Subject: Gene Wolfe: Book of the New Sun

From: Kim Helliwell <analog!kim at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1986 22:25:37 +0000

I've seen several kudos on this newsgroup for Gene Wolfe's Book of
the New Sun, and they nearly always prompt the following train of
thought in my mind:

What is it that you who love it (and read and re-read it avidly) see
in it that I am missing?  I've made it to the end of the second
volume, the one which ends with the invitation to journey further
with the protagonist, but does not blame the reader if he chooses
not to--saying "it is no easy journey".  Even up to that point it is
no easy journey, so I've paused long to consider whether I want to
go any further!

I must be missing some crucial point--is it something that will come
clear if I go on, or would the net advise me to abandon it because,
"if you have to ask, you ain't never going to know!"

If someone could explain in his own words what it is that Wolfe is
trying to do with this work, it might help.

---

From: Michaelntz <csd2!krantz at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1986 02:03:00 +0000

We are asked:

> hplabs!analog!kim

What Wolfe is trying to do is raise science fiction to a higher
degree of literary value than has EVER EXISTED, beyond question.  I
have read a hell of a lot of SF and a hell of a lot more `serious'
fiction than that (I'm an MA in literature/writing), and all I can
tell you, though the Book Of The New Sun is too long and complex for
your question to be answerable outside of an extended thesis (shit,
I won't pretend I really understand the damn books - they defy
that), is that if you are not blown away by now, at the end of the
The_Claw_Of_The_Conciliator, if you are not shaking your head at
Wolfe's awesome scope, his dazzling imagination, his miraculously
skilled prose - well, man, go back to clowns like Heinlein and
Asimov.

Gene Wolfe is, quite simply, the best novelist ever to write in the
science fiction genre.  His prose, his ideas - all of it.  The best.
Hands down.

Michael Krantz

---

From: ISM780!jimb <ism780!jimb at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Tue, 04 Feb 1986 15:32:00 +0000

I will straddle the fence (and probably incur anatomical
difficulties as a result).  The first two quotes above I agree with,
though I do not associate myself with some of the snotty tone in the
sections I deleted.

As to the third quote, while I find it arguable, it *is* arguable,
e.g., can't be dismissed out of hand.  The Book of the New Sun is
not for plot readers.  Wolfe's use of plot is almost completely
centered on progressive revelation and illumination of character,
that kernel of all good fiction.

TBOTNS is one definition by example of tour de force.  He is using
SF convention and imagery combined with classical literary technique
to portray the life, conflicts, and character development of a
fascinating individual in a fascinating world.

TBOTNS is written with and to a different sensibility than most SF,
and like all literature, you must accept it on its own terms if it
is going to "work" for you.  If you don't, or for whatever reason
can't, such is life.  Remember, concerning matters of taste, there
is no disputing.  (An aphorism that antedates my birth by a good
couple of millenia.)

Jim Brunet
ihnp4/ima/ism780B
hao/ico/ism780B

---

From: Tim Maroney <hoptoad!tim at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1986 07:59:42 +0000

The Book of the New Sun is in some ways a difficult work.  If you
don't like it, then by all means read something you will like better.
However, since the question was why others like it...

First, ignore the person who said the world is unique.  Wrong.  Jack
Vance used it frequently, though Wolfe's variation incorporates some
Cordwainer Smith as well (you know, when he says "Atomic Age" and it
*really* sounds like "Bronze Age").  Nonetheless, it is fascinating
to modern people to explore a perspective from which we are not only
relegated to a historical junkpile, but completely forgotten and
proven to have no significance whatsoever in the overall history of
the world.

The prose is stunningly crafted.  That in itself is not enough to
make a book enjoyable -- see William Gibson, who people will get
sick of long before 1988.  Nonetheless, at this level it is the best
science fiction ever: it almost attains the stature of an epic poem.

Related to thhe quality of the prose is the quality of the imagery,
which is peculiarly evocative.  All the grains and colors of a Wolfe
scene leap out with all the attribnutes of a vivid three-dimensional
perception remembered from childhood.  This is done without long,
tedious description or focusing on surface features.

The plots are what really make the series.  For some reason I have
yet to figure out, the characters and events really get into my
brain and reconfigure it into an Escher lithograph.  Their raw
potency defies description or summary.  If these are not moving you,
I don't know what to tell you.  Do they seem arbitrary?  Pointless?
Then you and I have different worlds, or at least different ways of
reading.

I hope this helps.  Try to read the Book as if it were an epic poem
in blank verse, and you may come to appreciate it more.

Tim Maroney

---

From: ISM780!jimb <ism780!jimb at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1986 15:12:00 +0000

Thought I'd jump back in again.  Jim Gardner's response (jagardner @
watmath) is excellent.  I wish *I* had written it and I second
practically everything he said -- didn't see anything I wouldn't
wholeheartedly agree with on one read/think.  Thanks, Jim.

Jim Brunet
ihnp4/ima/ism780B
hao/ico/ism780B

---

From: Tim Maroney <hoptoad!tim at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1986 18:33:27 +0000

patcl at hammer.UUCP (Pat Clancy) writes:
>>I read Shadow of the Torturer and thought it was horrible.
>
>I'll second that!  This was an outstandingly bad novel.  Yet it
>seems that every year or so the Wulf-cultists must issue forth onto
>the net to demonstrate why there's such a large and uncritical
>market for so much bad SF.

This "cult" happens to include more than half of the SFWA, the
Science Fiction Writers of America, as evidenced by the Nebula
selections.  I would hardly call the SFWA uncritical, or large for
that matter.  Perhaps the writers know something you don't?  (There,
we're even insult for insult.)

Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot

---

From: Steven K. Zoltan Brust <starfire!brust at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1986 20:56:53 +0000

Okay, I'm finally moved to take up this gauntlet.  Whatever else has
happened, the original query ("What d'you guys see in this,
anyway?") was quite reasonable and deserves to be answered.

It is sad that I can't answer it.

I will, however, describe my experience with the books.  Okay.  I
picked up SHADOW OF THE TORTURER and read about a third of it,
discovered that it hadn't grabbed me, and stopped reading it.  For
the next year, I kept hearing from friends I respected how much they
were enjoying the books.  In particular, I was hearing from those
who enjoyed the sounds of words, that is, the work of those who are
aware of the beauty of the language.

Well, okay, I like that stuff, too.  That's why I'm a Zelazny nut,
and why I like Orson Scott Card, Jane Yolen, Patricia McKillip, etc.
etc.

So I decided to give the books another try, this time forcing myself
to read slowly and carefully.  It worked for me, and I am now very
glad that I did.  For those who enjoy the sound of English well
wrought, these books will tickle that.  For those who enjoy a good
story, it really is here, it just takes a while to realize it.  The
book is screamingly funny, without ever falling out of its conceit
(including a multi-page comparison of the art of torturing to the
art of writing; I almost hurt myself laughing.)  The book had me
close to tears at times, yet was never a tragedy.  The part of me
that likes to play with ideas just as ideas was tickled all the way
through, but never quite in ways I expected.  On my next few
readings, when I start looking for "What is really going on here;
what is the author saying?"  there is enough meat that I don't go
away hungry.

Okay?  This certainly won't convince anyone who didn't like it that
he ought to, but maybe this will help whoever asked the initial
question to understand why some of us enjoy the books.

skzb

---

From: Charley Wingate <umcp-cs!mangoe at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1986 14:37:40 +0000

I've found that I really like Wolfe's short stories.  Shortly after
the BotNS came out, I picked up _Gene Wolfe's Book of Days_, which I
enjoyed immensely.  I could never get into the BotNS, though, for a
couple of reasons.  WHen I got _Free Live Free_ a few months ago, I
had hoped that things would be different.  Alas, I have temporarily
given up it, about halfway through.

   Wolfe's style always seems to get to me after a few hundred
pages.  I can take it in small doses, but the prospect of page after
page of it stretching out before me always makes me faintly queasy.
_Free Live Free_ manages to overcome this by a certain lightness
which is more like his short stories.  The BotNS, though, moves
along with the ponderous grace of the Vehicle Tranporter pulling
away from the VAB.  Also, the odd word trick doesn't work for me.
SInce it's such a high-wire act, one slip ruins it, and when I ran
across "palaquin" used in the wrong context, the spell was broken.
Not caring for the subject matter all that much anyway, I've never
seriously attempted to pick it up again.

Its certainly true that Wolfe requires rather deliberate and careful
reading.  That's partly why I haven't finished _Free Live Free_;
things have gotten in the way and I haven't had the time to devote
to it.

C. Wingate

---

From: Randy Murray <cbosgd!rtm at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 1986 19:42:30 +0000

I've really been shocked at all the net-talk about how difficult it
is to read Wolfe's work.  His novel and short stories have been
absolutely spellbinding to me.  It seem as if a number of you claim
to understand fiction (let alone science fiction), yet haven't
learned to willingly suspend your disbelief.

While recently reading one of his short stories "The eyeflash
miracles" I had one of those revelations that makes you want to
abuse innocent and uncaring bystanders.  Wolfe understands that the
reader is blind.  The reader can never truly see anything, no matter
how detailed or complex the description.  The writer can only delude
his audience into believing they see and understand.  Wolfe can be
painfully truthful in his fiction.  The reader must not fix images
in his mind and rely on them as stable.

I can't believe that Wolfe is causing such a stir because he uses
difficult language.  The work in BotNS comes in not fighting the
author.  Let him take you where he wants to go.  And if you think
you were confused with BotNS, you should try one of his earlier
novels, _Peace_.

You can get lost in Wolfe's work.  Why not sit in the dark and let
Gene tell you a story.

By the way, I was just introduced to the net.
I love it.
So let's hear from y'all.

---

From: rti-sel!wfi <rti-sel!wfi at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 1986 23:25:06 +0000

mangoe at umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) writes:
>the BotNS came out, I picked up _Gene Wolfe's Book of Days_, which
>I enjoyed immensely.

Then you should check out another collection of his stories, "The
Island Of Dr. Death And Other Stories And Other Stories," in my
opinion a collection that's superior to the "Book Of Days."

Cheers, Bill Ingogly

---

From: Matt Verner <inuxh!verner at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1986 03:35:05 +0000

>>I've found that I really like Wolfe's short stories.  Shortly
>>after the BotNS came out, I picked up _Gene Wolfe's Book of Days_,
>>which I enjoyed immensely.  ...
>

Could someone please tell me how I can aquire these obscure books?
I am constantly reading about this or that book from Gene Wolfe and]
when I go around the local book stores in Indy they invariably don't
have anything but books that appeal to hormone-drenched teenagers
that thought the novelization of 'Star Wars' should have won a Hugo.

Is there a mailing list or catalog I can subscribe to?  Yes, I am
already a suscriber to the SF Book Club.  Passable at best.

Drop me a line, if you have any info!
P. O. Box 1008

---

From: ccvaxa!wombat <ccvaxa!wombat at caip.rutgers.edu>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1986 03:45:00 +0000

Gene Wolfe himself will sell you signed editions by mail. An old
Science Fiction Chronicle laying around here lists his *Books of
Days* for $16 (hardback, first edition, signed) from Gene Wolfe, POB
69, Barrington, IL 60010. If you can find an issue of SFC or Locus
they have lots of advertising from mail-order firms.

Wombat