{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/3853", "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": 3853, "subject": "Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "messages": 12, "voices": 7, "first": "2003-02-16T14:02:27+00:00", "last": "2003-02-20T23:09:44+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2003-02-16T14:02:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Last month, Nigel Price suggested that the \"theologies\" implicit in Wolfe's\nfictions aren't necessarily the same as the theology Wolfe believes is true\nin reality. This is a good point, which can be extended beyond theological\nspecifics to basic world-views. Behind many of the posts here which seek to\nprovide a \"Christian\" interpretation of Wolfe, there lurks the belief that\nbecause Wolfe is a believing traditional Christian, all his works must\nrelate to Christ's redemption of humanity, and therefore must ultimately\nprovide some sort of redemption. But in most of Wolfe's major works, there\nis either no redemption at all -- PEACE, 5HC, \"The Island of Doctor\nDeath...,\" \"The Death of Doctor Island,\" \"Forlesen\" -- or what redemption\nthere is fails to outweigh the horrors that have preceded -- UOTNS, BOTLS,\nBOTSS. One could argue that the lack of redemption is due to the\ncharacters' lack of faith; but even when Christianity is mentioned in these\nworks, as at the end of PEACE, the works as a whole don't present redemption\nthrough faith as a real possibility. If one reads Wolfe's works purely for\nwhat is in them, he's one of the bleakest authors I know; perhaps bleaker\nthan he consciously intends.\n\nSomething else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works. Does any of his major novels have a\nprotagonist who is genuinely capable of loving another individual (as\ndistinct from compassion)? The closest, perhaps, are Green in TAD and Silk\nin BOTLS, but there's something obsessive about both these loves: neither\nGreen nor Silk really knows the woman he \"loves,\" and I don't think either\nof them is really interested in knowing her as a person. (Though it's been\na long time since I've read BOTLS.) Horn's love for Nettle is unconvincing,\nand his feelings for Seawrack and Jahlee are more like lust than love; and\nSeverian, Weer, and the protagonists of 5HC all seem incapable of love.\nWolfe is a great writer, but his emotional range is limited.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Jordan", "address": "jbjordan4 at cox.net" }, "date": "2003-02-16T21:38:06+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "At 08:02 AM 2/16/2003, Adam wrote:\nLast month, Nigel Price suggested that the \"theologies\" implicit in Wolfe's\nfictions aren't necessarily the same as the theology Wolfe believes is true\nin reality. This is a good point, which can be extended beyond theological\nspecifics to basic world-views. Behind many of the posts here which seek to\nprovide a \"Christian\" interpretation of Wolfe, there lurks the belief that\nbecause Wolfe is a believing traditional Christian, all his works must\nrelate to Christ's redemption of humanity, and therefore must ultimately\nprovide some sort of redemption." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " I know this is not pointed at me (Pat the Nut) above anyone else, \nAdam, but I certainly don't think \"all\" his works are put in a Christian \nworldview. And of those that are, I don't think all include the notion of \nredemption. Like you, I tend to think Wolfe is more at home displaying the \nhorror of sin and/or of human failings and their consequences. If there is \nsalvation, it's off the page, something maybe reading this or that story \nmight make the reader desire.\n On the other hand, however, in terms of a general Christian \nworldview, not the specifics of redemption, I do think one sees this \nthroughout Wolfe's major works. *Peace* has something to do with either \nhell or purgatory. TAD shows Mama & the Italian Restaurant interested in \nredeeming Lara and the goddess-world from itself. Christian sacramental \nallegories/images are all over the \"Sun\" dodekology. Ben Free is a \nsemi-Christ (a sort of \"American Messiah\") in FLF, and the characters get a \nnew birth via time travel self-remaking. A pre-Christian world is displayed \nin the *Soldier* novels -- not a friendly pagan world, but a world in \ndesparate need of something better. As for *Castleview,* I'll give it a pass.\n But Wolfe likes to write about worlds and worldviews. The clash of \nreligious worldviews, and their possible reconciliation in Christianity, is \nthematic in TAD and the *Soldier* books, and perhaps most notably in the \n*Long Sun,* where idolatry is a major theme.\n I think it is mainly in his shorter fiction that Wolfe plays games \nin other gardens outside this worldview. And of course, occasionally his \nshorter fiction is rather explicitly Christian (\"To the Seventh,\" \n\"Westwind,\" \"Detective of Dreams\")." