Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Gregg Levine (14 Mar 2026 15:08 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Terrence Fugate (14 Mar 2026 21:45 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris David Johnson (15 Mar 2026 07:47 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Terrence Fugate (15 Mar 2026 20:19 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Jay P Hailey (15 Mar 2026 22:30 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Terrence Fugate (15 Mar 2026 22:46 UTC)
Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris David Johnson (14 Mar 2026 21:58 UTC)

Re: [HBP] Piper and the nuclear weapons and Uller and Fenris Jay P Hailey 15 Mar 2026 22:24 UTC

> Fenris, in H. B. Piper's universe, has always confused me.
> Fenris is where /Four Day Planet/ takes place, there are no sentient
> natives to use nukes on.

Well, this stands as a conflict in the source materials.  We could
speculate why.  Many such speculations are credible and sensible.

But that leaves us with an issue.  How do we resolve the contradiction?

We could just quietly accept it, and move forward

We could come up with a rationalization that covers both statements as true.

We could say "There's two different places named Fenris"

But when you do something like this, you're describing a version of the
THFH in your mind where the contradictions are taken care of.

So if you pick a solution you like and apply it,  you have created
"Terrence's version of the THFH"

This is valid, but someone else's internal model might not agree.

As a story telling thing, these are valid.  As descriptions of history,
no - only what HBP put on the page counts.

Which is why its important to mark the two differently.

My preference is that "There's more than one place called Fenris"