{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3773", "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": 3773, "subject": "Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "messages": 6, "voices": 5, "first": "2003-01-19T15:29:06+00:00", "last": "2003-01-21T16:18:13+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Nigel Price", "address": "nigel.a.price at virgin.net" }, "date": "2003-01-19T15:29:06+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Also Sprach Zibethicus:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Nothwithstanding this, I think that my\npoint about retaining a cautious distinction\nbetween theological and fictional intentions\nis still, possibly, a partially valid one." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I've always been fascinated by the perplexing business of what Wolfe\nactually believes and what he puts into his stories simply because he\nhappens to find it interesting.\n\nWhen I first encountered his books and before I knew anything about Wolfe\nthe man, I remember thinking, \"Gosh, I wonder whether the person who wrote\nthis is a Christian?\" Looking at the evidence as I read first TBotNS and\nthen FLF and various other volumes, I was alternately going to myself, \"Yes,\nhe must be!\" and \"No! He can't be!\"\n\nI know a little more about Wolfe now, but I still don't think I've got to\nthe bottom of the matter. It's complicated. He genuinely seems to like\nplaying about with odd theological ideas that he's come across, teasing out\ntheir implications and extrapolating them very much in the way that more\ntraditional SF authors treat speculative scientific and technological ideas.\nAs a typically uptight and repressed Protestant Evangelical, Wolfe's\ndabbling with speculative philosophical and theological ideas makes my\n(admittedly scant) hair stand on end. =:O)> Of course, just because Wolfe\nputs an idea in one of his stories doesn't necessarily mean that he thinks\nthat it's true.\n\nBut then again, he just might. By his own account, Wolfe is not entirely\northodox in his Catholicism. I know about some of his individual quirks and\neccentricities, but by no means all. Contributors to this list sometimes\nsay, \"Wolfe is a Catholic and therefore he believes such and such,\" or\n\"Wolfe is a Christian and therefore believes this thing and that.\" When I\nread such assertions, I'm usually sitting there mumbling, \"Maybe,\" and\n\"Possibly!\"\n\nFor the record, my guess is that \"Westwind\" and \"The Detective of Dreams\"\nare among the most explicit fictional expressions of Wolfe's personal faith.\nBut I could be wrong...\n\nNigel" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2003-01-20T18:30:30+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 09:29 AM 1/19/2003, you wrote:\nBy his own account, Wolfe is not entirely\northodox in his Catholicism. I know about some of his individual quirks and\neccentricities, but by no means all. Contributors to this list sometimes\nsay, \"Wolfe is a Catholic and therefore he believes such and such,\" or\n\"Wolfe is a Christian and therefore believes this thing and that.\" When I\nread such assertions, I'm usually sitting there mumbling, \"Maybe,\" and\n\"Possibly!\"\n\nFor the record, my guess is that \"Westwind\" and \"The Detective of Dreams\"\nare among the most explicit fictional expressions of Wolfe's personal faith.\nBut I could be wrong...\n\nNigel" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, since my interview and conversations around that time centered on \nWolfe's religious beliefs, I can chime in a bit. Wolfe sees himself as a \nthoroughly orthodox RC, but with a bit more thrown in. He has said things \nin interviews like, \"I'm an RC, but don't think you know what that means\" \n-- which is certainly true enough these days. It does not mean \"I'm RC, but \non a quasi-heretical fringe.\" It just means most people don't really know \nmuch about RC.\n I think he's a kind of post-Vatican II conservative. That is, not \na reactionary, but not a liberal at all either. He's happy to say that \nprotestants like you and me are true brothers, not hellbound apostates. And \nhe holds to theistic evolution, of a Lamarkian sort. He's read Aquinas, but \nI think the main religious influences on him are probably C.S.Lewis and \nChesterton. He's a fan of both, and claims to have read everything by them. \nThat's pretty \"mainstream Christian.\"\n \"Westwind\" and \"Detective\" often come up on short lists of his \npersonal favorites. And they're very orthodox.