{
  "export": {
    "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/2585",
    "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": 2585,
    "subject": "Digest urth.v030.n088",
    "messages": 2,
    "voices": 2,
    "first": "2001-04-15T19:36:43+00:00",
    "last": "2001-04-19T09:56:21+00:00"
  },
  "messages": [
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0030-0305@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "akt",
        "address": "akt at attglobal.net"
      },
      "date": "2001-04-15T19:36:43+00:00",
      "subject": "(urth) Re: Digest urth.v030.n088",
      "in_reply_to": null,
      "reply_link": null,
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Quoth William Ansley:"
        },
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "I have just finished listening to a series of taped lectures called\n_The Life and Writings of Geoffrey Chaucer_*. Somewhere in this\nseries, the lecturer talks about how Chaucer inserts himself as a\ncharacter, the narrator, in _The Canterbury Tales_. He questions how\nmuch we should believe the narrator and says, \"Chaucer may be the\nfirst unreliable narrator in English literature.\" This gave me quite\na start.\n\nWell, well. Wolfe has an even longer and more distinguished literary\nlegacy than I realized."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "It is important to distinguish between the unreliable narrator, a\ncreature of the author, and the unreliable author.  In Chaucer's case,\nthe lecturer may well be correct. (It's been quite a while since I've\nread!) But the fascinating thing, for the few of us who have been\nfollowing John Crowley's Aegypt series, is that the *author*, especially\nin -Daemonomania-, appears to be unreliable, in a *third-person*\nnarration. Unreliable does not mean careless--I have been complaining\nabout carelessness in RttW and I don't want the two\nconfused--unreliability in a narrator or an author is deliberate. But\ndifferent.\n\n-alga"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "message_id": "<urth-v0030-0320@digest.urth.net>",
      "from": {
        "name": "Adam Stephanides",
        "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net"
      },
      "date": "2001-04-19T09:56:21+00:00",
      "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: Digest urth.v030.n088",
      "in_reply_to": "<urth-v0030-0305@digest.urth.net>",
      "reply_link": "subject",
      "blocks": [
        {
          "kind": "quote",
          "depth": 1,
          "text": "on 4/15/01 6:36 PM, akt at attglobal.net at akt at attglobal.net wrote:\nBut the fascinating thing, for the few of us who have been\nfollowing John Crowley's Aegypt series, is that the *author*, especially\nin -Daemonomania-, appears to be unreliable, in a *third-person*\nnarration."
        },
        {
          "kind": "text",
          "depth": 0,
          "text": "Since Ranjit has given us permission to discuss Crowley here, could you tell\nus what you're referring to?\n\n--Adam"
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}