Is the ending of the Priest's tale consistent with the rest of the story?

Question

I'm part way through Dan Simmons' Hyperion; please no spoilers for the rest of the book, if possible (wording, etc).

I've just read through the Priest's tale and the ending seemed inconsistent with the rest of the "tale" in several ways.

1. Why did Father Dure crucify himself?
2. How did he do it despite the unbearable pain he already was apparently experiencing from the cruciform? hardly believable, is it? (I don't think this has a real answer, but still, maybe I missed something)
3. Father Hoyt says the Bikura showed them the "Son of Flames". Even if they didn't actually tag along, they must've seen him. How? It's made very clear that those affected by cruciforms start suffering from terrible pain when nearing the edge of the forest, nevermind advancing into it, and the Bikura had seemed to have no interest in even trying to go outside their normal habitat. Then how were they able to see Dure?

Again, please no spoilers for the rest of the book, if at all possible. If not, please mark them as spoilers. I was just baffled by this particular bit that seemed grotesquely incongruous with the rest of the story.

Answer 1

Why did he crucify himself?

Duré thinks on Day 311:

I do not know if it would be possible to inflict on oneself - or to tolerate - levels of nonlethal pain sufficient to drive the cruciform out completely

He intends to cause himself enough pain to cause the cruciform's tendrils inside him to retreat, although realizing that he could surely not survive. The crucifixion is a method to allow himself to undergo continual pain while not being able to escape. It is also obviously connected to his Catholic faith, so that's a reason why he would think of the "mechanics" or consider it an appropriate method.

How did he do it despite the pain?

He was extraordinarily determined to put himself on the tree, after a year of carrying the cruciform and hating it. Once he had impaled his limbs on the spikes and bent them into hooks, there was no way for him to lift himself off, so at this point he would not be able to change his mind. Hoyt notes that "as long as his skeleton was intact" he would not fall. So although the pain would have been very bad, and then much worse, he only had a choice for the first part.

How did the Bikura know he was there?

By the time Hoyt arrives, Duré has been on the tree for seven years. Although their minds have been dulled, the Bikura might still at some point have happened across him, especially if they heard screams. We know that they are alert enough to notice interlopers into their area on short order.

Earlier, on day 215, he made it 14km into the forest, and the Bikura were able to go 5km in to carry him back. Hoyt says the crucifixion site is about 3km in to the flame forest, so that's within the range that the Bikura are willing to travel. They were also able to meet Duré about 4km from their village (and murder Tuk a few days before that). It's more distant than he managed on day 116, which was 2km, and he guessed then that the limit was 10km. The Bikura might be allowed a longer leash than he was, but in any case these numbers don't seem too inconsistent as rough estimates.

Answer 2

1. He was looking for a release, and he believed that this was a way to accomplish it.

2. Pain is relative. If you are experiencing a 10 on a scale of 1-10, you might barely notice or care about an additional lesser pain, even if that pain by itself would seem unbearable.

3. I don't recall the actual geography from the book, but it's possible that he could be seen from a greater distance than the Bikura would actually approach.

   It's also possible that

   the cruciforms could have played a role. If the Bikura couldn't actually be roused to do something about it, they could at least be made to show as much interest as possible in order to inform someone else to do something.

   As it turns out,

   Father Hoyt not only finds Duré and takes him down, but winds up hosting Duré's cruciform as well.