{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/2486", "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": 2486, "subject": "Digest urth.v030.n031", "messages": 1, "voices": 1, "first": "2000-12-05T12:35:06+00:00", "last": "2000-12-05T12:35:06+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2000-12-05T12:35:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) RE: Digest urth.v030.n031", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Adam, thanks for replying." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "1. That Gene Wolfe did in fact have a \"real\" and (more or less) coherent\n biography of ADW in mind when he wrote PEACE;" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I agree that Wolfe had something definite in mind; whether it was a\ncoherent biography of Weer, or a collection of deliberately fragmentary\nor inconsistent biographical \"facts\" I don't know." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that's an interesting question -- one that I hadn't really considered\nbecause I think that Wolfe is, in a way, a very conservative writer. He uses\npomo tools like metafiction and auctorial intrusion and such, but he seems\nat \nthe same time to be concerned, first and foremost, with telling a story, and\nI\nthink he uses those tools in the service of the story. If you disagree with \nthat, then you won't agree with anything else I'm going to say, and so might\n\nas well stop reading here.\n\nWhat isn't always clear at first blush is what story Wolfe is telling. \nThat's really why we have URTH OF THE NEW SUN: he was telling one story and\nHartwell was reading (or expected Joe Reader to be reading) another story, \nand wanted to know how _that_ story \"came out.\" And, yeah, at first glance,\ntBotNS looks like a save-the-world story, when it's actually more of a \nbildungsroman -- \"The Making of the Messiah, Parts 1-4\" rather than an\nactual \ngospel account, which we then get in URTH. (Modulo Wolfe's quite justified \npoint that Severian is not _the_ Messiah.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "2. That PEACE does not give us the clues to accurately, reliably, and\n consistently reconstruct that biography." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[...]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The question is, assuming that all this uncertainty is not arbitrary\n(which\nwould by implication predicate of its author a kind of meanness\nvis-a-vis\nhis readers that I simply do not see as likely in the case of GW)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "When I talked about the \"trap\" of biography, I didn't mean to imply that\nWolfe was being pointlessly sadistic (though I'm not as convinced as\nyou of his essential helpfulness; after all, he's written one novel and\na number of shorter works which nobody, AFAIK, has yet made any sense\nof). " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Which novel? There are some I haven't completely worked out, but none of\nthem have completely failed to make any sense to me.\n\nA couple of the short pieces, otoh, just leave me going, \"Huh?\" I suspect\nthat in a couple of cases, what's going on is just what's going on. I \nremember all the speculation here about \"Suzanne Delage\"; on rereading\nthat story a month or two ago, I came away firmly convinced that it was\njust about what it says it's about, the circumstances surrounding an \nevent that the narrator simply cannot remember because it fails to fit\ninto the context of his life. Because he can't remember it, he can't\nreally tell us anything about it, and so we cannot know what it is. End\nof story. (If anyone wants to say that this makes the story pointless\nI won't argue; I find it entertaining on its own terms.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Wolfe's intent, under this hypothesis, would not be to make the\nreader endlessly and fruitlessly hunt for clues, but to make a point\nabout the mutability of memory, or the indeterminacy of reading or\nknowledge." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I agree with this; I think it's another way of approaching the same basic\nthing I am saying: that PEACE is not about the surface events of Weer's\nlife so much as it is about the process of \nrecollection/reliving/reconstruction/falsification (mix 'em and match \n'em, kids! The first one's always free!) by which those events are \nrelated. I think one key to the whole shebang is the question of whom \nWeer [thinks he] is writing to; at one point he addresses his readers \nas \"ladies.\" (Olivia?)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I partially agree with what I think you're saying. I agree that there\nare aspects of the book which can be \"comprehended\" apart from Weer's\nbiography, and that we should look at the why and how, not just the\nwhat, of Weer's narration much more closely than we've done so far. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "This is what I have been trying to drag towards, the basic point of my \n\"story of Weer telling his story\" tagline. Time/place of narration are\n[well, seem] very important to Wolfe: look how carefully he sets up the\nlocus of writing for tBotNS. The \"Soldier\" books are another example of\nthis -- with each new entry we have to ask how long it's been since the \nlast one, where Latro is writing, and what has happened since (especially\nwhat has happened that Latro has forgotten before writing)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But, to jump ahead in your post, I'm skeptical that reading the book as\n\"the story of Weer telling his story\" will make it more determinate or\ncomprehensible. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'll agree that it may not make things any more determined; what I suggest\nis that it gives the indeterminacy a kind of coherency and meaning. Why\nare the events so inconsistent/incomplete? Because of when and how and why\nthey are told. This is the heart of the matter.\n\nI'm not saying that the surface events don't matter; far from it. That \nwould be like saying the words Wolfe uses to tell the story don't matter.\nBut I think we need to perceive a minimum of three narrative layers. \n\nIn this I'm somewhat indebted to the model by which mystery novels are\ngenerally built: a mystery has at least three plots, in successive layers.\nThere is what actually happened (plot 1); there is what appears to have\nhappened (plot 2); and there is the story of how the detective moves from\nthe appearance of the latter to the knowledge of the former (plot 3). The\nthird is, of course, the \"surface narrative.\" \n\nSimilarly I see in PEACE at least the possibility that there is a real\n\"what happened\"; and there is a second layer, which is Weer's narration,\nwhat he says happened; and there is a third layer, not of moving from\nWeer's narration to a real \"what happened,\" but of moving from Weer's\nnarration to a/the real PEACE, to the solution to the puzzle \"What is\nthis book _about_, anyway?\" One thing PEACE is about is us reading PEACE." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On the contrary, it seems only to lead to \"confusion\nworse confounded,\" at least on the evidence of the discussion here. At\nleast we can put together a basic outline of Weer's life, even if it's\nmissing information on crucial points. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not only missing information but apparently contradictory in several\nplaces; some of these, apparently, can be shoehorned into a kind of\nconsistency, but I question the value of doing this." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But when it comes to Weer's\npresent situation, we can't even agree on the simplest facts: is he\nalive or dead? If alive, is he young or old? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Is there anyone on this list who seriously maintains that he is _not_ dead?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If dead, is he on his way to heaven, resurrection, or neither? " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, that's quite the problem, isn't it? But perhaps we should take the\ntitle seriously; perhaps the book is indeed about how Weer either finds\nor fails to find Peace." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "To add to the confusion, Weer's\ndescription of his present contains far more, and more glaring,\nanomalies than his account of his past. It's true that (judging by what\nI've read) less work, in the sense of close reading, has gone into\ninvestigating these questions than into investigating Weer's biography,\nso it's possible that with more work things might clear up." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I also question whether there is a coherent distinction between the \n\"present\" and \"past.\" If Weer is actively reliving or recreating, the \ndistinction becomes moot.\n\nThe scenes where Weer-of-the-\"present\" speaks to the other characters \nthrough the medium of Weer-of-the-\"past\" suggests either reliving or\nrecreating; and we can only make it \"reliving\" if we are willing to\naccept that he actually said some these things the first time through\n-- for example, that he actually told his doctor, years before his \nstroke, that he was actually an old man who'd had a stroke. If not, then\nthat entire conversation is not recollection or reliving but recreation,\neven if only in memory/imagination.\n\n(Of course that _is_ possible; it may be able to produce a coherent reading \nin which Weer's future ghost actually moves back in time and takes \npossession of his younger body for these discussions. One would think, \nthough, that his saying such things would give the doctor more concern \nabout Weer's sanity than is shown by his giving TAT-type tests.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Second, I suggest that the book contains everything necessary for a\nuseful\nreading. This is important; it is, I think, the difference between\ncalling\nWolfe a sadistic and manipulative writer and calling him a tricksy but\nskilled and fair writer." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "There's a third possibility: that Wolfe misjudged what a reader could\nreasonably be expected to infer. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, yeah. That actually did occur to me, but I didn't want to raise\nthe spectre of PEACE being a less than competent performance on Wolfe's \npart...\n\n[...]\n[Scripture-like interpretive technique:]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of course, Wolfe is aware that he isn't God (he even wrote a story on\nthe topic), so he would presumably concede that he might have\noccasionally contradicted himself, or failed to say what he meant to." