Such scrupulous evasions of ‘plain English’ apparently illustrate how seriously the idea is actually regarded.
And, in many circumstances, the results have indeed proved favourable; from successful lease applications, to adulterous affairs going undetected.
They do not ‘bring about’ the future any more than a road-sign brings about the approaching corner to which it refers. In that sense, they are a ‘sign’ of the future, but a sign nonetheless that the future seems compelled to obey.
This idea underlies just one of three principal theories so far proposed to explain their actions, as follows:
(Here is where formality might potentially help, rather than bamboozle us, although admittedly some perseverance is required, if we are to reap the benefits).
To make things easier, 1.2 and 1.3 are best considered essential parts of a single theory – to be complete, each serves as a supplement of the other.
Common features, moreover, suggest an equivalence with 1.1, although this would appear mandatory if all three are expected to be true.
_____________________________
The "Signpost" version has considerable explanatory power and is formally elegant, although not strictly a ‘physical theory’, and its longevity will ultimately require experimental verification.
In the prevailing metaphor of a ‘signpost’, the Faerie is portrayed as merely an adjunct, or ambassador, with no hand in the actual manifestation of future events.
To understand this in terms of ‘wish fulfilment’ is akin to searching for a town – call it "My Big Lottery Win" – by scouring the landscape, or a map, for a ‘signpost’ indicating the town up ahead.
To discover the whereabouts of the ‘sign’, is therefore, the principal quest undertaken, and leads implicitly to the sought destination.
The analogy – which is all it is at present – of a ‘signpost’, placed by the town’s citizens, on ‘the road leading in’, permits the singular conclusion of the Faerie as the cause of such events to be avoided through the notion of a 'common cause'.
On the other hand it spares the even less appealing consequence that the future was itself the cause of something in the past.
Thus we may ascribe a cause to both, without the failure to identify that cause as any great disaster. What causes X? If X occurs, we may confidently assert that some such cause at least exists, whether or not we are a position to say what it might be.
This is progress since we are now relieved of wish fulfilment
The earlier arrival of the Faerie on this view may reliably be correlated with the future, but not in such a way that need entail the still a manifestation of that future, or of that which and only appears to precede events (though in a ‘non-contradictory’ way).
If rain causes floods as well as the prior appearance of umbrellas, we are not bound to conclude that floods owe their existence to umbrellas, or else we could rid ourselves of one natural disasters by permanently folding up our raingear By the same token if the two are reliably correlated we may use the one (umbrellas) to presage the arrival of the other (an imminent incursion of water)
Nevertheless, while self-consistency, and the elimination of awkward metaphysical gremlins – 'wish granting' – do represent progress for the case under review, the Signpost Hypothesis is not quite out of the woods, and
This in turn suggests that prior appearance of a Faerie, and the subsequent emergence of the future, which they might be said to 'signpost', may simply indicate a co-dependent correlation of events, in the ‘counterfactual’ sense that "if the one occurs, then so the other", rather than the causal link of " one occurs because the other".
Such a correlation need not therefore temporal location of the common cause would To appreciate dependent and causal correlations, consider the following statements.
(A) If it is raining, then we go home.
(B) Because it is raining, then we go home.
Only in the first case do events have a dependent correlation but one which is not causative. We may
Note that we can orientate (A) with respect to either of its dependants without falling into contradiction – the counterfactual "If it is not raining, then we do not go home" is consistent with (A), but so is "If we go home, then it is raining" and its counterfactual, "If we do not go home, then it is not raining" – ‘rain’ and ‘home going’ are only co-reliant in that they happen together. They are not physically connected.
For (B), however, the use of ‘because’ makes ‘rain’ expressly causal, and therefore temporally constrained – since causes only precede, never follow, their effects – as evidence forced to imply ‘following which’, rather than the temporally-asymmetric ‘ergo’, which it more reasonably should.
To be clear, the relationship between ‘rain’ and ‘our going home’ is, in (B) but not (A), such that exchanging dependants results in asymmetry of function.
This is all quite enough to promote a nasty headache and it may be sufficient to say that Faeries and their futures are co-dependent, providing we accept that each can reliably and determinably guarantee the other, but not in any sense that requires powers of ‘creation’, or ‘causation’.
_____________________________
The second theory, 1.2, if more satisfactory from a ‘physical’ point of view, nevertheless requires the re-suspension of disbelief from a good deal higher altitude.
As non-residents of ‘our universe’, the motives and methods of Faeries shall forever remain a mystery. But, according to the stipulations of the "Chosen Paths" theory, when manifest in our dimension, however brief or infrequent such occasions, they are incapable of causative acts altogether.
To navigate our time and circumstances they must instead ‘choose’ a path, into the future – any possible future, consistent with the laws of physics.
