Dear Plisters,

[Michael Bailey]

Mark Kohut  wrote:
> Are we done? What's next?
>
>



close enough for government work, I guess.

a few natterings:

Demivolt's faith in the hierarchy -
"I don't think," Demivolt smiled grimly. "I try not to.  Seriously, I
believe all elaborate games of this sort arise from someone in the
Office - high up, of course - getting a hunch.  Saying to himself,
'Look here: something is wrong, you know.'  He's usually right."
(528)

Stencil's term for the ruined-faced Godolphin: (529)
"Was that in Florence?"  (you have to hear the tone, "Was *that* in Florence?"


also on 529
"Another one?"
"Oh hardly so soon.  But give it twenty years." (taking us up to 1939,
and Maijstral's undergraduate journals)


"Nostalgia and melancholy....in Valletta remembrances seemed almost to live."
(534) // "...nostalgic melancholy is a fine emotion, becoming blunted
on alcohol." (535)
-----

I do not quite get this, but I think there is something to get:

Fairing has to report to America; Stencil doesn't sneer, "God's will"
- so to what is the priest replying, when he says,
"Hardly" ? - is it to "Here was after all another Englishman.  So they
were, in a sense, brothers in exile."?

anyway, Fairing goes on to say, "In the matter of Caesar and God, a
Jesuit need not be as flexible as you might think.  There's no
conflict of interests."

Stencil: "As there is between Caesar and Fairing?  Or Caesar and Stencil?"
Fairing: "Something like that."

why are both these men, who apparently are acting in the British
Empire's interests, Fairing indirectly as the person who requested its
attentions and caused Stencil to be sent, and Stencil directly as its
agent -

why is each ready to accept the idea of a conflict between himself and
Caesar, more so than a conflict between himself and God?

the general idea I get is that they both see a confluence of interests
between Church and State, and that sits comfortably enough;

but what needs of their own aren't being met by this arrangement?

----
Maijstral is indeed being paid by Stencil (537) but his wife indicates
it's not the money.  He's having an affair with V., but apparently
that doesn't change his sympathies from loyal subjection.
Or is V., though embroiled through personal affairs with the
Mizzist/D'Annunzio/Mussolini crowd, still at heart an English rose,
covertly sending Maijstral to lend what aid he may?
Are all the players somewhat softened by nostalgia and love, until V.
(I read this between the lines, but so does Stencil seem to) turns
poor Dupiro over to the fascisti?  -- this really seems to hit Stencil
hard (again, reading between the lines, but doesn't he seem distraught
at the news?)


"Forgive me, Father."
The priest chuckled.  "I can't.  You're an Anglican." (540)


ah well, there's a lot in this book.
I've learned a lot from the read.  I was looking for the passage that
sort of anticipates De Landa's idea of inanimate matter as a mover in
history (as the whole book anticipates Norman Mailer's "psychology of
machines") but can't find it right now.

Thanks everybody, this was great!