uncanny representation of the lifecycle of our earth, claiming the bones and shells of the dead as its own. There is, therefore, immortality, of a kind, at least for shellfish. I feel very tired, and the wound left by the limpet stinks of decay. I wonder if I will be absorbed into the earth. I think I would like that. I can see, now, why we place so much stake on burial rites and ceremonies. Not merely to prevent unhygienic bodies from causing problems, but because it does matter what happens when we die. And in this small, but permanent act, we can have some control over that.

Again: Brava! Bravissima!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 00:24:07
Hi, I'm working on an article about geodes, and rockhounds, (collecting mineral curiosities,) and was wondering if I could use this.
Quote
On the contrary, I was shown around certain caverns and chambers in which the walls were embedded with the petrified remains of ancient creatures, including several shellfish of extraordinary proportions. Some resembled fragments of trysters, but if my estimates are correct they would be perhaps exceeding a ped in length. There were other forms, multitudinous in number, like beds of small, pen-shaped mollusks growing in some ancient seabed as grass might grow in a well kempt garden. I can only imagine what might graze on such pastures.
By the way, the small, pen shaped mulloscs, we have fossils of them near where I live in California.  Unfortunately here, the are all jumbled up segments, no full ones.  Its a whole lot of fun to try to get the peices out.  some no bigger than a pencil lead, and others the thickness of my pinkie.  How great it would be to see them underground in a giant wall!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 02 May 2009, 01:29:22
@ Sivartius: By all means, use exerpts from this! the whole thing originally grew from a "quote" i made up in order to back up an entry i was writing. really i wrote it as an excercise in bendy thinking, and itnended to harvest quotes for lots of entries. if others do this, then it's less work for me! you might want to wait till i've checked it for spelling errors etc. first, though, to save your entry being corrected for my mistakes. :buck:
as for the pen shaped molluscs, i modelled them on modern day razor shells, dunno if you get them in california. it's cool to think they're fossils as well. :shocked:
@ Shabakuk: aww, thanks, and sorry about all those spelling mistakes, i really should be getting better at this. your suggestions are as brilliant and insightful as ever, and i will get to work imminently. hope you slept well.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 01:53:40
Ah, thank you very much.  From your descriptions, I thought you were talking about Crianiods  (aka "sea lilies".)  they look something like a stalk with a tiny anemone on top.  Something like this.  Where we are, they're all broken and jumbled, without any or the heads that I've seen.  (By the way, this picture is really zoomed.  I have yet to see a section bigger around than my thumb.)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 02 May 2009, 04:03:27
ooh, yeah, i know what you mean. another animal still living in modern seas, sometimes called sea fans, as well, i think. we need more weirdly beutiful plantlike animals in Santharia, i think. there's so much inspiration on Earth. :grin:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 11:20:35
By the way, have you got cuttlefish yet?


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Bard Judith on 02 May 2009, 11:57:28
We have Kraken, if only so that we can have krakalimari.... delicious deepfried, good with kitraure juice or shroom cream....


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 12:59:39
If I remember rightly, cuttlefish are much smaller than Kraken.  They are the chameleons of the sea, able to change their colour to match their surroundings.  The cuttlefish can adjust it's boyancy by changing the gas to liquid ratio in it's bones. Dried shredded cuttlefish is to Asian snack food, what Calamary is to Asian seafood.  They were the source for the origional sepia dye.  Aint Wikipedia great.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 02 May 2009, 17:30:22
it's true, the kraken seem more like squid than cuttlefish, but there's also the fliachara ink dumpling, which is a little bit cuttly. that said, i'm sure there's room for more cephalopods, Sivartius, if you're interested. :grin:


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 21:47:35
I think I could manage it.  Just let me get the dulcimer off my hands and I'll make an entry.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 02 May 2009, 21:57:35
eeep! slimy things!!! :D


