{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3116", "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": 3116, "subject": "Wizard Knight and after", "messages": 4, "voices": 4, "first": "2002-04-01T05:04:05+00:00", "last": "2002-04-14T11:02:32+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Christopher Culver", "address": "christopher_culver at yahoo.com" }, "date": "2002-04-01T05:04:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wizard Knight and after", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've been corresponding with Gene Wolfe for a few weeks now, and I'm \npleasantly surprised that he has time to answer letters from fans.\n\nApparently, The Wizard Knight will be in two volumes called, \nappropriately enough, WIZARD and KNIGHT. Wolfe seems to be pretty modest \nabout his talents, he tells me there's no guarantee that David Hartwell \nwill accept it.\n\nI asked him if after Wizard Knight we'd see a conclusion to the Soldier \nseries, and his response was \"I don't know what my next book will be. Or \neven if there will be a next book. If there is, it may be another \nSoldier book. If it is, it may conclude the series, though I doubt it.\" \nThat the Soldier series wouldn't be completed after three volumes makes \nme wonder what sort of plans Wolfe has come up with for Latro since \nSOLDIER OF ARETE was published.\n\nI wonder why the Soldier series tends to be the most underappreciated of \nWolfe's work. (Well, it's certainly rated higher than Operation Ares for \neveryone, I'm sure.)\n\nChristopher Culver" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "David DiGiacomo", "address": "david at slack.com" }, "date": "2002-04-03T19:06:00+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Re: Wizard Knight and after", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I wonder why the Soldier series tends to be the most underappreciated of \nWolfe's work. (Well, it's certainly rated higher than Operation Ares for \neveryone, I'm sure.)" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I would distinguish between underappreciated and low rated books. I think\nthat if the Soldier series is underappreciated, it's because very few\nreaders are sufficiently well read in history to have more than a vague\nunderstanding of it. CASTLEVIEW is also underappreciated, because it's\nincomprehensible (but good otherwise).\n\nIn contrast, THERE ARE DOORS and PANDORA BY HOLLY HOLLANDER are low rated\nbecause readers understand them (?), but dislike them." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Fernando Gouvea", "address": "fqgouvea at colby.edu" }, "date": "2002-04-03T19:25:00+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Re: Wizard Knight and after", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "David DiGiacomo said:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I would distinguish between underappreciated and low rated books. I think\nthat if the Soldier series is underappreciated, it's because very few\nreaders are sufficiently well read in history to have more than a vague\nunderstanding of it. CASTLEVIEW is also underappreciated, because it's\nincomprehensible (but good otherwise)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "In contrast, THERE ARE DOORS and PANDORA BY HOLLY HOLLANDER are low rated\nbecause readers understand them (?), but dislike them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Hmm, I don't quite feel that way. I agree, pretty much, about\nCastleview. My problem with the Soldier series is just that it's\nunfinished. The books so far seem quite satsifying to me, but the\nopen-ended status of the story makes it hard to have an overall\nopinion. I'd love to see more books in that series.\n\nI do like There Are Doors. I think Gene's description of it is fair: it's a\nbook about \"falling in love\" and what it does to you. People don't like the\nalternate universe aspect, I guess, because they feel that the other\nuniverse is not sufficiently different from ours. That doesn't bother me\ntoo much because the changes seem to fit the overall theme, and I'm willing\nto take the (admittedly somewhat ad hoc) explanation offered in the book\nfor why the worlds are in fact so similar.\n\nPandora is harder for me to find much significance in, though I enjoyed the\nride when I was reading it.\n\nOne major reason, of course, for all of these books (and Free Live Free and\nothers) to receive less attention is that they don't fit into some large\nframework as the various Sun books do. Because they don't, there are far\nfewer details to discuss and unravel, and so we discuss them less.\n\nFernando\n\n============================================================================\nFernando Q. Gouvea \nDept. of Mathematics Editor, FOCUS and MAA Online\nColby College http://www.maa.org\nWaterville, ME 04901\nfqgouvea at colby.edu\n\nSattinger's Law:\n It works better if you plug it in." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nigel Price", "address": "nigel.a.price at virgin.net" }, "date": "2002-04-14T11:02:32+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Re: Wizard Knight and after", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Oh, ages ago, David DiGiacomo wrote:\nI would distinguish between underappreciated\nand low rated books. I think that if the\nSoldier series is underappreciated, it's\nbecause very few readers are sufficiently\nwell read in history to have more than a vague\nunderstanding of it. CASTLEVIEW is also\nunderappreciated, because it's incomprehensible\n(but good otherwise)." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "In contrast, THERE ARE DOORS and PANDORA BY\nHOLLY HOLLANDER are low rated because readers\nunderstand them (?), but dislike them." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Strange, isn't it? I really like \"Pandora by Holly Hollander\" - it's\ncharming, witty, and well executed - and thought \"There are Doors\" was quite\nbrilliant, if decidedly odd.\n\nIs \"Castleview\" really incomprehensible? The narrative seems radically\ncompressed, certainly, and there are what may be signs of haste in the\ncomposition, but essentially it is GW doing a sort of late twentieth\ncentury, midwestern Charles Williams, and as such is excellent fun.\n\nFor the record, I rate the \"Soldier\" books very highly indeed and am\nconstantly surprised that we don't discuss them on the list more often.\nPersonally, I would love to see \"Soldier of Sidon\" (or whatever it might be\ncalled) published.\n\nNigel (who is slowly reading his way through two weeks' worth of accumulated\nUrth lists, having been away on holiday, and has now read Fernando Q.\nGouvea's response to David DiGiacomo's posting...he agrees with Fernando and\nprobably wouldn't have bothered to type out the above if he'd read that\nmessage first!)" } ] } ] }