Subject: (urth) Vancean influence on Wolfe

From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis at siriusfiction.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 17:57:47 +0000

Blattid wrote:
>And that, really, is the See Below. For me, at least, the
>stories in TDE are very much individual stories. There are
>links, characters from one appear in another, but they are,
>I think, less unified than (say) Leiber's yarns of Fafhrd
>and the Gray Mouser. Episodes from a single and singular
>future world, but not, to me, producing anything larger as
>a group than the sum of the parts.

I would not argue too strenously with you.  If you want to see Gene Wolfe's
take on TDE, see his essay "The Living Earth" in JACK VANCE: CRITICAL
APPRECIATIONS AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY.

>So for the more dedicated Vanceans on the list, I suppose
>the obvious question would be whether I, as a rather casual
>reader, am missing anything here? This book is the one most
>often cited when recommending Vance to a Wolfe fan; other
>than the gross-scale influence on New Sun, the fundamental
>idea (which, actually, wasn't entirely new here either) of
>this incredibly ancient Earth, is there something deeper?

What Andy Robertson said. In addition, I think it is important to isolate
TDE from the other Vancean "Dying Earth" novels: TDE has an "earnest"
quality, maybe something like sombre-mode Dunsany, that is burlesqued in
the other novels in a way closer to that of joking-mode Clark Ashton Smith
(as opposed to decadent-mode, which is the voice CAS used in most of his
Zothique stories).

The isolation of TDE could be extended further, to separate it from nearly
all of Vance's work--it really is different.  But I've read nearly 100% of
Vance's fiction (I haven't read a few of the mysteries because I cannot
afford them--oh yes, Vance wrote mysteries, too. Even won an award.) and I
may be forgetting more than that.

=mantis=

--

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:11:36 +0000

> In addition, I think it is important to isolate TDE from
> the other Vancean "Dying Earth" novels: TDE has an
> "earnest" quality, maybe something like sombre-mode Dunsany, 

Bingbingbingbingbing! I found myself thinking "Dunsanean" (or,
occasionally, less flattering: "Bad imitation Dunsany") over
and over again while going through TDE -- especially the Dunsany
of "The Castle of the Gnolls" and the story of "Chu-Bu and 
Sheemish."

> that is burlesqued in the other novels in a way closer to that
> of joking-mode Clark Ashton Smith (as opposed to decadent-mode,
> which is the voice CAS used in most of his Zothique stories).

(I really need to read those sometime...)

So are the other Dying Earth novels, uh, better? Or to put it
differently: do they have more of the gentle irony I tend to
associate with Vance?

> The isolation of TDE could be extended further, to separate 
> it from nearly all of Vance's work--it really is different.  
> But I've read nearly 100% of Vance's fiction (I haven't read
> a few of the mysteries because I cannot afford them--oh yes,
> Vance wrote mysteries, too. 

I seem to recall he's also one of the various SF writers who 
stepped in pseudonymously during "Ellery Queen"'s long blocked
period. I know for certain that Ted Sturgeon and Avram Davidson 
did.

--

---

From: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:27:38 +0000

Mantis wrote:

  TDE has an "earnest"
>(as opposed to decadent-mode, which is the voice CAS used in most of his

         Well put.  Vance in general is a Mozart to Wolfe's Bach, 
stylistically; but TDE's somber, almost tragic, ambience may have had a bit 
of influence on Severian's own style.

Nut-ria

--

---

From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis at siriusfiction.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:21:48 +0000

>differently: do they have more of the gentle irony I tend to

Hmmm.  I'm sticking on that "gentle" bit . . . :)

Seriously, Cugel the Clever is a ribald rogue of the picaresque school, and
Rhialto's mages are . . . words escape me.  The other books are fun reads,
but if TDE is like LOTR, then the other novels are rather pythonesque in
comparison.

>period.

Yes indeed: three, iirc. One of them is very good; one is screamingly good
until it completely blows out (alas!); the other one is okay, but still
better imho than one of the ones published under his own name.

=mantis=

SIRIUS FICTION
booklets on Gene Wolfe, John Crowley
Lexicon Urthus out of print!
http://www.siriusfiction.com/

--

---

From: Jason Voegele <jason at jvoegele.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:30:12 +0000

Nutria wrote:
> Vance in general is a Mozart to Wolfe's Bach, stylistically;

Care to expand on that?  It rings true to me, but I'm not sure why. :)  
Perhaps just because Wolfe's writing is quite fugal in nature?  Is there a 
quality judgement in that statement?

