It is interesting how the Dr. Yu Tsun uses the idea of the many diverging paths in time to justify to himself his murder of Dr Stephen Albert. He knows that in other timelines, Albert will live on, and possibly be his friend, so he is able to reconcile his guilt by the fact that this heinous act only takes place in this timeline. If one takes this idea to extremis, then anything is permissible. Any crime, no matter its horror, is justified by the fact there are many other timelines where the crime didn’t happen. All you are doing in your horrendous act is fulfilling one possible path of an infinite series of possibilities; you are doing your duty to the many worlds by completing your destiny in this one. The horror, the horror.
This doesn't really answer the question but some thoughts I had about the story: It plays out like he's been dropped into this world, this life, this scenario multiple times so he knows now how to avoid Richard Madden up until the final moment so this time he can achieve his goal. He knows how to evade him on the train and the children know where he is headed because he's been there before. Maybe last time he didn't make it or he did but he never got to complete his mission? The way Borges writes it is as though this is the nth version.
I understand the "Garden of Forking Paths" to be the unfolding of individual lives. Our decisions, as well as expected or unexpected events are the forks that create our past and our future. I notice that this story was published in 1941 in the midst of WWII and Argentina was impacted significantly by this European war because of its past connections to the British, but more significant relationships with the Germans and Italians. I think this background is important to the story. Yu Tsun and the soldiers in the tale have made "irrevocable decisions" in wartime. Actions against their own interests because of war. The final lines reflect the universal lament in war, "...I had no other course open to me than to kill someone of that name. He does not know, for no one can, of my infinite penitence and sickness of the heart."
Further thoughts--I hadn't ever read the Borges story and really got into it:
I have not read Hung Lou Meng (the novel 'Dream of the Red Chamber'), but I am familiar with it. For me, its inclusion in Borges' tale, is more important than the comparison to Albert's later tale. Hung Lou Meng is dream like tale of many stories, like 'Scheherezade's 1001 Nights' also mentioned in Borgia's tale. The creation of Yu Tsun's ancestor is described by Albert as, "A symbolic labyrinth,..An invisible labyrinth of time", his Ancestor's explanation is that "I leave to various future times, but not to all, my garden of forking paths."
At the beginning Yu Tsun reflects '...that all things happen, happen to one, precisely now.' Now indicates a connection to time-- before is past, after is future.
Borges' story also has vague indefinite allusions to time and a dreamlike atmosphere, abandoned streets, Albert's strange 'garden' and connection to Yu Tsun's ancestor and the 'garden of forking paths'.
Early in the story, Yu Tsun makes an 'irrevocable decision' that we later learn is to kill a man named Albert. It seems like this takes him out of the flexibility of time, out of the 'garden of forking paths', something about his circumstances (spy) has clinched his future, irrevocably.
Wow. All I can say is I’m glad I’m in the same timeline as this comment. So much to unpack here. Excellent spot on the allusion to WW2, I hadn’t thought of that, and I think you’re absolutely right. On your last point, I think the ‘irrevocable decision’ is what diverges Yu Tsun’s particular timelines from others, where takes a different path. You’ve also reminded me I really need to read Dream of the Red Chamber. Thanks so much for this contribution Leslie!
Thank you! I still have more questions. I’ve been thinking more about what makes “irrevocable decisions”. Is it wartime that makes Yu Tsun decision? He repeats the phrase several times, is it really irrevocable, is he making the decision over and over, is it ‘certainty’/belief in a cause/ proving himself to a person(German) that he hates/ love of country/ that makes it so he can’t change mind?
Is it just a story of one timeline—making me think about it.
The question as to on how many timelines does Yu Tsun kill Dr Albert I suppose depends on how many possible splinter points there are. Presumably there an infinite number of timelines where it does happen, with other details changed, and an infinite number of timelines where it doesn’t happen, with every conceivable other possible outcome happening instead. It’s rather dizzying when you think about it for too long!
Yes, dizzying. Too dizzying. Yesterday (Friday) I arrived at the low key, beautiful spot I visit each Sept for a week of fly fishing, reading, doodling and writing. NOW I’m making an irrevocable decision to not think about forking paths—except the ones between my favorite fishing spots.
How do you interpret the metaphor of the “garden of forking paths”?