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, yeah. That wasn't my point, though; I wasn't suggesting that Wolfe\nor I thought Wolfe infallible. I was suggesting that Wolfe might have that\nkind of reading in mind while writing. This is almost certainly so in the\n\"Sun\" books, which appear to have some kind of Scriptural authority in\ntheir various whorls -- I won't discuss that wrt \"Long/Short\" on this list,\nbut tBotNS seems to be either the \"Book of the New Sun\" that Severian refers\n\nto several times in the course of his narrative, or perhaps a textual \nancestor of it.\n\nIn particular I think that it would be worthwhile trying to apply the\ntechnique of \"genre criticism,\" in which each text of Scripture is \ninterpreted on the basis of \"what kind of writing it is.\" The interpretive\ntactics for a poem (such as the Psalms or Song of Songs) are quite different\nfrom those for a history (Exodus, Samuel/Kings/Chronicles) or a prophetic\nbook (the Prophets, duh). This applies, obviously, to the earlier \nobservation that each of the parts of PEACE seems to be set in a different\n\"genre\"..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "First, I think we may immediately conclude that we are not expected to\ndiscover a (single/consistent/reliable) status for \"the 'past'" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "sections.\"" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "\"What is the status of the 'past' sections\" is not among the most useful\nquestions to ask." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "If you're saying that the \"past\" sections don't all have the same\nstatus, I agree. If you're saying that it's not useful to ask what the\nstatus of any particular \"past\" section (or portion thereof) is, I\ndisagree (but I don't think you are)." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No, I'm not. I am saying that I'm more and more convinced that they are not\nmeant to be assembled into a coherent picture of Weer's \"past,\" and that \nthe \"status\" of at least some chunks may be permanently indeterminate." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Second, Adam left out at least two other possibilities.\n 1. Recollecting the past.\n 2. Reliving the past.\n 3. Recreating the past.\n 4. Lying about the past." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, I had been illustrating a point, not offering an exhaustive list. \nBut I like your typology." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Thanks." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "The idea that Den actively lies to us is probably the dullest choice.\nThe idea of straightforward recollection is only slightly more\ninteresting;\nif\nthis were the general case, we would have very little in the way of\nmystery." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Actually, (setting aside the other two possibilities on your list for a\nmoment), Weer is almost certainly neither 100% lying nor 100%\n\"straightforwardly recollecting.\" Instead, his narrative is a\ncombination of recollection, suppression, and (perhaps) lying that is\nnearly impossible to disentangle. So I don't agree that we have \"very\nlittle in the way of mystery.\"" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I don't see any particular evidence of Weer's lying, except perhaps to \nhimself, defensively. I'm not eliminating it as a possibility, mind, but\nI'd like to see where you think he's lying and why." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Indeed, if I could ignore all the ellipses, elisions, and contradictions\nin\nDen's story" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I certainly wouldn't ignore these, but we don't need Weer's \"reliving\"\nor \"recreating\" to account for them, although there are other reasons\nwhy Weer has to be \"recreating at least to some extent." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "... again, I'm not sure he _has to_ be: if we are willing to accept that he\nis actually \"haunting\" his own life as described above. (Actually, I find \nthis extremely unlikely but can't simply ignore it.)" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "I would have to conclude that PEACE consisted of the somewhat-\nincoherent ramblings of a not particularly interesting person." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Heh. Except for the \"not particularly interesting\" bit, that's a pretty\ngood description." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I dunno -- He doesn't seem like anyone I'd particularly want to know in\nRL." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "But I'm skeptical that \"recreating\" can be\nthe master key to building \"a coherent and consistent model,\" as you\nseem to be suggesting, at least one which is grounded in the text." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Okay, here's a bogey model.\n\nWeer is dead, to begin with. In the grave he is undergoing a process by\nwhich he goes, or is led, through his life, given the opportunity to \nchange his mind (a la the Chinese Pillow; but cf also \"Its a Wonderful\nLife\"... H'mm, this paragraph is taking on a holiday theme...), \"repent \nof\" his former decisions, and so achieve Peace.\n\nTwo additional speculations help: \n1. This may be an iterative process, and we may be seeing only one \n loop (or part of one)\n2. Weer may not be (almost certainly is not) aware of the nature of\n the process.\n\nI suggest that this model offers a coherent and consistent reading. \nFeel free to attack it.\n\n--Dan'l" } ] } ] }