{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3150", "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": 3150, "subject": "pandora", "messages": 5, "voices": 5, "first": "2002-04-15T06:28:37+00:00", "last": "2002-05-20T00:48:35+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "maa32", "address": "maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu" }, "date": "2002-04-15T06:28:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) pandora", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It was mentioned that the reasons Pandora by Holly Hollander was an \nunenjoyable reading experience seemed undiscernable to some on the list.\n\nFor me, I think Wolfe's one weakness is his portrayal of female characters - \nI'm just being honest. However, that doesn't really matter to me (please \ndon't stone me Alga; I'm talking about literary great-making qualities - not \nfeminism). I really don't think Wolfe is good at a first person female \nperspective - and especially a first person, pot-smoking, mother hating, \n\"liberated\" female like Holly - as far as possible from the tortured but \nultimately physically powerful Silk and Severian (Silk is even pretty handy \nwith a staff into his geritol-stage thanks to his superior (engineered? \nsurely) genetics). If I'm not mistaken, there is a quote in Pandora which \nstates that Larry Lief is a \"dreamboat\" (or something to that effect).\n\nLet's be honest - Wolfe's oppositional themes (perfect memory/end of the world \nvs. no memory/dawn of history) are usually fabulously pulled off from work to \nwork, but Pandora is too different. Even though I think you can find hints \nthat Holly's flying horse (you think I'm kidding, eh?) was complicit in the \ndeath of Larry Lief, you can also find some big German special forces \nconspiracy hints dropped all over the place, too. And Holly knows a lot about \nwhat masks the scent of pot for someone who claims she won't write about \nsmoking it for the first time in her introduction; it seems as if she already \nhas throughout the text - and her mom confronts her about \"smoking\", too; a \nsmoking that is never directly narrated by Holly in any other scene. I don't \ntrust that girl.\n\nIn any case, I think that there are two big factors involved here in the \ngeneral ill repute in which Pandora by Holly Hollander is held: your average \nreader of Wolfe appreciates the absolutely amazing technical skill he has \"in \nspite\" of his depiction of women (I know I'm generalizing; please forgive me); \nalso, Wolfe is notoriously ambiguous in many respects, yet I find little \nambiguity in his treatment of women. It just so happens that having a female \nnarrator, while to an amazing degree subverting this picture of weak and \naccepting or duplicitious and conniving women, reaffirms the stark dichotomy \nand emphasizes it at the same time (in my mind, Holly really wants to get rid \nof her mother and is just as culpable as whoever really did commit the \nmurders; perhaps Wolfe wanted to present her as an opposite of ideality (a \nreal word, by the way, or at least a word I read in a recent piece of \ncriticism on Borges) - we were meant not to like her narrative since it \nreflects some of her undesirable traits - but this is too devious and I cannot \nimagine Wolfe composing something that he envisioned as a \"failed\" narrative \nfrom the beginning, simply for the purpose of challenging the liberal \nconvictions of its narrator.)\n\nMarc Aramini" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Roy C. Lackey", "address": "rclackey at stic.net" }, "date": "2002-04-16T00:26:18+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) pandora", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Date: Monday, April 15, 2002 1:28 AM" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Marc wrote:\nFor me, I think Wolfe's one weakness is his portrayal of female\ncharacters - I'm just being honest.<<" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I won't argue with that, because I can't; you're right." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "(Silk is even pretty handy with a staff into his geritol-stage\n thanks to his superior (engineered? surely) genetics).<<" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Geritol-stage? Damn it, Marc, at the end of RTTW Silk is only about twenty\nyears older than you are!! Geritol-stage? Sheesh. " }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Let's be honest - Wolfe's oppositional themes (perfect memory/end of the\nworld" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "vs. no memory/dawn of history)<<\n\nUh, what Nutria said." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "And Holly knows a lot about" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "what masks the scent of pot for someone who claims she won't write about\nsmoking it for the first time in her introduction; it seems as if she\nalready\nhas throughout the text - and her mom confronts her about \"smoking\", too; a\nsmoking that is never directly narrated by Holly in any other scene. I\ndon't\ntrust that girl.<<\n\nIf by \"smoking\" you mean cigarettes, Holly does smoke in the text. In the\nhospital, near the end of chapter 8, page 66 of the hardback. And it was her\nmother who gave her the cigarette.\n\n-Roy" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2002-04-16T14:10:37+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) pandora", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Interesting post by Marc. I didn't find any of the subtleties in PANDORA\nthat Marc did; the few \"clues\" I did notice seemed to me to be just\naffectations leading nowhere. It struck me as being basically just a murder\nmystery, and not a particularly good one, either. Furthermore, I was\nrepelled by the misogyny in the portrayal of Holly's mother (unlike Marc, I\nwasn't put off by Holly, but she didn't erase the bad taste left by her\nmother). If it hadn't been written by Wolfe, I might have filed it away in\nmy mind as \"mildly diverting\"; as it was, it was a severe disappointment.\n\nThe Encyclopedia of Science Fiction (iirc) said there had been speculation\nthat PANDORA was actually written early in Wolfe's career. Can anyone\nconfirm or deny this?\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Endy9", "address": "endymion91 at attbi.com" }, "date": "2002-05-20T00:22:05+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Pandora", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "mantis wrote:\nWhat does it matter what =anybody= else says? You hate it. That is your\nopinion. Tried and tested. Do you want people to tell you that you are an\nidiot? Do you want people to brow-beat you into reading it again until you\nlike it? Do you want people to tell you that you are a genius for \"seeing\nthrough all the drivel,\" for being the brave fellow who says that the\nemperor has no clothes?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "What is your reason for writing anything to this mailing list? Do you want\npeople to tell you that you are an idiot for any opinion you post here? Do\nyou want people to brow-beat you into changing your opinion if they disagree\nwith you? Do you want people to tell you that you are a genius for \"seeing\nthings\" that other's were not intelligent enough to catch?\n\nDo you really want to attack my motives for writing instead of simply\nagreeing or disagreeing and open yourself to the same inspection?\n\n\n\nNow to attempt to honestly answer your questions:\n\nI do not look upon myself as the ultimate genius of this world and value\nother's opinions. I might gain insight into why others liked the story and\neven though I might not enjoy the story, I would better understand why other\npeople like it. I enjoy getting to know other people and what they like and\ndon't like and why. That is probably the main reason I post to any message\nboard.\n\nI also claim my right to like or dislike any work of literature and to state\nmy reasons why without the motive of trying to change anyone else's\nopinions. If I find a consensus that 99% of people like a work that I hate,\nwhen a friend asks my opinion of said work I will usually respond. I didn't\nlike it but many people seem to so you might.\n\n\nBTW, my apology to the group for forgetting to change HTML to Plain Text in\nthe last message I wrote." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Dennis/Endy\nhttp://home.attbi.com/~phleblori1/endy9/index.htm\n--\nBe more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your\ncharacter is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others\nthink you are. (John Wooden)\n--\n\n\n\n-- " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2002-05-20T00:48:35+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Pandora", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Endy wrote:\nDo you really want to attack my motives for writing instead of simply\nagreeing or disagreeing and open yourself to the same inspection?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Did I attack?\n\nDid I attack your motives for writing?\n\nI tried to make it clear that I wouldn't touch your opinion, but I took\numbrage at your hurtful words that, imho, verge on flaming. The bile that\nleaks out and spoils the diplomacy of discourse: not the content of what\nyou said, but the aggressive and antagonistic way in which you said it. I\nthought I said as much before, and you have yet to retract or apologize, or\neven acknowledge the offense.\n\nDid I attack your semi-flaming? Perhaps I did.\n\n=mantis=" } ] } ] }