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 02 May 2009, 23:24:57
*Hands Seth a large empty aquarium*
Tell you what. The as soon as it's done you get the first one.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 03 May 2009, 01:16:06
I'll give you a Chiton too. Sea centipedes. Very cool.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 06 May 2009, 02:37:58
Do you think you could put something in about him teaching Kraken and Cuttlefish to go through mazes like rats. I'm doing that entry on the cuttlefish and was hoping to reference the crazy mollusk thinker.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 06 May 2009, 03:23:21
please do reference him, but this probably won't be his main feild of research as cuttlefish etc are cephalopods, not shellfish. that said, i think so long as it's slimy and smells of fish Friddriv would be happy. i'll see what i can do. if you want to reference, put whatever you like - you can do the maze thing yourself if you want, fit it into your entry as you go - Alav was supposed to be a compulsive note-taker, he'd research anything that held his attention for five minutes.

chiton? sea centipede? i think you mean woodlouse? centipedes are more... bitey. :grin: thank you for the pets, i'll look after them!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 07 May 2009, 03:37:50
Here's what I wrote. If you can think of ways to make it better let me know.

The mad Mollusk researcher Fridiv Alev claimed to have taught Kraken and Cuttlefish to go through mazes. After much philosophical rambling, his conclusions are as follows:
Quote
The Kraken is a variable creature. On one day it will travel the maze with perfect ease, and on another it seems not to even know where it is. At times it sticks itself to the bottom of the tank and sulks, or maliciuously destroys all within reach. I am sure that it is mocking me, breaking my equipment and laughing. How can this spoiled creature, so different from the noble gnacker, be yet a close relation. It seems to posess all the failings of humanity.

The Cuttlefish, on the other hand, though still occasionally showing the frailties of temperment to which mobile life is heir, yet is still of a much more stable outlook. Perhaps this is because it, unlike the Kraken, has the benefit of an internal shell. This bears thought. If man were born with a shell, like a clam or gnacker, would he too have the benefit of their outlook on life? It is notable how humans constantly try to create an artificial shell. Suits of armor, clothes, shoes, all are barriers between ourselves and the world. And truly castles and houses are nothing more than attempts to creat a shell for ourselves, where we can be safe. Are we blindly striving for the perfection of the gnacker? A cuttlefish gains some of the benefits of  the shell, yet their exterior is still vulnerable. Perhaps this is why, though more stable than the kraken, they still sometimes show fear, anxiety, and ambition, things the gnacker and the barnacle never seem to feel.
<- From "The Philosophie of the Molluske Race" by Fridiv Alev.[/color]


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 11 May 2009, 03:53:31
thanks, Sivartius, it saves a lot of work if you can write stuff like this up. Could i suggest a couple of stylistic amendments before I integrate it, though?


The Kraken is an inordinately variable creature. On one day it will travel the maze with perfect ease, and on another it seems not to even know where it is. At times it sticks itself to the bottom of the tank and sulks, or maliciously destroys all within reach. I wonder sometimes if it is mocking me, breaking my equipment and laughing at the importance I place on such toys. How can this spoiled creature, so different from the noble gnacker, be yet a close relation? It seems to posess all the failings and inconsistencies of humanity.

The Cuttlefish, on the other hand, though still occasionally showing the frailties of temperment to which mobile life is heir, is still of a much more stable outlook. Perhaps this is because it, unlike the Kraken, has the benefit of an internal shell. This bears thought; if man were born with a shell, like a clam or gnacker, would he too have the benefit of their outlook on life? It is notable how humans constantly try to create an artificial shell: suits of armour, clothes, shoes, all are barriers between ourselves and the world. Even more so, castles and houses are nothing more than attempts to create something like a shell for ourselves, where we can be safe. Are we blindly striving for the blissful passivity of the shellfish? A cuttlefish gains some of the benefits of  the shell, yet their exterior is still vulnerable. Perhaps this is why, though more stable than the kraken, they still sometimes show fear, anxiety, and ambition, things the gnacker and the barnacle never seem to be troubled with.
<- From "The Philosophie of the Molluske Race" by Friddriv Alav.[/color]

you're uncannilly good at aping "Friddriv's" style. Nice job.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 11 May 2009, 04:44:57
Thanks....I think. I'm not sure what that says about my own mental state. Anyway, your comments have been integrated. And awaaaaay we goooo!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 12 May 2009, 03:19:52
OK, that's been pasted in - Sivartius, if you've any concerns about how i've integrated or phrased things, please don't  hesitate to say. and if you change the name of the cuttlefish, could you let me know, as i'd like to change it.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Sivartius on 15 May 2009, 01:27:41
I did change the name to "inkfish". Thanks.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Artimidor Federkiel on 15 May 2009, 04:00:21
So where are we with this, Seth? Update weekend's coming, and I'm looking for stuff that wants to enter said update... So in case you have a teaser and/or a book to place it (if new with teaser), make sure to get that done in time!


