“The Scientist”

Wednesday, January 19th, 2000

YOU ARE CURRENTLY SEEING BLOG POSTS IN PROPER CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. While in this mode, the links at the bottom and top of each page are not correctly labeled. However, the left pointing arrow always advances forward in time, and the right pointing arrow retreats.

Narrative 6 — and what comes after

Sunday, October 3rd, 2010

I have now posted all of Narrative 6, The Scientist. As I already mentioned, it begins at the end of Narrative 4, and fills in the details from the moment Menniss took Francine from her home (with a sliver of Blair’s tissue on ice)  up to the beginning of the genetic sequencing project. Unlike the others, it has two narrators: Francine Selis alternates with Richard Menniss. Also, there is a lot of serious science in this section.

Narrative 7 will follow soon after. I have not seen it, but according to Oxadrenals, it will span many months and bring us all the way to the present. That is to say, the last paragraph of that narrative will describe events that have occurred only days or hours before. It was written by Janice, and I am told it contains some of the finest writing in all the material. But for now, The Scientist. – Stephen

Francine is doing something she’s not saying

Monday, October 4th, 2010

I notice that I’m in a valedictory mood. I sense that something enormous is about to happen. Whether terrible, or wonderful, or both at the same time, I am not sure.

I wrote this post Sunday October 3rd. It will be posted October 4th. We often work that way on this blog, so I’m not sure why I am mentioning this now.

There are currents of intuition flowing through me, but I do not understand them. It’s often like that, and then a poem comes through and I understand.

I need to sit down now and try to write that poem. My hands are trembling.

Here comes a perception: Francine is doing something she’s not saying, something she didn’t tell Oxadrenals when he interviewed her to write the current narrative. I sensed it twice. First, when she says this:

Who else should take the responsibility?  Better a secular humanist than a religious fanatic, a scientist than a politician. Robert Oppenheimer hadn’t wanted the responsibility either. “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.”  But he knew he had to make the atomic bomb for America because if the Nazis got it first, imagine the horror. Einstein, Darwin, Nelson Mandela—they’d taken on huge responsibilities.  And Richard too.  Having to bomb his friend.  She admired greatness of spirit in others; could she find it in herself?

Take responsibility for what? For creating immortality? Probably that’s what Oxadrenals thought. But he’s not well attuned to her. I think he missed something. The examples she gives (Oppenheimer building the atomic bomb, Richard having to bomb his friend — a story he told Francine in Narrative 4) invoke people who have to make a terrible decision. What terrible decision is she making?

And then again at the very end:

“But after the two men left, Grey Fog vanished, and she saw what she would do.

What is it she’s decided to do?

She heard Father Bruno’s voice in her head.  “Take down your harps from the willow tree, oh my people, and return thee to Zion.”

What does she mean? What terrible choice is this noble, simplistic, brilliant, un-self-aware woman about to make?

The Illuminati are facing an equal

A genius

A soul of nobility unstained by evil

Disinterested, well-meaning, trusting and gentle

Foolish and powerful, upright and broken

One of our possible futures is held in her hands.

–Kate