From our perspective, the dynamics of this appear unremarkable. Perhaps the best analogy is that style of video-game in which a player’s ‘screen persona’ remains centred, while the surroundings move this way or that. In similar fashion, ‘we’ always remain ‘in the present’, facing 'towards' the future, however events may twist and turn around us.
And, apart from the actual events that constitute it, one future is much the same as another, at least, insofar as ‘travelling through it’ is concerned.
The arrival of any lawful future never raises our suspicions, and of those that fail to eventuate, we remain blissfully unaware.
Here, the ‘events’ are simply those lying along the path which the Faerie has chosen to travel. In short, they do not ‘forge paths’ through the world, but merely follow them, choosing one from the many.
That Faeries and their ‘chosen paths’ are always seen together merely confirms, for us, the appearance that they are ‘creating’ that future.
_____________________________
Ingenious as the foregoing might be, it crucially fails to explain an important feature; namely, why such ‘choices’ should necessarily prove the least bit advantageous to humans.
Here we must appeal to the third, somewhat more straightforward, Futures of Least Action Theory (1.3), which, as already mentioned, provides an essential addendum to the shortcomings of Chosen Paths.
Stated simply, although permissible ‘futures’ are limited only to the lawful, or real, Faeries will, nonetheless, tend to be found along trajectories of minimum resistance – in congregation with most other objects and occurrence.
Physical causes, however, play no part, although the ‘easiest routes’ still turn out to be just those ‘most desired’, influenced in large part by the hopes and anticipations of humans they encounter along the way.
A Faerie, seeking its way through the world, coupled with the human passion for ‘wishing’ – to us so tenuous – together, form a powerful synergy, creating an attractive byway into a possible future.
They will, if you like, go with the flow.
_____________________________
Formalities aside, the central feature that need hardly be pointed out, is that the possibility for thus arranging your future could prove extremely handy – something not lost on the legions of humans investing their waking hours in the search for gratification.
And, with a little imagination, there is no reason why application need be limited to the predictable – the ubiquitous ‘wads of bank notes’, and ‘refrigerated packets of chocky biscuits’.
But, before the prospects have you reduced to uncontrollable Pavlovian drooling, it is worth recalling that Faeries are aloof by nature, and quite indifferent to the wants and urgencies of humankind.
Obtaining their cooperation is no pushover, and one may have to settle for ‘less than the ideal’ when it comes to a detailed catalogue of one’s heart’s desires.
Certainly, their appearances are statistically frequent – but this in the sense that car accidents are frequent.
Still, it is true that, given time, "all leaves will eventually fall", and it is possible, through extreme vigilance, to engineer a chance encounter
Of course, as an involuntary participant in such a rendezvous, your Faerie is just as likely to view this practice as a form of entrapment.
Indeed, where other methods have failed, there has been recourse to seduction, and trickery, although I would suggest that those capable of such measures are well enough equipped to manage their own futures.
_____________________________
In the end, it may be prudent to consider the case of one particular middle-class family, living in a drab, but reasonably spacious mortgage-style apartment – and where I recently spent time – for whom nothing more than ordinary good luck seems to have been the principle go-between.
Faeries had taken to appearing spontaneously around the house – particularly the living room – without undue coercion, flitting about briefly before re-entering their parallel world – to the delight of the two young children, and the instant gratification of the parents, who had learned of the timely rewards to expect from such manifestations.
Whenever the frequency of visitations deteriorated, or expectations were raised, however, a peculiar tension would reign.
The frustration of knowing that Faeries are about, but refusing to cooperate, can quickly turn to resentment.
Not so ironically, the normal strategies for dealing with stubborn situations may now have exactly the opposite effect – once the path becomes tainted, no amount of resourcefulness, patience or resolve need result in the appearance of Faeries, despite exhaustive "now we’re serious" wait-a-thons, and frequent "I’ll just go check" perusals of the space around the living room.
During such stand-offs, the air itself can seem visibly tremulous, as though strained, ready at any moment to pop forth one of the little ‘wish-fulfillers’.
But then, it will invariably be while one’s back is turned, or for only a fleeting instant in the periphery of vision, neither of which constitutes sufficient manifestation for the purposes of diverting history.
This slightly wilful tendency is often dismissed as a consequence of their being male, although as an explanation, I would categorize it hardly impressive. Whether or not ‘female’ Faeries would prove any more cooperative is something we shall never establish – these Faeries only come in a male variety.
The gender-specific, ‘male’, probably doesn’t say much about their biology (even ‘biology’ may not do that). But, it serves a purpose in highlighting our usual conception of such entities as ‘feminine’.
At any rate, what we have here is not ‘convention dressed up in breeches’, (and even less an allusion to those rare forms actually born in pants) than simply diminutive, masculine Tinker-Bells – tiny Barishnikovs, if you will – with lean, slender muscles and 5 O’Clock shadows …along with a certain ‘hardness of trajectory’.
So, I think it goes without saying that they do not …throw ‘angel-dust’. Or, make …‘tinkling’ sounds.