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": " But in most of Wolfe's major works, there\nis either no redemption at all -- PEACE, 5HC, \"The Island of Doctor\nDeath...,\" \"The Death of Doctor Island,\" \"Forlesen\" -- or what redemption\nthere is fails to outweigh the horrors that have preceded -- UOTNS, BOTLS,\nBOTSS. One could argue that the lack of redemption is due to the\ncharacters' lack of faith; but even when Christianity is mentioned in these\nworks, as at the end of PEACE, the works as a whole don't present \nredemption through faith as a real possibility. If one reads Wolfe's \nworks purely for what is in them, he's one of the bleakest authors I know; \nperhaps bleaker than he consciously intends." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " I tend to agree. I think a tragic sense pervades much of Wolfe, \nand as John Clute pointed out during his brief sojourn here, the Christian \nworldview is comedic. Wolfe likes Chesterton, but he sure ain't Chesterton. \nRedemption is present only as glints and glimmers. Characters fail \nfrequently. I do think all these glints and glimmers and failings and very \npartial salvations are designed to point outside the text and, within the \ntext, to an eschaton.\n I do get the impression that fewer of Wolfe's later works are \nhorrific than his earlier ones." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Something else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": " Yeah. When I first read Wolfe many years ago, I thought \"He's a \nlot like Cordwainer Smith, except that Smith wrote one love story after \nanother, and Wolfe writes one horror story after another.\"\n I have come to think this, though. Wolfe may not be very good at \nwriting about love, and so does not try very much. But he does give \"glints \nand glimmers\" of it, and if this is part of his craft (maybe making good of \nhis weakness), then it is much like what he does with redemption and \nsalvation.\n Wolfe may be a Thomist, but he seems to function with an extremely \nAugustinian and Calvinian conception of human depravity. Human beings can \nand do ruin everything. They aren't much good at love. Human love is \nquestionable, and is linked up with appalling selfishness. I think this, \nagain, \"points off the page\" to the need for a better Lover and a better Love.\n\nPatera Nutria" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2003-02-16T22:46:15+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides, post-Valentine's Day, wrote:\nSomething else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works. Does any of his major novels have a\nprotagonist who is genuinely capable of loving another individual (as\ndistinct from compassion)? The closest, perhaps, are Green in TAD and Silk\nin BOTLS, but there's something obsessive about both these loves: neither\nGreen nor Silk really knows the woman he \"loves,\" and I don't think either\nof them is really interested in knowing her as a person. (Though it's been\na long time since I've read BOTLS.) Horn's love for Nettle is unconvincing,\nand his feelings for Seawrack and Jahlee are more like lust than love; and\nSeverian, Weer, and the protagonists of 5HC all seem incapable of love.\nWolfe is a great writer, but his emotional range is limited." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "It would be easier (or should that be \"possible\"?) to approach this if I\nhad some examples of a few authors inside and outside of genre who write\nfiction about love (monolithic or otherwise). Fictions that you find\nconvincing.\n\n=mantis=" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2003-02-18T01:51:10+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 2/16/03 4:46 PM, Michael Andre-Driussi at mantis at siriusfiction.com wrote:\nAdam Stephanides, post-Valentine's Day, wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Something else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works. Does any of his major novels have a\nprotagonist who is genuinely capable of loving another individual (as\ndistinct from compassion)?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It would be easier (or should that be \"possible\"?) to approach this if I\nhad some examples of a few authors inside and outside of genre who write\nfiction about love (monolithic\ndo you mean monogamous?\nor otherwise). Fictions that you find\nconvincing." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, the paragraph you quote was triggered by my rereading Patrick\nO'Leary's THE IMPOSSIBLE BIRD, which, while it may not be \"about love,\" does\ncontain convincing depictions of love. So do John Crowley's works. As for\nnon-genre authors, none spring to mind immediately. (Obviously, there are\nmany who've written about love, but none that I've read recently enough, or\nrecall well enough, to be able to say definitely that I find them\nconvincing.)\n\nBut I'm not sure why you need this information to \"approach\" my claim. If\nyou believe Wolfe's protagonists are capable of genuine love, why not say\nso?\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2003-02-18T15:37:56+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Adam Stephanides wrote:\nBut I'm not sure why you need this information to \"approach\" my claim. If\nyou believe Wolfe's protagonists are capable of genuine love, why not say\nso?