It is interesting how the Dr. Yu Tsun uses the idea of the many diverging paths in time to justify to himself his murder of Dr Stephen Albert. He knows that in other timelines, Albert will live on, and possibly be his friend, so he is able to reconcile his guilt by the fact that this heinous act only takes place in this timeline. If one takes this idea to extremis, then anything is permissible. Any crime, no matter its horror, is justified by the fact there are many other timelines where the crime didn’t happen. All you are doing in your horrendous act is fulfilling one possible path of an infinite series of possibilities; you are doing your duty to the many worlds by completing your destiny in this one. The horror, the horror.
This doesn't really answer the question but some thoughts I had about the story: It plays out like he's been dropped into this world, this life, this scenario multiple times so he knows now how to avoid Richard Madden up until the final moment so this time he can achieve his goal. He knows how to evade him on the train and the children know where he is headed because he's been there before. Maybe last time he didn't make it or he did but he never got to complete his mission? The way Borges writes it is as though this is the nth version.
I understand the "Garden of Forking Paths" to be the unfolding of individual lives. Our decisions, as well as expected or unexpected events are the forks that create our past and our future. I notice that this story was published in 1941 in the midst of WWII and Argentina was impacted significantly by this European war because of its past connections to the British, but more significant relationships with the Germans and Italians. I think this background is important to the story. Yu Tsun and the soldiers in the tale have made "irrevocable decisions" in wartime. Actions against their own interests because of war. The final lines reflect the universal lament in war, "...I had no other course open to me than to kill someone of that name. He does not know, for no one can, of my infinite penitence and sickness of the heart."
Further thoughts--I hadn't ever read the Borges story and really got into it:
I have not read Hung Lou Meng (the novel 'Dream of the Red Chamber'), but I am familiar with it. For me, its inclusion in Borges' tale, is more important than the comparison to Albert's later tale. Hung Lou Meng is dream like tale of many stories, like 'Scheherezade's 1001 Nights' also mentioned in Borgia's tale. The creation of Yu Tsun's ancestor is described by Albert as, "A symbolic labyrinth,..An invisible labyrinth of time", his Ancestor's explanation is that "I leave to various future times, but not to all, my garden of forking paths."
At the beginning Yu Tsun reflects '...that all things happen, happen to one, precisely now.' Now indicates a connection to time-- before is past, after is future.
Borges' story also has vague indefinite allusions to time and a dreamlike atmosphere, abandoned streets, Albert's strange 'garden' and connection to Yu Tsun's ancestor and the 'garden of forking paths'.
Early in the story, Yu Tsun makes an 'irrevocable decision' that we later learn is to kill a man named Albert. It seems like this takes him out of the flexibility of time, out of the 'garden of forking paths', something about his circumstances (spy) has clinched his future, irrevocably.
Wow. All I can say is I’m glad I’m in the same timeline as this comment. So much to unpack here. Excellent spot on the allusion to WW2, I hadn’t thought of that, and I think you’re absolutely right. On your last point, I think the ‘irrevocable decision’ is what diverges Yu Tsun’s particular timelines from others, where takes a different path. You’ve also reminded me I really need to read Dream of the Red Chamber. Thanks so much for this contribution Leslie!
Thank you! I still have more questions. I’ve been thinking more about what makes “irrevocable decisions”. Is it wartime that makes Yu Tsun decision? He repeats the phrase several times, is it really irrevocable, is he making the decision over and over, is it ‘certainty’/belief in a cause/ proving himself to a person(German) that he hates/ love of country/ that makes it so he can’t change mind?
Is it just a story of one timeline—making me think about it.
The question as to on how many timelines does Yu Tsun kill Dr Albert I suppose depends on how many possible splinter points there are. Presumably there an infinite number of timelines where it does happen, with other details changed, and an infinite number of timelines where it doesn’t happen, with every conceivable other possible outcome happening instead. It’s rather dizzying when you think about it for too long!
Yes, dizzying. Too dizzying. Yesterday (Friday) I arrived at the low key, beautiful spot I visit each Sept for a week of fly fishing, reading, doodling and writing. NOW I’m making an irrevocable decision to not think about forking paths—except the ones between my favorite fishing spots.
Thank you for the story. In spite of myself, it will come to mind again!
Sounds lovely, enjoy!