{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/1216", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 1216, "subject": "Graves & Orwell, also St. Peter", "messages": 3, "voices": 3, "first": "1998-10-20T07:30:20+00:00", "last": "1998-10-20T12:28:14+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alice Turner", "address": "al at interport.net" }, "date": "1998-10-20T07:30:20+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Graves & Orwell, also St. Peter", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Alex,\n\nWhy don't you see if your friend who wrote the St. Peter paper for Kessel\ncan send it to you as an email attachment? Then you could forward it to\nthose of us who would like to read it, me for instance." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "1984 isn't obscure, but most of his best writing (Road to Wigan Pier &\nthe essays in general) is. 1984 is an important book, but it isn't all\nthat\nwell written, except for a spots here and there (the opening and the\nfinale).\nI wonder why it happened to Orwell. To bring us on topic, Wolfe's\ntalked about his two favorites, also far more obscure than they deserve to\nbe,\nKipling and Chesterton. You can see political/social agendas lurking\nbehind\nthose falls from critical favor, but that really shouldn't hurt Orwell--I\nmean,\nhaving argued with Gollancz and criticized Shaw and the Webbs isn't exactly\ncause for blacklisting now that nobody defends Stalin..." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't think Orwell is as forgotten as you think. Check out Amazon.\nLiterally dozens of editions of Animal Farm and 1984. Half a dozen\nbiographies within the last 20 years. Oodles of Cliff notes and the rest.\nAnd I frequently run into an essay on him in some place like The New York\nReview of Books. The last one was pretty recent, and the essayist argued\nthat his best book was Homage to Catalonia and his worst (which he admitted)\nKeep the Aspidistra Flying. But even that is still in print. Serious\njournalists still study Orwell for form, as well they might. Especially for\nwar coverage. I'd bet anyone that Roger Cohen, researching his new book on\nBosnia that is getting such raves, read Orwell.\n\nI'd also argue that Graves still lives. Anyone interested in mythology at\nall has Greek Myths on the shelf (and learns how to read it---the salt\ncellar must remain nearby), while The White Goddess practically gave birth\nto the New Age goddess movement--it has never been out of print. Masterpiece\nTheater kept the Claudius books alive. Aside from these, he may not be as\ncurrent as Orwell, but he's certainly hanging in and perhaps will make a\ncomeback once he's in public domain.\n\nChesterton and Kipling are both in public domain now, and there's a\nsurprising amount of them out there. Kipling will obviously live forever as\na children's writer---once you pass the portal in that field you're\nimmortal. There's still a sort of cloud hanging over him as an \"imperialist\"\notherwise, though I've never bought that. To me, Kipling is alive, but I\nhave doubts about Chesterton. (I've never read -The Man Who Was Thursday-\nthough.)\n\n-alga" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alex David Groce", "address": "adgroce at eos.ncsu.edu" }, "date": "1998-10-20T12:14:03+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Graves & Orwell, also St. Peter", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alice Turner wrote:\nAlex,\n\nWhy don't you see if your friend who wrote the St. Peter paper for Kessel\ncan send it to you as an email attachment? Then you could forward it to\nthose of us who would like to read it, me for instance." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I will. Chaffee (author of the paper) is out of town until Friday, but I'll\nask him when he gets back if he has an electronic copy. Anyone who wants a\ncopy can write me (off-list)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I don't think Orwell is as forgotten as you think. Check out Amazon.\nLiterally dozens of editions of Animal Farm and 1984. Half a dozen\nbiographies within the last 20 years. Oodles of Cliff notes and the rest.\nAnd I frequently run into an essay on him in some place like The New York\nReview of Books. The last one was pretty recent, and the essayist argued\nthat his best book was Homage to Catalonia and his worst (which he admitted)\nKeep the Aspidistra Flying. But even that is still in print. Serious\njournalists still study Orwell for form, as well they might. Especially for\nwar coverage. I'd bet anyone that Roger Cohen, researching his new book on\nBosnia that is getting such raves, read Orwell." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "\tI suppose so; perhaps it's just that Orwell sometimes doesn't get the\nfull respect that he deserves? I think the most well-read crowd does know\nOrwell, and especially among literati in England the essays and such are very\nbig. I'd say though that the second-tier of readers does tend to think of him\nas a one-trick-pony author of anti-Communist dystopias. In other words, if you\nget your education in English literature from classes at American universities,\nthat's all you'd know about him (someone the other day said she was surprised\nto see him on the Modern Library list, and asked me \"So Orwell was a\njournalist, too?\") As opposed to Kipling and Chesterton who were once very\nbig, and still matter a great deal to a certain crowd (in his day Orwell wrote\nan essay about the distaste for Kipling, but suggested Kipling would endure),\nbut seem to be completely missing in most English Lit. departments.\n\tI would contend that their importance at the time (think how often\nChesterton comes up in other people's writing of his day--Eliot, for example)\nwould merit more of a place in the classroom. But people who have\nextra-curricular literary knowledge (which does not include most English\nmajors) do tend to know them. \n\tAnd yes, Graves is still alive & well. I like Graves, but don't think\nyou can argue he's had much less attention than he deserves. Kipling lives\neverywhere except in the classroom (mainly because he's one of the great\nEnglish makers of fiction, and thus hard to hold down).\n\tAs to Chesterton, I think he's important and a major figure in any\ncomplete picture of his time. He appears to be alive for Wolfe in the same way\nthat he is for most real Chesterton fans; we almost speak of him as a dead very\ngood friend we never happened to meet. Chesterton fans in general tend to be\npeople who somewhat agree with his religious and social ideas--thus Wolfe and\nLafferty (or myself). Although Orwell was given to defending Chesterton and\ncertainly thought his religious ideas were foolish, and Martin Gardner isn't\nexactly Catholic in thought. But I think Chesterton should be really annoying\nif you strongly disagree with him or even are just unsympathetic.\n\tWhich leads to a thesis about Wolfe: if you tend to agree with Wolfe's\nideas that's icing on the cake, but you could HATE most the\nreligious-philosophical-political matrix underlying his works and still love\nthe writing and be a Wolfe devotee (for instance, John Kessel adores Wolfe's\nwork, but I think I can safely say politically and religiously they'd be at\neach other's throats in a moment). This does set a writer apart from someone\nlike Chesterton, who is fun, and a master at what he does, but seems likely to\nbe unrewarding to anyone who dislikes his world-view, although lovable in a way\nthat Wolfe isn't to those who agree (Wolfe can be Chestertonian in his essays,\nthough--I admired Wolfe as a writer before I read any of his non-fiction, but\nonly felt a great liking for him as a man once I'd read some of his essays)." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "\"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.\" - John 8:32\n--\nAlex David Groce (adgroce at eos.ncsu.edu)\nSenior (Computer Science/Multidisciplinary Studies in Technology & Fiction)\n'98-99 NCSU AITP Student Chapter President\n608 Charleston Road, Apt. 1E (919)-233-7366\nhttp://www4.ncsu.edu/~adgroce" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Kevin J. Maroney", "address": "kmaroney at crossover.com" }, "date": "1998-10-20T12:28:14+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Graves & Orwell, also St. Peter", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 07:30 AM 10/20/98 -0400, alga wrote:\nAnd I frequently run into an essay on him in some place like The New York\nReview of Books. The last one was pretty recent, and the essayist argued\nthat his best book was Homage to Catalonia and his worst (which he admitted)\nKeep the Aspidistra Flying. But even that is still in print. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "In fact, the most recent NYROB piece on Orwell was about _The Complete\nOrwell_, a 20-volume scholarly edition of literally everything the editors\ncould find ever written by Orwell, from juvenalia to, I believe literally,\ngrocery lists. \n\nThe reviewer started off by asking, \"Why Orwell?\" but then quickly admitted\nthat the collection was fascinating and sets a new high-water mark in the\npresentation of the works of a canonical author.\n\n\n\nWombat, a.k.a. Kevin Maroney kmaroney at crossover.com\nKitchen Staff Supervisor, New York Review of Science Fiction\nhttp://ebbs.english.vt.edu/olp/nyrsf/nyrsf.html" } ] } ] }