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Because I don't know what you are \"pointing at\" when you say \"genuine\nlove.\" If I don't know this, then my approach is limited to a shrug. I\ncannot comment if I do not grasp the context." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Well, the paragraph you quote was triggered by my rereading Patrick\nO'Leary's THE IMPOSSIBLE BIRD, which, while it may not be \"about love,\" does\ncontain convincing depictions of love. So do John Crowley's works." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "So then, here is a start: which scenes from which John Crowley books\n(barring THE TRANSLATOR) spring to your mind as convincing depictions of\n\"genuine love\"?\n\n=mantis=" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Straight", "address": "straight at email.unc.edu" }, "date": "2003-02-18T15:56:24+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Adam Stephanides wrote:\nBut I'm not sure why you need this information to \"approach\" my claim. If\nyou believe Wolfe's protagonists are capable of genuine love, why not say\nso?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Because this sort of thing is so subjective. You say Horn's love for\nNettle is \"unconvincing\" (Meaning Wolfe failed to convince you the\ncharacters were real? or failed to convince you that Horn really loved\nher? Or that Horn is unconvinced?). I didn't have that reaction.\n\nYou point to Crowley. I've only read Little, Big and while the romance at\nthe very beginning between Smoky and Alice was wonderful, every other\nrelationship in the rest of the book (including Smoky and Alice's\nmarriage) seemed incomprehensible to me, like I was reading and trying to\nunderstand a Martian romance novel. Which I guess was part of the point,\nthat the fairies are *other*, so maybe this is atypical of Crowley's art.\n\n-- Rostrum" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "James Wynn", "address": "crushtv at hotpop.com" }, "date": "2003-02-18T15:51:41+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "You didn't say you were limiting this discussion to romantic love so I'll\nlist characters who are not too damaged or crabbed to be genuinely\nemotionally connected to another person:\n\nV.R.T. (FhoC) hunting his mother across too planets\nDorcas (BotNS) she seemed to genuinely love Severian\nAgia (BofNS) violently in love with her brother\nLatro (SoA) was genuinely in love his Amazon girlfriend\nAuk (BotLS) in love with Chenille and Tartaros\n\nHow is that for starting list of broadly known characters?\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Adam Stephanides [mailto:adamsteph at earthlink.net]\nSent: Monday, February 17, 2003 7:51 PM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 2/16/03 4:46 PM, Michael Andre-Driussi at mantis at siriusfiction.com wrote:\nAdam Stephanides, post-Valentine's Day, wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Something else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works. Does any of his major novels have a\nprotagonist who is genuinely capable of loving another individual (as\ndistinct from compassion)?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "[snip]" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "It would be easier (or should that be \"possible\"?) to approach this if I\nhad some examples of a few authors inside and outside of genre who write\nfiction about love (monolithic\ndo you mean monogamous?\nor otherwise). Fictions that you find\nconvincing." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Well, the paragraph you quote was triggered by my rereading Patrick\nO'Leary's THE IMPOSSIBLE BIRD, which, while it may not be \"about love,\" does\ncontain convincing depictions of love. So do John Crowley's works. As for\nnon-genre authors, none spring to mind immediately. (Obviously, there are\nmany who've written about love, but none that I've read recently enough, or\nrecall well enough, to be able to say definitely that I find them\nconvincing.)\n\nBut I'm not sure why you need this information to \"approach\" my claim. If\nyou believe Wolfe's protagonists are capable of genuine love, why not say\nso?\n\n--Adam" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "-- " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Alice K. Turner", "address": "aturner6 at nyc.rr.com" }, "date": "2003-02-19T21:08:30+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "So then, here is a start: which scenes from which John Crowley books\n(barring THE TRANSLATOR) spring to your mind as convincing depictions of\n\"genuine love\"?\n\n=mantis=" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Gosh, I think it would be difficult to find a book of any genre that\nportrays domestic love more eloquently than LITTLE, BIG. Sure Smoky strays\nwith Sophie, but can anyone doubt his long-term devotion to Daily Alice? And\nas for short-term romantic obsession, well, holy Toledo, who in the hell\nbeats Rush with Once a Day, Auberon with Sylvie, Pierce with Rose, even,\nmore diffidently Spofford with Rosie? Mantis, you are having a frigid\nwinter-chill indeed. Watch an episode of The Simpsons, with Homer and Marge,\nfor heavens' sake.