\n Where Wolfe might be \"off\" from Catholicism, in general, would be \nin secondary areas, such as his belief in the reality of ghosts. But when \nhe writes a story about Lilith as Adam's first wife, it's pure fiction. \nWolfe's Catholicism lets him toy with a (created) neoplatonic universe, as \nin the Urth cycles, but as a Calvinist I can also toy with that worldview \nin fiction also. How much such toying reflections what Wolfe actually \nthinks might be so is another question.\n But I don't think Wolfe strays far from the tradition in his \npersonal beliefs.\n FWIW.\n\nNutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Ryan Thistlethwaite", "address": "shintemaster at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2003-01-20T21:47:58+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "----- Original Message -----" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "From: \"Nigel Price\" \nTo: \nSent: Monday, January 20, 2003 2:29 AM\nSubject: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...\nAlso Sprach Zibethicus:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Nothwithstanding this, I think that my\npoint about retaining a cautious distinction\nbetween theological and fictional intentions\nis still, possibly, a partially valid one." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I've always been fascinated by the perplexing business of what Wolfe\nactually believes and what he puts into his stories simply because he\nhappens to find it interesting.\n\nWhen I first encountered his books and before I knew anything about Wolfe\nthe man, I remember thinking, \"Gosh, I wonder whether the person who wrote\nthis is a Christian?\" Looking at the evidence as I read first TBotNS and\nthen FLF and various other volumes, I was alternately going to myself,\n\"Yes,\nhe must be!\" and \"No! He can't be!\"\n\nI know a little more about Wolfe now, but I still don't think I've got to\nthe bottom of the matter. It's complicated. He genuinely seems to like\nplaying about with odd theological ideas that he's come across, teasing\nout\ntheir implications and extrapolating them very much in the way that more\ntraditional SF authors treat speculative scientific and technological\nideas.\nAs a typically uptight and repressed Protestant Evangelical, Wolfe's\ndabbling with speculative philosophical and theological ideas makes my\n(admittedly scant) hair stand on end. =:O)> Of course, just because Wolfe\nputs an idea in one of his stories doesn't necessarily mean that he thinks\nthat it's true.\n\nBut then again, he just might. By his own account, Wolfe is not entirely\northodox in his Catholicism. I know about some of his individual quirks\nand\neccentricities, but by no means all. Contributors to this list sometimes\nsay, \"Wolfe is a Catholic and therefore he believes such and such,\" or\n\"Wolfe is a Christian and therefore believes this thing and that.\" When I\nread such assertions, I'm usually sitting there mumbling, \"Maybe,\" and\n\"Possibly!\"\n\nFor the record, my guess is that \"Westwind\" and \"The Detective of Dreams\"\nare among the most explicit fictional expressions of Wolfe's personal\nfaith.\nBut I could be wrong...\n\nNigel" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not really a rivetting expose of a post I'm throwing in, but I felt a good\n\"Hear, Hear!\" was due for Nigel's post.\nMaybe you could say that the sum of the parts equals the whole, but the\nwhole does not necessarily equal the sum of the parts.\nI have also been of the mind for a long time that an artist's(read:\nperson's) work is not necessarily the living embodiment of their beliefs and\nthoughts... except in a round-a-bout philosophical way. \"It's his so it must\nrepresent his thoughts even if not intended....\"\nSometimes we say things we regret. Sometimes we write things we don't\nbelieve. Sometimes we don't know what we believe. Sometimes we need 100 more\nwords to finish a story, ANY 100. Sometimes something looks pretty so we use\nit.\nA bit vague I guess, but the point I'm trying to make as regards to Nigel's\npost is that the membership in an organisation of any type does not mean we\nagree or even think about the Dogma of that organisation. How many of you\npassionately agree with everything your company's employee handbook has to\nsay... Oh look, 2 CEO's....\n\nPeace" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2003-01-20T23:25:48+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ryan writes ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "membership in an organisation of any type does not mean we \nagree or even think about the Dogma of that organisation. How \nmany of you passionately agree with everything your company's \nemployee handbook has to say... Oh look, 2 CEO's...." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It seems to me that membership in an organization and belief\nin a religious faith are two quite different things. Obviously\nit is possible to be a Catholic and not believe in each and \nevery dogma of the Catholic church -- indeed, it's obvious\nenough that there's a name for it: \"Cafeteria Catholics,\" those\nwho take the meat and potatoes and dessert but not the yucchy\nvegetables, as it were. \"I'll have some of that and some of that,\nbut none of _that_ please.\" Note that the term is considered\ndisparaging within Catholic culture.\n\nOn the other hand, and this is the real point, what someone\nbelieves, deep down, will definitely have a powerful influence\non their decision-making process -- including, but not limited\nto, their creative decisions. Those odd hundred words needed\nto finish the story -- well, assuming that Wolfe managed to\nget himself into a position where he needed to fill out a story\nby a hundred words, I think we can feel pretty certain he\n_wouldn't_ do it by adding a kung-fu scene where Satan opens\na can of whup-ass on Jesus. If you see what I mean." } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alex David Groce", "address": "alex_groce at forlesen.modck.cs.cmu.edu" }, "date": "2003-01-21T00:31:22+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ryan Thistlethwaite wrote:\nA bit vague I guess, but the point I'm trying to make as regards to\nNigel's post is that the membership in an organisation of any type\ndoes not mean we agree or even think about the Dogma of that\norganisation. How many of you passionately agree with everything\nyour company's employee handbook has to say... Oh look, 2 CEO's...." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "True, but from his fiction it seems unlikely that Wolfe has the same\nrelationship to the Catholic Church that most people have to their\nemployers. Wolfe clearly does think about Dogma, and in temperament\nseems to me unlikely to find himself comfortable with being Catholic\nwhile disagreeing with much of Catholic dogma. On the other hand,\northodoxy on core points declared by the Church leaves a great deal of\nroom for \"oddity.\" Nutria's example of ghosts comes to mind--Russell\nKirk and Gene Wolfe can believe in ghosts and be quite orthodox\nCatholics. As could G. K. Chesterton. And I suspect R. A. Lafferty\nwas both about as orthodox as you get and believed what most people\n(and most Catholics) would call six impossible things before\nbreakfast.\n\nI'm rereading SHORT SUN now, by the way, but so far I have absolutely\nnothing to say to the list about it other than \"I still like these\nbooks, and I still don't understand most of the things I didn't\nunderstand the first time.\"" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "\"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.\" John 8:32\n--\nAlex David Groce (agroce+ at cs.cmu.edu)\nPh.D. Student, Carnegie Mellon University - Computer Science Department\n8112 Wean Hall (412)-268-3066\nhttp://www.cs.cmu.edu/~agroce\n\n-- " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2003-01-21T16:18:13+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Yes he is! No he isn't! Yes he is...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alex David Groce wrote:\nOn the other hand, orthodoxy on core points declared by the\nChurch leaves a great deal of room for \"oddity.\" Nutria's\nexample of ghosts comes to mind--Russell Kirk and Gene Wolfe\ncan believe in ghosts and be quite orthodox Catholics. As\ncould G. K. Chesterton. " }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[...etc...]\n\nYes: Chesterton once observed that -- paraphrasing from \nmemory -- \"Catholics agree about everything; it is only \neverything else we disagree about.\" A Catholic's approach\nto the dogmas of the Church is generally, well, dogmatic;\nhowever, despite what such fine minds as Jack Chick have\n\"proven\" over and over again, that still leaves a huge \nrange of play for individual opinions on a wide variety \nof topics ...\n\nWolfe has never, to the best of my knowledge, written\nanything that so much as suggests that he is anything\nbut an orthodox Catholic. His approach to things like\npagan gods, in books like \"Doors\" and \"Soldier of Foo,\"\nseem to me remniscent of -- and here's that C* F* thing\nagain -- Tolkien's approach to the Valar: not in detail,\nbut in the attitude of, \"well, if the Universe we live\nin is _thus_, what room does it leave for these beings\nthe ancients called 'gods?' How can I write about them,\nassuming their actual existence, without denying the \ntruth of the faith?\" Tolkien's answer was to make the\nValar angelic beings; Wolfe seems to have answered the\nquestion in ... other ... ways." } ] } ] }