Thanks,
Jason Voegele

--

---

From: Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <ddanehy at siebel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:35:27 +0000

In response to my question...

> >do they have more of the gentle irony I tend to
> >associate with Vance?

> Hmmm.  I'm sticking on that "gentle" bit . . . :)

Ah. Well, that's a matter of degree, I suppose ... Vancean
irony, at least in what I've read, is in fact often quite
strong, but I don't recall ever thinking of it as vicious
the way, say, Malzberg's or Vonnegut's so often is. Or Twain's,
for that matter.

> if TDE is like LOTR, then the other novels are rather 
> pythonesque in comparison.

It would never in a godzillion years have occurred to me to
compare TDE to LOTR. But the word "pythonesque" will certainly
have me looking for these in the foreseeable future. Thanks.

--

---

From: Andy Robertson <andywrobertson at clara.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:46:25 +0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes" <ddanehy at siebel.com>
To: <urth at urth.net>

> and over again while going through TDE

Yes, but - TDE really is one of those original, once-of-a-kind, novels.   It
seems imitative now only because it has been imitated so often.

For example, there is the matter of Role Playing Games.

The entire treatment of magic in RPGs derives from THE DYING EARTH - the
basic idea that a magician may compress just so many spells into his mind,
and no more.   This was worked out in the original Dungeons & Dragons games
and its influence *since* then has spread everywhere, to fantasy films, to
horror, and of course back into writing.

RPGs are low, of course, but they can be fun  :-)

    hartshorn

--

---

From: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:37:23 +0000

> >stepped in pseudonymously during "Ellery Queen"'s long blocked

The Four Johns
The Madman Theory
A Room to Die In

- Nutria

--

---

From: Michael Andre-Driussi <mantis at siriusfiction.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:18:24 +0000

>the way, say, Malzberg's or Vonnegut's so often is. Or Twain's,

Oh, gentle vs. vicious.  Right--"gentle"!  (I was thinking gentle as
subtle, underplayed, etc.  All of which is also part of Vance's range . . .
but the novels in question are a tad more broad and farce-ful.)  I can't
think of an example of Vancean irony getting vicious.

CAS and Dunsany also have their joking sides.

Anyway, to be clear--what you are looking for is:

1. THE EYES OF THE OVERWORLD (Cugal's first appearance)
2. CUGAL'S SAGA
3. RHIALTO THE MARVELLOUS [sic]

=mantis=

--

---

From: James Jordan <jbjordan4 at cox.net>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 19:43:04 +0000

>quality judgement in that statement?

         'Twas just a thought. Mozart is transparent compared with Bach's 
density. Mozart is more sunny; Bach more serious. Mozart more 
straightforward; Bach more complex.
         The comparison works for me and you; maybe not for everyone here.
         Not a quality judgment. Two different geniuses. I love Vance. I'm 
a subscriber to the Compleat Vance.

Nutria

--

---

From: Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman at yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 20:39:42 +0000

> differently: do they have more of the gentle irony I tend to

I feel about them the way people who dislike BotNS feel about *it*:
a thoroughly unsympathetic character goes through one pointless
episode after another.  There was enough invention (I certainly
can't criticize Vance on that score!), and of course the questions
of whether Cugel and Rhialto would ultimately succeed, to keep me
reading.

It's sort of like BotNS without the aspects I like, or Pratchett's
Rincewind novels without the jokes (though I think admirers of
Vance find the later three Dying Earth novels funny).

Jerry Friedman

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com

--

---

From: Adam Stephanides <adamsteph at earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 02:03:12 +0000

> A Room to Die In

Iirc, these are all from the series of paperback tough-guy mysteries
published under Queen's name, but without Ellery as the detective.

http://www.hycyber.com/MYST/queen_ellery.html lists FACE TO FACE, which iirc
is a "regular" Ellery Queen novel, as "ghostwritten by Jack Vance?", though
if you follow the link to "Novels Ghostwritten by Others," the attribution
is repeated without the question mark.

In any case, mantis, which of your evaluations correspond to which books?

--Adam 

--