\n\nAlice" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Michael Andre-Driussi", "address": "mantis at siriusfiction.com" }, "date": "2003-02-19T22:40:51+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To begin, I did not intend to badger Adam Stephanides at all, and if that\nis how it was taken by anybody then I apologize." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Alga wrote:\nGosh, I think it would be difficult to find a book of any genre that\nportrays domestic love more eloquently than LITTLE, BIG. Sure Smoky strays\nwith Sophie, but can anyone doubt his long-term devotion to Daily Alice? And\nas for short-term romantic obsession, well, holy Toledo, who in the hell\nbeats Rush with Once a Day, Auberon with Sylvie, Pierce with Rose, even,\nmore diffidently Spofford with Rosie?" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Of course I thought of these examples, too, but I thought that, for\nexample, Rush and Once a Day (of ENGINE SUMMER) might be already ruled out\nby Adam's knock against \"obsessive love\" wrt TAD and TBOTLS. In fact, I\nsense that the situation in TAD might be very much like the situation in\nnot only ENGINE SUMMER but also LITTLE, BIG." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Here is what Adam wrote:\nSomething else that contributes to my sense of Wolfe's bleakness is the\nabsence of love from his works. Does any of his major novels have a\nprotagonist who is genuinely capable of loving another individual (as\ndistinct from compassion)? The closest, perhaps, are Green in TAD and Silk\nin BOTLS, but there's something obsessive about both these loves: neither\nGreen nor Silk really knows the woman he \"loves,\" and I don't think either\nof them is really interested in knowing her as a person. (Though it's been\na long time since I've read BOTLS.) Horn's love for Nettle is unconvincing,\nand his feelings for Seawrack and Jahlee are more like lust than love; and\nSeverian, Weer, and the protagonists of 5HC all seem incapable of love.\nWolfe is a great writer, but his emotional range is limited." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If by using \"genuine love\" Adam means \"domestic love,\" that would be an\nimportant step to establish (and it could well be the case, given the\nparticular singling out of Horn and Nettle). Yes, this would rule out\nENGINE SUMMER, pretty much, and LITTLE, BIG would probably be king.\n\nI think it was Crush who offered a list of mainly supporting characters\n(except for Latro) showing love: they may be good examples, but Adam is\ntalking specifically about main characters. A possible strike against\nLatro might well be the lack of domesticity; the fact that he only loves\nher for one of the two books; or any number of reasons I couldn't hope to\nenumerate.\n\nBut you know? It really =is= easier to just say, \"'Every man to his\ntaste,' as the farmer said when he kissed the cow.\" Or just shrug and move\non.\n\n=mantis=" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2003-02-20T20:17:38+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "James Wynn wrote:\nV.R.T. (FhoC) hunting his mother across too planets\nDorcas (BotNS) she seemed to genuinely love Severian\nAgia (BofNS) violently in love with her brother\nLatro (SoA) was genuinely in love his Amazon girlfriend\nAuk (BotLS) in love with Chenille and Tartaros" }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I haven't read the Soldier books in a long time, and my memory of them is\ndim, so you may well be right about Latro. But V.R.T. is searching for the\ntruth about himself, not for his mother, at least as I read it.\n\nAs for the other three, I did originally say \"protagonists.\" Especially in\nWolfe's books, it's the viewpoint character who dominates the reader's\nexperience. The effect on the reader of being tied to the consciousness of\na man unable to love won't be dispelled by observing from afar other\ncharacters who love.\n\nHaving said this, I must confess with embarrassment that I'd forgotten when\nI wrote my original post about Severian's relationship with Thecla.\n(Interesting that nobody brought this up in reply.) Though I haven't reread\nTBOTNS in a while either, I'd be willing to concede this as a counterexample\nto my original claim. But note how gingerly Wolfe handles the\nSeverian-Thecla relationship: not until long after Thecla's death do we\nlearn there was any sexual component to it, and even then we only learn of\nthis in brief allusions. And Severian's final judgment on Thecla is rather\nclinical, iirc." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "Rostrum wrote:\nBut I'm not sure why you need this information to \"approach\" my claim. If\nyou believe Wolfe's protagonists are capable of genuine love, why not say\nso?" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Because this sort of thing is so subjective." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Not so much so. My point had been, not that Wolfe does a poor job of\nportraying what I confusingly called \"genuine love,\" but that, for whatever\nreasons, he generally chooses not to portray it. (See my other reply for an\nattempt to clarify what I meant.)\n\nAnd if it were subjective, so what? Responses to literature are inherently\nsubjective; that doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to talk about them.\n\n(The work of explication done on this list is very valuable; but it\nsometimes seems to me that in the process we give short shrift to Wolfe's\nwork as literature (and I include myself in that \"we\"))." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "You say Horn's love for\nNettle is \"unconvincing\" (Meaning Wolfe failed to convince you the\ncharacters were real? or failed to convince you that Horn really loved\nher? Or that Horn is unconvinced?). I didn't have that reaction." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Meaning that Horn failed to convince me he really loved her. Or, strictly\nspeaking, the Narrator. He says he loves her, but his behavior isn't\nconsistent with this imo. His betrayal of her to Krait in the pit can\nperhaps be excused as simple human weakness (it occurs to me that this scene\nis very reminiscent of the Room 101 scene from 1984). And his adultery with\nSeawrack can be excused by the Mother's spell. But Jahlee didn't place him\nunder a spell; nor did his wives in Gaon. (Smoky's brief affair with Sophie\nhardly compares to Horn's serial adultery.) And, while Horn leaves a great\ndeal out of his written narrative, he includes his betrayal and his\nadulteries in an accouont he knows Nettle will read, and be hurt by. These\ndo not seem to me the actions of a man who loves his wife.\n\nWhether Wolfe intended to convey that Horn genuinely loved Nettle or not, I\ndon't know.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Adam Stephanides", "address": "adamsteph at earthlink.net" }, "date": "2003-02-20T20:17:40+00:00", "subject": "Re: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "on 2/19/03 4:40 PM, Michael Andre-Driussi at mantis at siriusfiction.com wrote:\nTo begin, I did not intend to badger Adam Stephanides at all, and if that\nis how it was taken by anybody then I apologize." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No problem. I just wasn't clear where you were coming from." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Of course I thought of these examples, too, but I thought that, for\nexample, Rush and Once a Day (of ENGINE SUMMER) might be already ruled out\nby Adam's knock against \"obsessive love\" wrt TAD and TBOTLS. In fact, I\nsense that the situation in TAD might be very much like the situation in\nnot only ENGINE SUMMER but also LITTLE, BIG." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "To clarify what I was talking about with TAD and TBOTLS (and, rereading what\nI wrote, I see I was unclear), what I was trying to point to was not the\nobsessive nature of Green and Silk's loves, but that each of them seemed\nuninterested in relating to his inamorata as a person, in having a\n\"communion of souls,\" so to speak (and I realize this is still pretty vague,\nbut it's the best I can do right now). Green doesn't seem to need a\nrelationship at all; he's happy just to be near Lara. He's not at all\nperturbed when she tells him that she can only love him as she would love a\ndog. As for Silk, my memory of TBOTLS is not that good, as I said; but my\nrecollection was that the \"Hyacinth\" Silk loves is largely a creation of his\nimagination. Both Rush and Smoky, on the other hand, do seem to want to\nrelate to their beloveds as people, to go beyond the images that they have\nof them in their mind and really know them; though you could argue that they\nboth fail.\n\n--Adam" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "ddanehy at siebel.com" }, "date": "2003-02-20T23:09:44+00:00", "subject": "RE: (urth) Wintry thoughts on Wolfe", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "A couple of days ago, Mantis wrote:\nIt would be easier (or should that be \"possible\"?) to \napproach this if I had some examples of a few authors inside \nand outside of genre who write fiction about love (monolithic \nor otherwise). Fictions that you find convincing." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Really, I'm surprised nobody's mentioned either of the \nobvious in-genre examples:\n\nSturgeon. Almost anything after about 1950 by Sturgeon.\n\nBut even more: \n\nLe Guin. Especially TEHANU, but lots of her other stuff too \n-- even LEFT HAND is, in an oblique way, a love story; and \nthere's a powerful love story driving THE DISPOSSESSED. In \nfact, her fiction is in many ways a better example than \nSturgeon's, because Sturgeon was so busy analyzing and \ndissecting love that, at times, the actual portrayal suffered; \nplus, he was busy with \"variations on the theme,\" while Le \nGuin simply writes about people and those people sometimes \nlove each other.\n\n(I find myself thinking \"Surely Connie Willis,\" but, oddly, \nI honestly can't think of a good example -- and ditto for\nOctavia Estelle Butler.)" } ] } ] }