Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009

Re: Womb / Phallus

From: Rick Walter <fpwalter~at~UH.EDU>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 13:58:17 -0800
To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~math.technion.ac.il>

At 01:51 PM 2/2/00 -0500, you wrote:
>> Yesterday, Feb.1, Ron Miller wrote the Forum about The Annotated FROM THE
>> EARTH TO THE MOON of NYU professor, Walter James Miller (no relation).
>>
>> Ron wrote: "The only faults I've found . . . have mostly to do with
>> Miller's unfamiliarity with astronautics. For one example, he seems
>> extremely confused as to what "g" or "g force" means and most of his
>> references to it make no sense. And trying to make a 900-foot hole in the
>> ground into a phallic symbol... one hardly knows what to say."
>>
>> I'm sorry that Ron has returned to his old malicious sniping at Walter
>> Miller. And, as in the past, Ron's haste and compulsive hostility have led
>> him into making silly blunders. To wit--
>
>I see nothing compulsively hostile in my remarks, particularly given
>that this is the first criticism I've offered in half a decade--and the
>first regarding this particular book--other than the publication a
>couple of years ago of a possible source for Verne's reference to an
>8-armed squid. I can only suppose that Rick's definition of "sniping"
>includes anything he might interpret as being critical.
>
>> 1) WJM's description of GEES ACCELERATION is on p. 114, (with backward
>> references on pp. 131 & 163), and I'd always thought it eminently clear,
>> straightforward, and inoffensive. As a double-check I shared it this
>> morning with one of my contacts at NASA--who declared it admirably
>> accurate. Ron seems to be the one who's "extremely confused."
>
>I admit, with apologies to Mr. Miller, that I had allowed my
>recollection of his almost universal use of the phrase "gees
>acceleration" to color what I remembered of his explanation of
>acceleration--which was, as Rick points out, perfectly correct. But .
>. . the fact still remains that there is absolutely no such thing as
>"gees acceleration" and I've failed, in a library of several hundred
>volumes on astronautics, to find such a phrase. The unit is "g", for
>"gravity". (Writing "gee" is rather like writing "vee" for "volt", or,
>worse, "vees electromotive force".) Since g is a measure of
>acceleration the phrase "gees acceleration" is simply redundant. I
>admit that I overstated the case when I said that Miller's
>explanation was confused--it's not--when I meant that his
>terminology was idiosyncratic.
>
>> 2) As for making the 900-foot-deep Columbiad "into a phallic symbol," Ron's
>> memory is playing tricks on him. On pp. 93 and 163, WJM's notes call it a
>> WOMB symbol, and French critics have made the same connection. Surely, as a
>> married man, Ron knows the difference between a phallus and a uterus.
>
>The passage I refered to reads, verbatim: "Verne explores basic
>dream and sexual symbolism. He names Barbicane after a
>commanding tower, he makes Nicholl feel impotent and jealous
>when Barbicane erects his 900-foot tube." (p. 162) I can hardly
>imagine a reference clearer or less arbitrary than this. The
>reference to "womb" on p. 193 is without any stated connection to
>the cannon at all. I suppose, at worst, Miller can only be accused
>of mixing his metaphors--and Rick of missing one of the only two
>unambiguous references.
>
>> Almost exactly 5 years ago, I asked Ron how this kind of gratuitous
>> negativity could "further the appreciation of Jules Verne." He still hasn't
>> come up with an answer.
>
>The answer is the same as it was then: the negativity is in the eye
>of the beholder. I broached exactly the same objections to Walter
>Miller personally and he found nothing offensive whatsoever in them-
>-indeed, we had a very amicable and amusing discussion in which
>he himself laughingly wondered where he had ever come up with
>the idea of a 900-foot hole as a phallic symbol. It would appear that
>Mr. Walter (who is in any event not the author of the book under
>discussion) is finding offense on behalf of Mr. Miller, who, as I just
>said, found nothing at all wrong with my remarks.
>
>Ron
>

This R-rated dialogue demonstrates conclusively that Verne isn't "just a
writer for children."

Ron is right in referring to the phrase (which I'd forgotten) "erects his
900-foot tube" as seemingly phallic in its imagery. It's a pity Walter
Miller didn't word it, more aptly, "SINKS his 900-foot tube." But then we'd
have missed out on this zesty exchange.

As for the references to "womb" having "no connection" to the cannon, there
I'M right. Of course they have a connection. Both allusions concern the
celebratory stag banquet that the Gun Clubbers put on INSIDE THE CANNON.

Onward and upward. Or is it "Inward and Upward"?

RICK.
Rick Walter
Announcer
KUHF-FM Radio
University of Houston
Houston, TX 77204-4061
713.743.0887
Received on Wed 02 Feb 2000 - 22:01:26 IST

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2009/02/01 22:36:11 $$