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Artimidor Federkiel on 15 May 2009, 04:01:57
Oh, and one more thing: Shouldn't it be "philosophy"? Or is there a special reason for this spelling?


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Shabakuk Zeborius Anfang on 15 May 2009, 04:36:20
I thought that both "Philosophie" and "Molluske" were intended as instances of Friddriv's idiosyncratic mind, as it applies itself to spelling?

Anyway, I like the additions about the cephalopodian members of the molluske clan. (On earth, the barnacles, which also feature in the new section, are classified as crustaceans, not molluscs - but I don't think that matters for Santharia.) Well done, Sivartius and Seth!   :D

Before you upload this as an entry, though, I think I may be permitted to say that the comments resulting from my uri-check about two weeks ago (Reply #11) have not been addressed yet. Leastwise there are no coloured changes in response to them, and I still can spot some of the spelling mistakes I pointed out.  ;)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 16 May 2009, 01:42:45
Aaargh, sorry, I got most of your comments, then got sidetracked and forgot to colour them. I'll go over that, hunt down and mercilessly obliterate any spelling or other errors I can find, and colour them.
@Arti - once that's done I've no major changes to make, unless anyone else finds any. I'm a little confused about the submission process though - is it right that I send it as a word doc. with the same margins etc. as other library pieces? I've written a teaser and stuck it at the top for now, but I should put that in the thread at the top? and I've suggested a tentative categorization, ( in the Philosophy section :P) but I'm not sure if it fits there. Any suggestions would be very welcome.

Oh yeah, and the Whole "Philosophie" thing was really just what seemed like a good idea at the time - I quoted it as a not-yet-existing- text in my gnacker entry, and saw no reason to change the title when I actually wrote it in its own right. If you don't think it works, I'll happily change it.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Artimidor Federkiel on 16 May 2009, 02:10:05
If you can put it into a Word file and send it to me like the other Library entries we have, that would be perfect, Seth. Just take such a Library document and change it accordingly. So yup, would be great to have it that way, cause otherwise I'd have to prepare it that way anyway as well. :)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 16 May 2009, 02:20:43
OK, will do, thanks. :) I looked again, and Ithink I must have mucked up my last edit because nothing bar Sivartius's addition had stuck. sorted now, I think.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Shabakuk Zeborius Anfang on 21 May 2009, 04:35:45
Looks great, Seth! It's ready for the next site update, as far as I can see.  :D


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 21 May 2009, 04:38:34
Yay! I guess I should start bothering Arti with the formatted copy, then. :P


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Remaom on 21 May 2009, 06:24:18
At one point you describe something as pen shape, are there pens in Santharia?


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Valan Nonesuch on 21 May 2009, 07:19:11
Yes, depending on what we're talking about. Quill shaped pens exist, and things like charcoal "pencils" (essentially a grip for a stick of less messy charcoal in the form of a cloth or paper wrap around the outside. It's not inconceivable that someone has done away with the feathered quill and replaced it with a piece of dowel, which is essentially a pen. You just have to dip it in ink, so it isn't a fountain pen.


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 23 May 2009, 01:59:25
before dfferentiation between pencils, pens etc, a pen was just a word for a generic writing implement, hence pen-knife - used for sharpening a quill tip or a graphite stick, etc. Thanks Valan for answering that. :)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Artimidor Federkiel on 31 May 2009, 15:24:39
I start with preparing this now, Seth - if you can deliever a document version the better, but I can do the site entry for now :)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 31 May 2009, 19:53:48
I've got a formatted version ready, but where do I send it?


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: Artimidor Federkiel on 31 May 2009, 20:48:38
How about webmaster@santharia.com? :)


Title: Re: Philosophie of the Molluske Race
Post by: seth ghibta on 31 May 2009, 20:52:30
Aha! thanks Arti, it should be on its way now.